Introduction

For several weeks, the Kurdish question is once again under the media spotlight and highly discussed within the diplomatic landscape. Overshadowed by the war in Ukraine, the combined Turkish-Iranian threats to invade Syrian and Iraqi Kurdistan(s) are forcing antagonistic actors of the international and regional systems, to comprehend the situation, express their concerns and to prepare for the various potential short-term scenarios.

Why is Iran now threatening to invade Iraqi Kurdistan? Can this threat truly be implemented? Looking to Syria, will Turkey entirely occupy Syrian Kurdistan? Are the objective conditions this time favourable for "liquidating" the Kurdish administration in Syria? Is there an agreement between Ankara and Tehran to stop the rise of the Kurds in the Middle East? Does the new Middle East context allow for the development of such a strategy for joint action? Do the recent trends in the transformation of the Iraqi and Syrian states – depriving them of their traditional conceptual frameworks – make it extremely difficult, not to say impossible, to deal with the Kurdish question?

This article aims to put into perspective these questions that force us to think differently. In a radically transformed Middle Eastern landscape, the old conceptual frameworks are rendered obsolete to decipher current trends.

Iran, a rogue state?

The death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Kurdish woman, on 16 September 2022, after her arrest by the morality police, sparked a large-scale protest movement throughout the entire country. Iran accuses the Iranian Kurdish opposition, which has set up its base within the territory of the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government, of organising and directing the protest movement. Amongst the ranks of the opposition can be found, Komala and the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI).

The Islamic Republic leaders’ narrative is perfectly illustrated by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hossein Amir Abdollahian. His narrative is designed with the aim of "starting a civil war", similar to what is happening in Syria, Yemen or Libya. Its ultimate goal is to "disintegrate Iran". This narrative ignores the entire political-economic structure of a regime challenged by a youth who aspires to a better world. Therefore, it is necessary to find an enemy who conspires with the help of international powers against the Islamic regime. This perceived enemy is eager, close, all powerful and lies just beyond Iran’s borders, according to this narrative. These are the two Kurdish groups, the KDPI and Komala, who are supposedly instrumentalising Iraqi Kurdistan, preparing for a "civil war" to destroy Iran from within. The liquidation of this threat is becoming the upmost priority for the Iranian Regime.

It is within the confines of this narrative that the justification for an invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan takes shape. The Kurdish regional government and Iraqi government being incapable of exerting control over Komala and the KDPI, the guardians of the Islamic Revolution will thus have to step in to complete this objective. However, it must be noted that the objective conditions make this invasion unlikely.

First of all, the Islamic Republic of Iran is perceived by a large part of the international community (the United States of America, the European Union, the Arab countries, Israel, etc.) as a rogue state that systematically transgresses international treaties, does not respect the most essential human rights and behaves like an actor ostracised from the international community.

Moreover, Iraqi Kurdistan is today a federated entity and constitutionally recognised by the Iraqi State. The Kurds are no longer reduced to peshmergas in the mountains of Kurdistan, they now possess key positions within the Iraqi government, such as the Presidency of the Iraqi Republic, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Deputy Prime Minister. Let us recall that 20% of key positions within the Iraqi state are occupied by Kurds. For the international community, the Kurdish Regional Government is an essential political, economic and security partner within the Iraqi state. From Washington to Paris, the slogan adopted is: "We want a strong Kurdish Regional Government within a united Iraq."

Lastly, with regards to the two Kurdish parties in Iran: the KDPI and Komala, none are internationally classified as terrorist organisations. Admittedly, they have military training bases and adopt armed struggle as a means to an end against the Islamic Republic, but it must be stated that the territory of the Kurdish Regional Government has never been instrumentalised by these two groups against Iran. On the contrary, Erbil has often enjoyed good relations with Tehran, thus often controlling, limiting and even sacrificing both these groups to maintain relations with Iran.

All these elements make it unlikely for the scenario of an Iranian invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan to occur. Nevertheless, it cannot be disregarded entirely. Especially since Tehran has been putting growing pressure on both Erbil and Baghdad to achieve, at least partially, the objectives identified in this narrative.

Turkey, a key state

A crucial player since the war in Ukraine, Turkey occupies a position in the regional and international system that is radically different than Iran. A NATO member, with very good relations with both Moscow, to which it pays for its gas purchases in roubles, and Kiev, to which it sells its drones, Turkey is now the country where belligerents and key players caught up in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict meet.

At the regional level, Turkey has managed to normalise its relations with the Gulf countries and Israel. Regarding Marshal Sisi’s Egypt, normalisation is underway. In Iraq, together with the KRG, the Sunnis of Halboussi, Khanjar and the liberal Shiites, they form a significant pole of influence.

However, internally, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has never been so weak. The country’s economic situation is dramatic. The Turkish lira (TL) has lost "more than 28% of its value against the dollar since the first of January. It had already lost 44% in 2021. The trade balance widened by 430% in October 2022. In the same month, inflation reached a quarter-century high of : 85.5% year-on-year, generating a surge in prices of 117% for transport, 99% for food and 85% for housing. These increases burden the lowest wages and precarious households by 126% to 146%. 1 ”

This general economic crisis will undoubtedly be pinned to a president who has a decisive electoral appointment next June. His goal is to make the impossible possible in the hope of winning these presidential elections. However, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, is aware that with such an economic track record, the probability of an electoral victory is very slim. He is thus forced to work a different angle for his campaign, namely national security.

At war with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) for about 40 years, the President is preparing a new militarily intense confrontation, especially in Syrian Kurdistan, where the local branch of the PKK, the Kurdish Democratic Union Party ( Partiya Yekîtiya Demokrat), runs an unrecognised state entity.

In January 2018, Turkey had already occupied the Kurdish region of Afrin, in northwestern Syria, despite the unanimous condemnations of the international community. Today, it targets the region of Kobane. If it is true that the US demands of Turkey not to put in full swing its invasion plan, simultaneously Washington confirms that Ankara has every right to protect itself against terrorist operations. For President Erdoğan, Washington’s position confirms that Turkey’s relations and influence are growing.

Capitalising on this whilst making this Kurdish issue work to his advantage could be highly profitable, enabling him to acquire a popularity that should allow him to increase his chances for the June 2023 elections. President Erdoğan thus has two options. The first is to invade and occupy the Kobane region and the second is to force the Kurds to accept the return of Bashar al-Assad’s authority over the whole of Syrian Kurdistan. The Russians, strongly present in Syria, are in favour of the second option, the Iranians have not yet decided between the two.

In both cases, President Erdoğan will win. An occupation of Kobane, according to his calculations, will be perceived by Turkish society as the victory of a Turkey led by a strong president that the country needs, capable of protecting the Nation, the territory and the State against the threats of “terrorist” organisations. Nevertheless, the return of Bashar al-Assad’s regime to Syrian Kurdistan would also be profitable. Indeed, still according to his calculations, this return definitely puts an end to the existence of this Kurdish state entity. As a result, Erdoğan can also hope for a rise in voting intentions in the face of this eventuality.

Between invasion or return, the Turkish president wishes, as soon as possible, to find a solution for the few million Syrian refugees in Turkey. Indeed, this massive influx of Syrians in his country is now perceived as a failure emanating from his management of the Syrian file. Through invasion or return, he hopes to build safe zones and return these refugees, willingly or by force, to their country by June next year.

Conclusion

To date, the armed forces of the two powers of the regional system are deployed on the two borders of Iraqi Kurdistan and Syrian Kurdistan. For Iran, the more the protest movement expands, the more it takes up root and the longer the protest movement lasts, the more it risks increasing the pressure exerted by Tehran on Baghdad and Erbil. However, the risk of a total or partial invasion is very limited. On the other hand, the closer Turkey gets to the June 2023 deadline, the greater the risk of a liquidation of the Kurdish state entity in Syria by an invasion or the return of Bashar al-Assad’s regime becomes possible. The international community, although strong in the face of the Islamic Republic of Iran, to which it regularly imposes sanctions, seems helpless in the face of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.