Though large numbers of Jews were scattered around the world for two thousand years, Palestine has always retained a significant number of them. Of the almost 11.3 million Jews in 1900, most were in Europe (9 million), Russia (3.9 million) and the United States (1.5 million). At the beginning of the WWII the global population of Jews had grown to 15.4 million of which one third were in the US.
Even before the holocaust there were movements to reestablish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The 1917 Belfour Declaration from British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Walter Rothschild, pledged British support for a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine. The local Christian and Muslim community of Palestine, who constituted almost 90% of the population, strongly opposed the declaration.
What became known as Zionism (as formalized by Theodor Herzl, it aimed to secure a safe haven for Jews fleeing persecution and to revive Jewish culture and language) took many forms. For example, the question who is Jewish continues to be debated. Following World War I, Britian ruled the Lavant (Palestine). On September 3, 1947, the UN adopted the boundaries (green line) to divide the British mandate between a state of Israel and the rest. Israel was given 56% and Jerusalem (an important Christian, Jewish, and Muslim shrine) was made international. When Britten ended its Mandate, Israel declared its independence.
Most Zionists sought a democratic Jewish state. Upon its founding in 1947, Israel was roughly 60% Muslim, 40% Jewish and 10% Christian. That was an unacceptable problem for those wanting a democratic Jewish state. From the Nakba of 1948 (Jewish ethnic cleaning of over half of the Palestinians then living in Israel) Israel was about 90% Jewish in 1949. Currently the population of Israel is about 10 million, of which 73% are Jewish, and 20% are Muslims. Finding peace with the rest of Palestine has remained a challenge to this day. Are the prospects for a peaceful Kurdistan very different.
The Kurdish population worldwide is estimated to be between 40 and 45 million, making them one of the largest ethnic groups without a sovereign state. However, about 30 million of them live within what would be the sovereign state of Kurdistan should it be allowed to exist, made up of chunks of Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria.
Kurdish military forces have fought for territory but largely in pursuit of claims to rule what they considered home ground. It is extremely unlikely that the Kurds in this area would have any interest in expanding their territory. None the less Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey have generally been hostile to any effort of the Kurds to rule themselves. The formation of a Kurdistan raises the questions whether that would bring greater peace to the wider region and whether the “internal” politics would support domestic rule that would properly serve the Kurdish people (or all residents of the area). Intense opposing political views exist within Kurdistan, particularly in Iraq, where the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) compete for control, often leading to governance deadlocks, separate security forces, and split zones of control.
In addition, we must ask whether the Iraqi Kurds, Iranian Kurds, Turkish Kurds, and Syrian Kurds feel more loyal to the country they are located in or to their fellow Kurds in the surrounding countries. Does a nation function better toward the interests of its citizens when based on ethnic and/or religious commonality or when based on common principals of governance and rights?
Israel is an example of the first option—Jewishness. As a classical liberal (libertarian) I support the American approach of rights and laws applied equally without regard to ethnicity or personal religious beliefs. For Kurdistan, the question with whether the Kurds of Turkey, Iraq, Iran or Syria feel greater loyalty to other Kurds or to the country they live in.
I started this blog expecting to build the case for a Kurdistan. I have talked myself out of it.
Warren's space 