Amid the ongoing war in Iran, many have wondered how regime change is possible in Tehran by air campaign only.
History has consistently shown that air bombing campaigns rarely achieve regime change, especially in countries where the government enjoys at least some popular support.
The two objectives: achieving regime change in Iran without putting boots on the ground seemed incompatible.
Now it emerges that the US does have a plan. And the plan is straight from the centuries-old imperial playbook – ‘Divide and Rule’.
The Financial Times reported on March 5 that the Trump administration is currently engaged in discussions with Iranian Kurdish armed groups to explore whether these groups could play a supportive role in the ongoing US-Israeli military campaign against Iran.
If the talks succeed, it will enable the US to move beyond reliance primarily on airpower to incorporate ground-based pressure without putting US soldiers on the ground.
Kurdish officials have reportedly said that Iraqi Kurds are ready to support the US in its effort against Iran.
However, Kurds are moving cautiously. They’re demanding security guarantees from the US.
The Kurds have a long history of associating with the US; however, the association has mostly ended in betrayal of the Kurds.
In fact, the plan could end disastrously for all the parties involved: the Kurds, the Iranians, and even the US.
Who Are The Kurds?
The Kurds are an Indo-European ethnic group indigenous to the mountainous region of West Asia known as ‘Kurdistan.’ Kurds speak a language from the Indo-European family of the Iranian branch.
Their global population is 30 to 45 million, and they’re one of the world’s most significant stateless ethnic groups.
Their population is spread across multiple countries, with the largest numbers in Turkey, where 15 to 20 million Kurds live in southeastern Turkey.
Iran has 8-12 million Kurds. Syria has approximately 1.5 million Kurds living in the country. Meanwhile, Iraq has roughly 5.6 to 8 million Kurdish people living in the northern part of the country, where they have a semi-autonomous government.
While Kurds are predominantly Sunni, they’re a distinct ethnic group from the Arabs. Kurds speak an Indo-European language, while Arabs speak a Semitic language of the Afroasiatic family.
While Kurds are linguistically close to Iranians, religiously, they’re closer to Arabs, as Iranians are predominantly Shia, whereas Kurds are mostly Sunni.
Due to these reasons, Kurds have faced discrimination and persecution everywhere, from Turkey to Iran.
The Kurds have been fighting for a separate state since before World War I.
The 1920 Treaty of Sèvres promised them an independent Kurdish state, but this was never ratified. The 1923 Treaty of Lausanne divided traditional Kurdish areas into four different countries: Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey.
Following years of war, Kurds have enjoyed various degrees of autonomy in Iraq and Syria. The Kurdistan Regional Government (K.R.G.) in Iraq is now a constitutionally recognised autonomous region.
In Turkey, there has been a decades-long separatist insurgency led by the Kurds, but they have faced brutal suppression.
The US Has Repeatedly Betrayed The Kurds
In the early 1970s, under Presidents Nixon and Ford, the US, in coordination with Iran and Israel, provided arms and aid to Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq. The goal was to weaken the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein and counter Soviet influence in the region, using the Kurds as a proxy.
However, in March 1975, Iran and Iraq signed the Algiers Agreement, resolving their border disputes. Iran immediately withdrew its support for the Kurds, and the US followed suit by cutting off CIA aid. This left the Kurds exposed to brutal Iraqi reprisals, resulting in thousands of deaths and mass displacement.
When Kurds appealed to Henry Kissinger for help, they received no reply.
During congressional scrutiny of this betrayal, Kissinger was asked to justify the policy shift.
“Covert action should not be confused with missionary work,” he replied.
This realpolitik quote by Kissinger has come to encapsulate the US’s pragmatic approach to Kurdish aspirations for freedom and sovereignty for the last half-century.
In fact, the US has repeatedly used the Kurds to advance its own strategic interests in the region, and then betrayed the Kurdish cause when those interests shift.
The story repeated itself in 1991.
After the 1991 Gulf War, when the US expelled Saddam’s forces from Kuwait, the US encouraged the Kurds to rebel against Saddam.
Not unlike Trump’s call to Iranians to ‘seize the moment’ and ‘take matters into their own hands’ by overthrowing the Islamist regime in Tehran, in 1991, Bush encouraged Kurds to “take matters into their own hands” against the weakened Ba’athist government.
Anticipating US support, Kurds in northern Iraq rebelled and took control of many cities. But the promised US help never came. Washington felt that undermining Saddam could empower Iran, and an independent Kurdish territory could annoy its regional ally, Turkey.
Saddam’s reprisal was brutal. Over 50,000 Kurds were killed, and over 1 million were displaced.
In 2014, the US once again leveraged Kurdish forces in its fight against the Islamic State.
The Obama administration partnered with the Kurdish-led People’s Protection Units (YPG) and later the broader Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a multi-ethnic alliance dominated by Kurds.
Kurds fought the ISIS bravely, allowing the US to defeat ISIS without putting American boots on the ground. After defeating ISIS, Kurds established an autonomous province in Syria’s northeast.
However, in 2024, after the fall of Bashar al-Assad, the US once again betrayed the Kurdish cause and prioritized its relations with its NATO ally, Turkey.
The Syrian forces led by Ahmed al-Sharaa and supported by Turkey, overran the Kurdish autonomous region in Syria, killing thousands and displacing hundreds of thousands.
Given this long history of the US using Kurds as its disposable proxies, many say that Kurdish forces should think twice before taking the American bait.
Tomorrow, if the US is able to place a friendly regime in Tehran, it will not shy away from cutting a deal with the new regime by selling out Kurdish interests.
The Kurds should also consider the fact that they constitute less than 10 percent of the Iranian population.
Furthermore, Iranian nationalism is still a very potent force. The country might be divided on the question of the government, but noone should underestimate the power of Iranian nationalism.
Trump is known for his aversion to long wars. Once his interest in the region wanes, Kurds, just like in previous instances, might be left alone to face the fury of Iranian nationalism.
In 2003, when the US invaded Iraq, it exploited the pre-existing divisions in the society to advance its own cause and weaken the Iraqi regime.
They used Shia against Sunni, Kurds against the Ba’athist. The Iraqi regime was defeated, but the country had to face the burn of sectarian violence for years to come.
In the coming days, the US would try to employ the same ‘divide and rule’ strategy in Iran.
This is not to say that there are no ethnic or sectarian cleavages in Iran. There is a Baloch separatist movement in the South, there are the Kurds in the northwest, and Sunni communities in the southwest.
However, history tells us that when a country is destabilized and its ethnic divisions are leveraged by an outside power, the endless violence that is unleashed harms those communities more than anyone else.
- Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK.
- VIEWS PERSONAL OF THE AUTHOR.
- He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com
