Washington traditionally engages with the governments of Turkey, Iraq, and Syria on developments within these countries. While this might represent traditional statecraft, what makes these nations unique is their sizable and distinct Kurdish populations. Furthermore, the United States continues to work closely with these governments, even when they oppose American presence and policies in the Middle East. To better protect U.S. national security interests and advance an “America First” policy in the region, it is long overdue for President Donald Trump to appoint a special envoy for Kurdish affairs.
It benefits every U.S. president to secure a position that views the Kurdish region holistically.
Why the Kurds? The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world without an independent country. It benefits every U.S. president to secure a position that views the Kurdish region holistically, rather than channeling U.S. interests through the lens of U.S. embassies that might focus on other bilateral or host nation priorities.
The Kurds are historically pro-American and consistently support the United States when needed. They stood up against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein for decades, helped American forces enter Iraq in 2003 through their northern territories when Turkey refused access, fought alongside U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq to defeat the Islamic State, and have been willing and ready to oppose the Iranian regime. They are the most battle-hardened and organized non-governmental group within the country.
Washington has supported the Kurdish military through training, arming, and professionalization. The U.S. government has invested economically in the Kurdistan Region. A special envoy for Kurdish affairs would enable Washington to see the results of U.S. investments and inform Washington of the setbacks and challenges the Kurds face. While the State Department maintains a consulate in Erbil, this is subordinate to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and so does not necessarily operate outside its guidelines.
Meanwhile, the Turkish government presents a positive image of its relationship with its Kurdish population, but Turkish prisons are filled with Kurds. It labels those imprisoned as “terrorists,” a designation too many American diplomats assigned to Turkey accept to assuage their hosts. An envoy could bypass this dynamic.
The Turkish government presents a positive image of its relationship with its Kurdish population, but Turkish prisons are filled with Kurds.
The special envoy could provide the president or secretary of State with facts on the ground to calibrate policy to reality and help advocate for a symbiotic relationship in the interagency process. This, more than U.S. sycophancy, would encourage these governments to improve their human rights records. It would compel these countries to be honest with Washington because it establishes a competition of facts.
History shows that the current war against the Iranian regime will not be the last, due to the Islamic Republic’s ongoing violations. Although former President Bashar al-Assad has left Syria, the new regime is Islamist and likely only feigning cooperation with the West while it tightens its control. On paper, Turkey is a NATO ally, with the second-largest army in the alliance, but in reality, the Turkish government hosts the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas, shares intelligence with Iran to aid its survival, and regularly undermines U.S. policy from Venezuela to Gaza.
A special envoy for Kurdish affairs would not only ensure that the U.S.-Kurdish alliance grows but also allow us to pursue a more stable, consistent, and coherent Middle East policy across the countries in which the Kurds reside.
