Featured Post |
As a sociologist observing the ongoing upheaval in my homeland, I view the struggle of the Iranian people not merely as a quest for regime change, but as a profound social revolution. For those of us in Iranian Kurdistan (Rojhelat), the path forward is illuminated by Abdullah Ocalan’s paradigm of Democratic Confederalism — a vision of grassroots democracy, ecological sustainability, women’s liberation (Women, Life, Freedom), and the peaceful coexistence of all peoples without the oppressive apparatus of the nation-state.
Yet, this delicate sociological fabric is currently being torn apart by the geopolitical games of distant powers.
Recent statements from US President Donald Trump have fundamentally endangered the Kurdish people. By publicly claiming that the United States attempted to send “a lot of guns” to Iranian protesters through Kurdish intermediaries—and then baselessly accusing the Kurds of keeping the weapons for themselves—the US administration has committed a catastrophic diplomatic and moral error.
This reckless narrative is immensely destructive and places the Kurdish population in an impossible, life-threatening vice between two distinct forces:
The Islamic Regime: For decades, the mullahs have sought any excuse to disproportionately target, imprison, and execute Kurdish activists by branding them as “armed separatists” and “foreign proxies.” Trump’s remarks hand the Islamic Republic a golden propaganda victory and a direct pretext to escalate its militarized crackdown on Kurdish cities.
The Iranian Protesters: The success of the Iranian uprising relies on solidarity across all ethnic lines — Persians, Kurds, Balochs, and Azeris fighting a common oppressor. By suggesting the Kurds hoarded weapons meant for the broader resistance, Washington is actively sowing seeds of mistrust and fracturing the opposition from within.
Sociologically, trust is the foundation of any alliance. The United States has consistently demonstrated that it views the Kurds not as partners with legitimate democratic aspirations, but as disposable geopolitical tools.
We have not forgotten Rojava. The US abandonment of Syrian Kurds — who sacrificed thousands to defeat ISIS — left a deep psychological scar across Kurdistan. Now, history repeats itself in Iran. While the US enforces blockades, we also hear murmurs from Washington of a potential ceasefire and a “good deal” with the mullahs. How can the US expect to rebuild trust with the Kurds when it oscillates between urging us to rise up, accusing us of theft, and negotiating with our executioners?
If the United States still considers the Kurds to be allies in the Middle East, these false narratives and fake takes are the exact opposite of how to treat them. We are not “guns for hire.”
When analyzing regional actors, it is clear that Israel has historically managed the “Kurdish matter” with a far more grounded and consistent approach. Unlike the erratic pendulum of American foreign policy, Israel has long recognized the strategic, historical, and moral legitimacy of the Kurdish struggle.
If the United States genuinely wishes to support a free, democratic, and decentralized future for Iran, it must fundamentally rethink its strategy. Rather than isolating the Kurds through dangerous public accusations, the US would do well to cooperate more closely with Israel on this matter. A coordinated US-Israeli policy — one that respects Kurdish autonomy, prioritizes human rights, and avoids turning marginalized minorities into cannon fodder — is the only way to establish a coherent and reliable strategy against the Islamic Republic.
The Middle East does not need more betrayal. It needs a paradigm shift toward genuine democratic solidarity. Until Washington realizes this, the Kurds will continue to rely on our own resilience, our mountains, and those few allies who have proven they understand the true cost of freedom.