Kurds Are Not a Bargaining Chip; Kurds Are an Equation A Political Response to Donald Trump on the Kurds, Weapons, Present-Day Iran, Turkey, and the Region

President Donald Trump’s remarks about the Kurds, weapons, protests inside present-day Iran, and Kurdish forces’ possible role in regional equations cannot be ignored. When the President of the United States says he is “disappointed in the Kurds,” claims that weapons intended for Iranian protesters through the Kurds did not arrive, and says the Kurds “take, take, take,” a clear, political, and direct response is necessary.

This response is not written out of hostility toward America or Israel, nor in denial of shared interests. It comes from a nation that has stood for decades against terrorism, tyranny, the Islamic Republic of Iran, ISIS, and Turkey’s expansionist policies — a nation repeatedly used as an ally, yet sacrificed at decisive moments because of great-power calculations and regional pressure.

Mr. Trump, I heard your words and understood their message. But much of this is meant for media consumption. In politics, what is said publicly is not always the real policy. Often, real policy is what remains unsaid: what is discussed behind closed doors, in security meetings, strategic calculations, and confidential contacts. Therefore, I do not view your words merely as an attack. They may also contain a message, pressure, a political test, or preparation. But one thing must be clear: the Kurds cannot be pushed away from their historical path through media pressure, public blame, or humiliating language.

Mr. Trump, you know, and I assure you, that the place of what you refer to as America’s weapons is safe. Those resources, whatever they were and however they were defined in your calculations, are in trustworthy, responsible, and aware hands. What is entrusted to the Kurds will not disappear, fall into irresponsible hands, or be diverted from its historical path. Any capacity placed in Kurdish hands will be used at the proper time, within the framework of Kurdish national interests, legitimate defense, and the struggle against tyranny, terrorism, and the enemies of freedom.

The Kurds are not rootless, irresponsible, or aimless. Their strategic position, political memory, and field experience cannot be dismissed by one accusation or moment of dissatisfaction.

But the main question is this: if there truly was a plan in which Kurdish forces, alongside American and Israeli air pressure, were to play a decisive ground role in weakening or ending the Islamic Republic of Iran, why did you step back at the last moment? Why was the green light suddenly turned off? Did the reality on the ground change, or was it pressure from Turkey? Was the retreat caused by concern for the Kurds, or by fear of Ankara’s anger?

Should America, with all its global power, allow Turkey to hold veto power over its Kurdish policy and the future of present-day Iran? If America submits to Turkish pressure at a historic moment instead of trusting the Kurds, not only will an opportunity for change in present-day Iran be lost, but a dangerous message will be sent to the region: that Turkey can hold America’s Kurdish policy hostage.

We do not speak to you in the language of hostility, nor portray America as the enemy of the Kurds. On the contrary, the interests of the Kurds, America, and Israel intersect: containing the Islamic Republic, confronting terrorism, preventing extremism, supporting oppressed nations, defending a new regional order, and creating a new balance in the Middle East.

I believe America’s overall and final policy, if shaped according to Washington’s long-term interests, must be to support the Kurds in the region. This is not emotional rhetoric; it is the result of geography, security, history, and shared interests. America may hesitate, delay, retreat tactically, or face regional pressure, but the strategic reality does not change: the Kurds are among the most natural, serious, and reliable allies of America and Israel in the Middle East.

Yet real alliances are not built by blaming allies. They are built through respect, clarity, courage, and consistency. One cannot expect the Kurds to fight in the hardest battlefields and then abandon them at the last moment under Turkish pressure. One cannot ask the Kurds to be part of a historic plan while leaving their future unclear.

The Kurds are not a tool, a temporary card, rented forces, or a bargaining chip. The Kurds are an equation. A deal can be signed, hidden, changed, or canceled. But an equation cannot be ignored. In Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and present-day Iran, the Kurds are a living, organized,........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)