UK and France have a historical duty to support Syrian Kurds

UK and France have a historical and moral duty to support Syrian Kurds — Greater Kurdistan map, Kurdish claims territory 1919-1945. Photo: Le Monde diplomatique/Kurdish institute of Paris

Omar Sindi | Exclusive to iKurd.net

As World War I ended on November 11, 1918, the Ottoman Empire capitulated. The prime victors of the war (Britain and France) unconsciously and arbitrarily determined the division of Kurdistan among the new artificially created states, which essentially made Kurdistan the sub-colony of the colonial powers, leading to the continued denial of the Kurdish people’s plight and rights.

During the French mandate rule in Syria, the French government did not support or provide any recognized legislative code to protect the Kurdish people in Syria, even though this forced attachment was against the wishes of the people of the Kurdish region.

“In 1936-1937, there was some autonomist agitation among Assyrians and Kurds, supported by some Bedouins, in the province of Al-Jazira. Its partisans wanted the French troops to stay in the province in the event of Syrian independence, as they feared the nationalist Damascus government would replace minority officials with Muslim Arabs from the capital. The French authorities refused to consider any new status of autonomy inside Syria.”

They must acknowledge the historical errors, revise the judgments, and take their case to the United Nations General Assembly for recognition of autonomous regions in Eastern Syria.

Today, the world is witnessing the devastating civil war in Syria, mainly between Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorial regime and the majority Sunni opposition, with brutal consequences on both sides of the conflict. So far, the Kurdish areas have been partially spared. The Kurdish Syrian parties have agreed to jointly govern these areas. Neither the opposition nor the Assad regime approves of the Kurdish self-proclamation of an autonomous region in Eastern Syria.

If international protection is not provided for self-proclaimed autonomy in Eastern Syria-Kurdistan, the future regimes in Damascus—whether the Bashar al-Assad regime or the Sunni-majority opposition, neither of which appear to respect minority rights—may lead to ethnic cleansing, as history has shown. The Kurdish people in that area have suffered greatly, including but not limited to the deprivation of basic human rights such as education, citizenship, land confiscation, and forced deportations, at the hands of various regimes in Damascus.

Mohamed Talab Hillal, a Syrian Baathist Cabinet minister in 1963, planned the systematic destruction of Kurdish land in Eastern Syria. He wrote a baseless and unfounded thesis on the Kurdish people, which he called the “Arab Cordon Plan” (Al Hizam al-Arabi), which envisaged the expulsion of the entire Kurdish population living in eastern Syria. Today, the world has witnessed the racist, misguided policy set out by opaque views, where all Syrian people suffer.

Minorities in the region continue to face serious threats, discrimination, and racism and are frequently forbidden from fully participating in the economic, political, and social life of their countries.

“Kurdistan was erased from the map after World War I, when the Allied Powers carved up the Middle East and denied the Kurds their nation-state.” As far as the Kurdish people are concerned, this is a historical betrayal bestowed on the Kurdish nation by the victors of World War I. The dominators of the sub-colonial states of this land do not appear to have any future solutions at hand.

These armed conflicts have failed to achieve any tangible goals. Therefore, we should pursue a different vision for the whole region: the best option would be a democratic system along a peaceful process. The Kurdish people have not sought superiority over any other nation; they seek equality, co-partnership, peace, and justice for all, but at the same time, they do not accept inferiority either.

“The ideology of racism serves to legitimize the social inequalities between the groups by making them seem ‘natural’ or ‘right.’ If one can believe that all tyrannical behaviors are good, then prejudice leads to hostile attitudes toward members of another group. These people are regarded with hostility simply because they belong to a particular group, and they are assumed to have the undesirable qualities that are attributed to the group as a whole.”

“The Sykes–Picot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France, with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I. The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916. The agreement was concluded on May 16, 1916.”

The ill-advised Asia Minor Agreement between the victors of World War I was unjust to the region, and it had devastating results for the Kurdish people, effectively taking Kurdistan off the international stage. The British and French governments both have historical responsibility to correct the wrong course set on May 16, 1916, during the Sykes-Picot Agreement.

Therefore, the opportunity is on the horizon, and both governments are capable of partially reversing the misguided policy they bestowed upon Kurdistan. Today, minority communities face new challenges, including legislation, policies, and practices that may unjustly hinder or violate minority rights.

The Erbil agreement should be enhanced and must continue to be upheld, as it was signed by the Kurdish forces and political parties of Syria under the supervision of the Kurdistan Region’s President, Massoud Barzani.

Omar Sindi, a senior writer, analyst and columnist for iKurd.net, Washington, United States.

The opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of iKurd.net or its editors.