Introduction: Pawns of Geopolitics and Broken Promises
At the beginning of 2026, with yet another quiet shift in U.S. Middle East policy, the Kurds find themselves once again standing at a historical crossroads. In northeastern Syria, the self-governing administration established with U.S. support is now facing sustained military pressure from Turkish forces. In Iraq, leaders of the Kurdistan region are navigating difficult tensions between the constraints of the Baghdad central government and the regional influence of Iran and Turkey. This scene feels all too familiar—for over a century, the Kurdish nation has repeatedly served as a temporary ally in great power strategies, only to be sidelined when interests are reshuffled.
Historical Echoes: From Sykes-Picot to Modern Power Games
The Kurdish issue is rooted in the birth trauma of the modern Middle Eastern state system. When the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement drew straight lines across the ruins of the Ottoman Empire, Kurdistan was divided among Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran, becoming a “nation without a state.” Nearly a century later, during the war against ISIS, Kurdish fighters became the West’s most effective ground force, liberating territories at the cost of over 11,000 lives. A former U.S. Secretary of Defense publicly praised them as “our most reliable partners on the battlefield.”
However, trust is often fragile in realpolitik. In October 2023, as U.S. troops further reduced their presence in Syria, Turkey launched a new cross-border operation codenamed “Operation Firm Determination,” targeting the U.S.’s former ally—the Kurdish YPG forces. Washington’s silence stood in stark contrast to the frequent diplomatic exchanges between Moscow, Tehran, and Ankara. Latest satellite imagery shows border outposts that once flew Kurdish flags now bearing the Turkish flag.
Multiparty Games: Calculations of Regional Actors
Turkey labels Kurdish armed groups as terrorist organizations, relating to its domestic security and national unity narrative. Iran worries about separatist tendencies in its own Kurdish regions while using the Kurdish issue as leverage in negotiations with Turkey and Iraq. The Syrian Assad regime, with Russian support, is gradually reasserting control over northeastern areas, promising “limited autonomy” to the Kurds in exchange for territorial integrity. Meanwhile, Israel provides covert support, viewing the Kurds as a potential force to counter Iranian expansion.
This complex game reached a new stage in December 2025: Turkey, Russia, and Iran held a trilateral summit in Tehran, with a joint statement explicitly including “respect for Syria’s territorial integrity” and “opposition to all forms of separatism,” widely interpreted as a triple negation of Kurdish aspirations for autonomy. At the same time, European countries, deepened in their dependence on Turkey due to the energy crisis, chose geopolitical reality over human rights concerns.
Islamic Perspective: Forgotten Brothers and the Test of Faith
Within the Muslim world, the Kurdish issue raises profound dilemmas of identity and ethics. The Kurds are overwhelmingly Muslim, predominantly Sunni, and their plight touches on core Islamic teachings regarding justice, covenants, and brotherhood.
The Quran emphasizes: “O you who believe, fulfill [all] contracts” (5:1). When the United States established a military alliance with the Kurds to fight ISIS, this constituted a de facto covenant. Today’s situation recalls the verse: “Except for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque. So as long as they are upright to you, be upright to them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous” (9:7).
Similarly, the Quran’s warnings about oppression are thought-provoking: “Persecution is worse than slaughter” (2:191). What the Kurds face is not only military threats but systemic deprivation: restrictions on language and culture, lack of political representation, and control over economic resources. In Iraq, despite constitutional recognition of the Kurdish region, disputes over oil revenue sharing continue to simmer. In Syria, Kurdish language education remains strictly controlled. In Turkey, Kurdish political leaders face judicial repression. In Iran, Kurdish activists are sentenced to death.
Islamic scholars are divided on this issue. Dr. Abdul Aziz Fawaz, former advisor to Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs, notes: “When we speak of unity in the Muslim world, we cannot selectively exclude our Kurdish brothers and sisters. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: ‘The believers, in their mutual kindness, compassion, and sympathy, are like one body; if one organ complains, the whole body responds with wakefulness and fever.’ (Bukhari) The fractures today are concerning.” However, Turkey’s Directorate of Religious Affairs cites Islamic legal principles of “preserving national unity” to justify its policies.
The Unique Kurdish Reality: A Third Way in the Cracks
The Kurds’ greatest strategic dilemma is that they can neither fully rely on the West nor easily find stable allies in the region. In 2024, Kurdish activists launched the “We Are Not Pawns” campaign, emphasizing that the Kurdish issue should be seen as a matter of national rights, not a geopolitical tool. In Rojava (Syrian Kurdistan), an experimental social model combining direct democracy, women’s empowerment, ecological protection, and multi-religious coexistence once attracted international attention but now struggles under military pressure.
Notably, there are also deep divisions within Kurdish society. Traditional tribal structures versus modern political organizations, religious versus ethnic identities, and differing interests among Kurdish regions in different countries all weaken the capacity for unified action. In 2025, the collapse of the coalition government for the third time between the two main Kurdish parties in Iraq—the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan—exposed how internal divisions are exploited by external forces.
Comparative Perspective: From Kurdistan to the Broader Muslim World
The plight of the Kurds is not an isolated case in the Muslim world. From Palestine to Kashmir, from the Rohingya to the Tuareg, many Muslim groups struggle between self-determination and the existing state system. This raises a fundamental question: How compatible is the Islamic concept of the “Ummah” (Muslim community) with the modern nation-state system? Islamic scholar Taha Jabiri once pointed out that in early Islamic history, political loyalty was based on faith and covenant, not on singular ethnicity. Today, when Kurdish Muslims face off against Turkish or Arab Muslims on the battlefield, the chasm between this ideal and reality is stark.
Future Outlook: Between Idealism and Realism
In 2026, the Kurds face limited options: reaching a fragile compromise with the Assad regime for limited autonomy under Turkey’s tacit approval, or enhancing bargaining power through regional alliances (such as covert cooperation with Israel), though this risks escalating tensions with neighboring countries. The most likely outlook is a “frozen conflict”—no full-scale war, no political resolution, only ongoing low-intensity tension.
But history often surprises. At the end of 2025, the opening of a second humanitarian corridor between Syrian and Iraqi Kurdistan showed increased cross-border Kurdish cooperation. Meanwhile, Kurdish youth launched the “Digital Homeland” movement on social media, constructing a transnational ethnic identity through cultural revival.
Conclusion: Beyond the Narrative of Abandonment, Seeking a Framework for Justice
The shift in U.S. policy is merely the latest chapter in the long saga of Kurdish suffering. The deeper issue is how the international system addresses the tension between the right to self-determination and the principle of the inviolability of existing borders. The Kurdish case reveals the limitations of Western idealist diplomacy—support for democracy and human rights often gives way to realist interests such as energy security, migration control, and counterterrorism cooperation.
From the perspective of the Muslim world, the Kurdish dilemma is a test of the concept of Islamic brotherhood. The Quran emphasizes: “Cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and aggression” (5:2). Ultimately, the Kurdish issue is not only a geopolitical problem but also an ethical and justice issue. Perhaps the way forward lies not in expecting external saviors but in constructing a regional security architecture based on mutual recognition—acknowledging the legitimate rights of the Kurds while addressing the legitimate security concerns of Turkey, Iran, Syria, and others.
On the hills of Erbil and the banks of the Euphrates, the Kurds still wait for promises to be fulfilled. Their fate concerns not only one nation but also the credibility of the international community and, more importantly, whether the Muslim world can live up to the profound teachings of justice, compassion, and brotherhood embedded in its faith. As the Quran states: “Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression” (16:90). In these turbulent times, the echoes of these words are more urgent than ever.
About the Author
