Kurdistan - Rebellion Ignored?

The Holocaust is rightly remembered as the most tragic example of ethnic cleansing that the world has seen in living memory. Reminders of this, such as the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC and the permanent Holocaust exhibition at the Imperial War Museum in London are a testament to the western world's determination not to forget this tragedy. Yet, whilst we have remembered this one instance, we have at times ignored many similar examples from elsewhere in the world. Once such example is that of the Kurdish people.

During World War I, large scale ethnic cleansing by young Turks resulted in the 'forcible deportation' of an estimated 700,000 Kurds, more than half of whom died or went missing in the process. In response, Western nations (under the leadership of Great Britain) gave an assurance that they would henceforth act as protectors of the rights of the Kurdish people, much as they would later do with the Jews in Europe. This is as far as the comparison goes. Whilst the west kept its promise to the Jews in giving them their own nation state (and significant aid for the purpose of protecting it), they have watched on as the people of Kurdistan have been subject to further ethnic cleansing (180,000 murders at the hands of Saddam Hussein's regime) and have had to make do with semi-autonomy over the region of Kurdistan.

With Kurdistan sitting on top of some of the largest oil and gas reserves in the Middle East, control over the region is, understandably, a hotly contested issue. The Iraqi establishment is loathed to agree to any arrangement whereby Kurdistan's regional government would receive all (or even a section) of the profits from exporting these raw materials whilst the Kurdish people see these natural resources as their birth right. Despite (weak) attempts from the US to leverage a fair compromise on the issue, the Iraqi government has so far only allowed the Kurds to sell oil from newly discovered fields, refusing to give them a share of the profits from the other fields in their territory (which is where much of the true value lies).

Recently, however, Kurdish members of the Iraqi parliament have attempted to fight back by attempting to push through a new constitution for the semi-autonomous region which "enshrines Kurdish claims to territories and the oil and gas beneath them", though you would not know it from the non-existant coverage of it in the western media (with the exception of the New York Times).

Such a move should have provoked an agressive response from both Iraq and the US, who had hoped to withdraw their troops in the near future. Yet, whilst the Iraqis have responded as expected, there has been a deafening silence from the US. This is remarkable at a time when they desperately need more troops to deploy in Afghanistan.

We must question why, after nearly a century of oppression, the Kurdish minority have chosen now to act. They are gaining strength in the region, certainly, but to make such a bold move alone would be naive at best. When looking at the US's military position, one would naturally assume that it is not in their interests to support the Kurdish cause. To only look at military objectives, however, is to ignore a greater problem for America in the region.

American oil companies have struggled to gain permits from the Iraqi government in recent times, causing much frustration to some in Washington. The Kurdish regional government, on the other hand, has been more than willing to grant permits to foreign oil companies in return for a small slice of the profits. Thus, in times of economic strife, KRG (Kurdistan Regional Government) control over the remaining oil fields in Kurdistan could bring some much-needed revenue to some U.S businesses.

Is the US living up to its promise to protect Kurdish interests or simply trying to further endow its ailing economy? It seems that business interests have trumped military interests once again.

ADJB