By: Abdul Ilah Ibrahim
Forming a united Kurdistani army to preserve various Kurdish areas within ‘state of Kurdistan’ has always been an aspiration of millions of Kurds. However, in order to go through this ambition and measure its possibility, specific issues need to be taken into consideration, including ideological influences on the Kurdish people’s social, economic and political life.
Ideology, as a ‘science of ideas’, entailing the notion of ‘political sociology’, had constantly played a crucial role in the establishment of communal beliefs and factual or normative concepts that are being used to explain intricate social phenomena, after determining the political and social options for individuals and groups. Ideological method was always used by political parties to find certain pretexts in order to accomplish its private agendas, dominating a community’s life on social, economic and political levels.
The current instable and chaotic situation in several areas of ‘Syrian Kurdistan’ (Rojava or western Kurdistan) indicates the carelessness and selfishness of some political leaders who attempt to deploy the political agendas of their parties in the service of their personal and ideological interests through the usurpation of power and manipulation of the destiny of millions of civilians, especially concerning the domination of the Kurdish armed forces who were supposed to protect the people instead of turning into a tool to defend the dominant figure of their leaders. Thus, this monopoly of domination on the armed wing of the Kurdish political movement and the exclusion and marginalization of other currents raised justifiable fears from either a fragile security vacuum or clashes among Kurdish forces themselves.
Under the sponsorship of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), an agreement was signed by different Syrian Kurdish political parties in Erbil, September 2012. This agreement included a compromise between the Democratic Union Party (PYD) –a Syrian affiliation of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK)– and party members of the Kurdish National Council in Syria (KNC) –a coalition of thirteen Kurdish political parties and currents. Moreover, the Erbil agreement called for a formation of a ‘non-partisan Kurdistani army’, to be led politically by the Kurdish Supreme Committee –an extended umbrella of the PYD and the KNC founded after Erbil agreement.
It is hard though to ideologically unify the Kurdish political movements, unless the supreme dream of ‘Kurdistan state’ is concerned, which can be the only solution to achieve a Kurdish national security against the persecution and suppression they always suffered from. Thus, this would ensure the protection of all dwellers of the region without bias towards any party at the expense of the other. The establishment of such an army would remain the only guarantee for a Kurdish reassured and preserved future. Therefore, we could shorten the path that would transform (Rojava) Kurdistan into a safe and stable area instead of a volcano burning all sects of people and generate a social malice turning culture and civilization back for decades if not centuries.
The egoistic method of the parties’ dogmatic ideology cannot survive without a popular support, and the Kurdish political movement wouldn’t be able to continue and develop without the establishment of a ‘Kurdistani public framework’ to be reorganized within. Based on these facts, the actual forces on the ground should reconsider the supreme interest of the Kurdish people. When we look at the incidents taking place on ground, we spontaneously conduct a comparison between the various policies adopted by different Kurdish parties, being fully aware that the situation in (Rojava) is approaching a dangerous transformation that will most likely lead to devastated and loose areas.
Apparently, some political parties are characterized by the self-interest basis regarding their policies towards the ongoing developments, while trying to prevail the idea that the popular demands and aspirations are at ‘the top of the agenda’, forgetting that those people are the same who had sufficient courage to revolt against the most brutal and totalitarian regimes, and will never accept to return again to the cage of slavery after attaining their freedom.
Another point related to the topic, namely the used terminology in society and its impact on the region’s population that show a sense of dependency and melting of identity. For example, the term (Rojava) carries a nationalist trend by some components of non-Kurds, of course the title here does not justify for anybody to stand against it, because it is historically relevant to a land called Kurdistan. Thus,history should be looked at objectively without any sense of chauvinism and exclusion, only then the Kurdish people can gain their legitimate rights for which they have been oppressed by a number of the world’s most tyrannical dictators. Syrian Kurds (Kurds of Rojava) should not make the same mistake founded by states that divided the land of Kurdistan. Rights must be kept on a Kurdistani basis instead of nationalistic or partisan basis. Obviously, some members of the Arab opposition in Syria who have recently defected the Baath party, they still hold the same chauvinistic and exclusive mentality generated by the Baath party for decades. We do not see any justification for them to adhere to the word ‘Arab’ when addressing the Syrian Republic as ‘Syrian Arab Republic’, since the latter implies a total marginalization and exclusion of many non-Arab genuine components of the Syrian community, including the Kurds as the largest non-Arab ethnic group in Syria. Thus a constitutional recognition of the Kurdish legitimate rights and demands is needed, otherwise the door will be open to all the possibilities, including the topic dealt with in this article.
Source: ARA News
For the latest news follow us on Twitter
Join our Weekly Newsletter