Saudi – Israeli cooperation in the Kurdish secession

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Away from the philosophical and the religious analysis which he used to write, the Israeli professor Yaron Friedman wrote in Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper an article that is full of important information, he depended on the high ratio of the readers of his articles in order to promote ideas and information, which cannot be published by any other newspaper but  Yedioth Ahronoth, because it has a degree of credibility and  required and well considered function due to the seriousness of its relation with the concept of the Israeli security.

The article is devoted to the project of forming unified Kurdish entity for the Kurds of Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Turkey based on the coincidence of two events, namely the approaching of the end of the war on ISIS in each of Iraq and Syria, and the enjoyment of the Kurds in the two countries of a special status and privacy that allow the presence of rare historic opportunity for the formation of Kurdish state according to his opinion. He called the Kurdish leader Massoud Barazani to do what Ben –Gurion did in 1948, to exploit the available opportunities and to be aware that the United States despite its official objection would eventually support the Kurdish state, hoping to gain an additional ally in the Middle East, So Barazani has to know that despite the political dangers, the military and the economic circumstances would be good for taking a decisive decision.

Freidman has explained the appropriate circumstances and the strategic convergence between Israel and Barzani’s aspirations for secession, by providing encouraging elements depended on important information, he said that Israel is the only party till now which announced publicly its support of the independence of the Kurds , but according to the information, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Jordan have agreed on supporting the independence of Kurdistan region in Iraq, provided that to establish military bases in the region to confront the future Iranian threat. According to Israel, it is of its interest to resume the relations which were with the Kurds in the seventies, where it trained the “Peshmerga” against the Iraqi regime; moreover, it wants to import oil from the Kurdish state. Politically, the support of Israel of the forming of a Kurdish state will have an active importance in facing Turkey’s support of Hamas Movement.

Freidman said that despite the aspirations of “the Kurdish people” which its number ranges between 30 and 40 million people, and which is distributed between four countries “ Iran, Syria, Iraq, and Turkey” that object its independence to establish an independent Kurdish state for many reasons; most importantly because the United States shows its anxiety to support this idea, because it affects the interests of its allies Iraq and Turkey, this is applied on Russia which wants to preserve the interests of its two allies Syria and Iran. Freidman added that the factor of time as it puts pressure on the Kurds, it opens for them the horizons to change the equations, he considered that the Kurds of Syria have to benefit from their military victories in Syria especially the occupation of Raqqa in order to win a political achievement, just for that they have to accelerate their political steps towards the independence, and to make use of the preoccupation of the Syrian army in its war on several fronts, because its success in resolving the battle with the opposition and “ISIS” will enable it to devote itself for fighting the Kurds in the northern of Syria. So the Kurds in Iraq and Syria have to make use of their important victories against ISIS in order to achieve a political gain.

The conclusion of Freidman’s speech is a great strategic bet that is supported by Israel and Saudi Arabia as Freidman’s article reveals. It is based on neglecting the unity of Turkey as an ally to Israel, since it is one of the priorities of Israel in the region, at the same time it reveals Saudi-Israeli understanding on getting used to the Russian-American understandings temporarily in preparation for strategic surprise that is represented by the Kurdish insistence in Iraq on a referendum that will lead to new dynamisms that will start to affect Iraqi factions that complain from the rule, and which like the talk about deepening the independence of the remaining regions either between the Shiites or the Sunnis, which Saudi Arabia was trying in an indirect way to apply their goals. It became clear that it wants to meet the confusion resulted from the referendum on the secession of Kurdistan in order to propose wider independence of the regions that have majorities of opposition  especially towards the choice represented by Iran in the region. Despite that the referendum will be devoted to the secession of the Kurds of Iraq, but it will create enthusiasm among the Syrian Kurdish leaderships to take the adventure depending on embroiling the Americans by imposing a fait accompli, but as Freidman said it is a choice that is welcomed and wished by Washington, but it is afraid to bear the consequences of the fight to impose it or to pay the bill of its failure, so it will leave it under experience. Freidman said that it is as the birth of the occupied entity in Palestine. So if the Kurds succeeded in imposing a fait accompli the Americans would enter into a settlement formula that depends of federalism for Syria, and wide confederation for Iraq that would preserve the form of a single state, but it will grant the new Kurdistan security, military, and diplomacy powers, thus this will lead to incoherent Iraqi state. While in Syria, it will agitate along with the Kurdish movement groups from the calm areas to impose a military fait accompli to defend it without getting involved in fighting. The new project as suggested by De Mistura before solving the situation in Aleppo is local self-management governments, so according to the Americans and their points of view it will be logical to propose a barter of ending the rebellion with a settlement entitled the federalism which will cover their staying in their military bases in Syria, and thus this will lead to Syria the desired weak country or the country which is lack of sovereignty by keeping the part which is dominated by the Kurds outside its control.

In the resistance axis Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and the Iraqi allies, the question which is proposed is about the reason of the insistence of the Kurdish leadership in Iraq on the referendum, and the reason of the remaining of the Kurds of Syria outside the two paths of Geneva and Astana. The Kurdish option as an Israeli –Saudi bet is taken seriously. The Turkish heading towards Iran in order to have understanding on confronting the fragmented threat is an expression of awareness of risks. It is not excludable that after the referendum in the Iraqi Kurdistan, the lines of the commercial and economic communication with Kurdistan  as an area of rebellion will be blocked by the Iraqi government, and the closure of the Iranian-Turkish borders in front of oil and other forms of trade. Because Freidman forgot to tell the Kurds that there are not any land or air borders of Kurdistan, but only with those whom the secession aims to harm. Today’s time is different than yesterday in its forces, balances, equations, and the size of the will and the determination to win. Maybe this is a lesson for the Kurdish leaders in Syria which experienced in Afrin a simple experiment called the exchange of car numbers, and which did not last even twenty-four hours.

There will be no tolerance with the formation of the secession even if it leads to war; it is the decision of Syria, Iraq, the region, and according to Russia. Let the Israelis and the Saudis pay attention well that they will not cover their defeat with an alternative war, since the unity of Syria and Iraq is not negotiable.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,