A Historical and Legal Imperative
Addressing the world public opinion and especially the United States is not a luxury but an obligation: As the Kurdish nation, in our own homeland, Kurdistan, we are being driven into genocidal annihilation
We are systematically denied, fragmented, assimilated, exiled, and threatened with physical destruction by three fascist colonial states: Turkey, Iran, and Syria.
This is a planned, coordinated, and persistent assault against the existence of a people. And unfortunately, every form of oppression, persecution, death, and countless severe pains, blood, and tears are recklessly inflicted upon the Kurdish nation.
In historical comparison, our situation is no different from the Jews in the concentration camps of Hitler’s Germany.
- We are being killed in our own homeland,
in our villages, our mountains, and our cities
The United States is the country that knows this geography and the hypocritical realpolitik calculations at play here the best. In Rojava, during the war against ISIS, the open diplomacy conducted between American representatives and Mazlum Abdi (Kobani) demonstrated the potential and ethical foundation of the cooperation between the U.S. and the Kurdish people.
- However, this example should not remain a fragmented and temporary diplomatic interest. As the Kurdish nation, we are now at the threshold of making a united call. Not in fragments, but as a nation, we are shouting out our historical demand and right: We demand international protection. We want to go to a referendum
Article 1 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights explicitly states: All peoples have the right to self-determination. There are many examples of the exercise of this right in international law:
- East Timor went to a referendum in 1999 under UN supervision against Indonesia’s years-long colonial occupation and declared independence in 2002.
South Sudan separated from Sudan through a referendum in 2011 and became an independent UN member state.
Eritrea separated from Ethiopia through a referendum in 1993.
Kosovo was cleared of Serbian forces through NATO intervention in 1999 and declared unilateral independence in 2008.
The situation experienced by the Kurdish nation is no less legitimate than these examples; on the contrary, with its historical continuity, demographic reality, and geographic existence, it is much deeper. Yet this right must not remain in words alone; it must take shape through political consciousness, diplomatic calls, and societal mobilization.
At this point, we cannot ignore the passive, unsolved, and dire situation of Kurdish political parties. Most of them either play the role of opposition within the boundaries drawn by colonial regimes or follow international actors with an identityless and visionless line.
The future of our people will no longer rise on the shoulders of parties but on those of intellectuals, academics, artists, and popular initiatives who act with a spirit of freedom, secularism, and national consciousness. Peoples’ histories are not written only by parties but also by conscientious intellectuals. Our main duty in the coming process is to explain, document, express, and institutionalize this just cause all around the world.
The ongoing occupation in the four parts of Kurdistan is not merely the product of regional states. These occupations were shaped with the support of imperial powers, especially through the Lausanne order, which rejected the Treaty of Sèvres in the early 20th century.
The contemporary extensions of this order namely the regimes of Turkey, Iran, and Syria still see the existence of the Kurdish nation as a threat and attempt to annihilate it entirely. Yet history is once again turning. As in the second half of the 20th century, oppressed peoples are no longer alone. Humanity’s common values, the conscience of international public opinion, and legal mechanisms can no longer excuse colonialism.
In this framework, possible U.S. support for the Kurdish people will not be an occupation but a liberation. Likewise, the establishment of a protection zone in Kurdistan by NATO or the UN Security Council is legitimate on the basis of human rights. The principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) considers international intervention legitimate in cases of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. What is happening in Kurdistan fully falls within the scope of this principle.
- As the Kurdish nation, we have the right to make an appeal for help.
This is not an emotional plea for refuge, but a historical, legal, and humanitarian legitimacy.
We call upon America and Western public opinion:
The international protection of the Kurdish nation is no longer a possibility but a necessity
https://www.basnews.com/en/babat/893096
