In response...
Thus far, Iraq has merely returned the situation to the pre-2014 status quo, which was not unfavorable to the Kurds. The Kurdistan Regional Government has been “pro-Western and open for business” because it has been a U.S. client or protectorate for over a generation: specifically since 1991. The same is hardly true of the Turkish and Syrian Kurds, who are mainly under the control of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party and its Syrian branch, the Democratic Union Party.Originally Posted by John Jenkins
Unfortunately, Jenkins makes the grave error of conflating Iraqi and Syrian Kurds, the KDP and the PKK, and the Peshmerga and the YPG. Barzani attempted a fait accompli despite Western warnings, and despite the fact that the West was not about to allow Iraqi Kurdistan to be overrun by Iraqi Shia militias and subjugated into a unitary Shia-dominated state. Iraqi Kurdish frustration with the status quo was understandable, but so too should have been the necessity of continuity. Unless the U.S. was planning on expelling Turkey from NATO and championing Kurdish independence against opposition from Iran, Turkey, Iraq and Syria (which are united on that particular issue), any unilateral declaration of independence was sheer folly.
As CrowBat and others have noted, the Iranian “military supply lines” to the Houthi/pro-Saleh forces in Yemen are very “modest” indeed. Houthi successes have more to do with former president Saleh’s support than Iran’s.Originally Posted by John Jenkins
Jenkins seems to ignore the fact that aside from the perception that Iran is now more influential in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria now, than it was in 2011, Iran has had to marshal all of its resources in order to preserve Assad’s rule in perhaps one-third of Syria. Not only are the IRGC and foreign Shia militias occupied in Syria or Iraq (~35,000 of them), but Syria’s once-formidable air defenses (at least 4X more capable than Iran’s) have been neutralized by the war, and no longer provide any protection from or early-warning of an airstrike on its nuclear facilities, ostensibly by Israel. In addition, Syria’s arsenal of tanks and artillery are now denied to Iran in the event of conflict with Israel. Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs aside, Israel is less threatened by Iran’s allies or auxiliaries than ever before, and Lebanese Hezbollah is in no position to pummel northern Israel as it did in 2006.Originally Posted by John Jenkins
Bookmarks