Article: Why Kurds Should Consider an Alliance with Israel
For over a century, the Kurds have faced a harsh political reality in four main countries: Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria. In these states, the Kurdish issue has rarely been addressed through fair constitutional recognition of their identity, language, and culture. Instead, it has often been treated as a “security problem,” managed through policies of denial, repression, or temporary containment. This has led to recurring cycles of tension and violence, fostering a deep Kurdish sense of political deadlock.
In Turkey, official discourse for decades denied Kurdish national existence, imposing strict restrictions on language and culture. In Iraq, Kurds endured devastating military campaigns, culminating in the Anfal campaigns of the 1980s. In Iran, Kurdish movements faced continuous political and security repression, including executions and assassinations. In Syria, Kurds suffered from discriminatory policies and were denied citizenship for many years. These accumulated realities have made trust between the Kurds and central governments fragile and conditional.
Within this context, some Kurdish thinkers advocate rapprochement with Israel as a strategic option—not merely for immediate benefits but as a reading of the regional balance of power. Israel is officially defined as a state with a pluralistic system, regular elections, and relatively independent institutions, and it has significant influence in international decision-making centers. From a pragmatic perspective, some see that establishing channels of communication could provide the Kurdish cause with political, media, or economic support on the international stage.
Supporters of this approach also point to historical parallels, arguing that both peoples have experienced persecution and denial at different times, potentially creating a foundation for mutual understanding. They emphasize that openness toward Israel does not equate to hostility toward other regional populations, but rather an effort to expand the network of alliances beyond a regional space that has repeatedly failed to produce just solutions.
Nevertheless, this proposal remains highly debated within Kurdish circles. Critics warn of the costs of alignment within complex regional axes and the risk of Kurds becoming a pawn in larger conflicts. Any overt alliance could also exacerbate tensions with central governments and affect the fragile stability in some Kurdish areas.
The discussion about alliances is not an emotional one but a profoundly political question: how can a people seeking recognition, full citizenship, and peace build a network of relationships that protects their rights and supports their aspirations without being drawn into conflicts that do not serve their interests? Addressing this question requires a long-term strategic vision, balancing principles and realism, historical memory and the demands of the present.