In any case, I wonder how much farther this will go. Frankly, I think we've already passed the "Lucy point", a principle I derive from Jon Schwarz's writings almost four years ago:
The Kurds have really become the Charlie Brown of international relations, always believing that Lucy, in the form of the US, is finally going to let them kick the football.Follow the link for classic picture.
It's worth pointing out that a number of our stupider liberal hawks supported the war in Iraq based on their experience with the Kurds. This was always a bad rationale, because there were pretty slim chances that the outcome of any war -- even one that succeeded beyond our wildest dreams -- would be objectively better for the Kurds than the de facto independence they had. So way to go, people! We've managed to screw over even the people who had it pretty good pre-2003.
1 comment:
Even if they didn't have DC's explicit blessing, it doesn't matter. The Kurds will assume that they have DC's blessing if we don't actively move to stop Turkey. But I'd assume that Turkey got at least a tentative go ahead from DC before doing something on the ground.
This is unsurprising to say the least - Kurdistan should have been expecting it since the whole Lebanon-Israeli inflammation a few summers ago. I'm frankly surprised that the US has been able to hold Turkey back this long.
I am curious about what kind of connection the PKK has to the current government of Kurdistan. I'm assuming not enough for the government to tell them to stop trying to provoke a war with Turkey, but I'd still like to know what if any connection they have (we don't seem to get information like that here in the States - if I go by US media reports both Turkey and the Kurds are our "friends").
As for our "stupider liberal hawks" - meh. In the blogosphere and out most of the liberal hawks I've run across seemed pretty darn stupid in the runup to the war, and the more time goes by the stupider they look in retrospect.
--NonyNony
Post a Comment