The Future of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The Syrian Kurds and Iraqi Kurds won't join up - they are at loggerheads at a lot (specifically the Syrian Kurds are friendly with the PKK, and the Iraqi Kurds are more 'conservative/neoliberal/cronyistic/sultanate'; and also the former don't really want independence, largely following Ocalan's new beliefs on democratic confederalism. Only the Iraqi Kurd establishment (I.e. The Barzani and Talabani families) really really want an independent state, and they'll probably get it or something very close to it following the referendum). The Iranian Kurds will never leave. The Turkish Kurds again, unless the war ramps up to the levels we saw in the 20th century and the AKP lose their base in rural Kurdistan, won't go (although the demographic dilemma that the Turks find themselves in irt the high birthrate of Kurds and below replacement rate of the "natives" are currently causing panics in the Turknationalist mind.)

Iraq won't be allowed to break up on Sunni-Shia lines because is isn't good precedent to allow that to start happening. Besides that would just lead to a Shia supremacist Iranian puppet state and a Sunni half that would be like a more Yemeny Yemen.

Neither will Syria for that matter. An Alawite state? Please.

Pakistan and Afghanistan is a whole other matter that I might add later.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Iraqi Kurdistan (KRG) is a clientalistic machine dominated by two parties, the conservative KDP and ostensibly socially democratic PUK. Both parties are corrupt to the core and have sustained their rule through classic petrostate means - large amounts of nonsense jobs for cronies, a cut of the profit going to private banking accounts etc. KRG's main ambition, aside from the aforementioned corruption (which is becoming a big problem as the war/oil crash is driving the population antsy), is forming an independent Kurdish state they have autonomy over. To do that, they need the support of their neighbours, and you do not get the support of your neighbours (or, for that matter the major powers/UN) by announcing you have irredentist aims like you're in WW1 or something. Remember, the key aim for them is a Kurdish nation, not THE BIGGEST KURDISH NATION THERE CAN POSSIBLY BE (that never ends well). Even worse for relations, PUK has lost a huge amount of power recently in its strongholds to Gorran, an anti-corruption leftist group that the KDP claim are linked with Iran. This means the conservative KDP and its leader Bersani has consolidated a lot of power, antagonising the Syrian Kurds.

Rojava meanwhile is a formation of PKK-friendly PYD (the KDP friendly KNC has less institutional support within Rojava itself). They have little interest in the project of Kurdistan independent state (as the PKK is a nationalist, but no longer a separatist organisation) and even if they did, would find the KRG distasteful for ideological (as PYD is very much a New Left party) and personal reasons (they distrust President Bersani, who keeps them at arms bay because he wishes to remain on good terms with Erdogan and the Turkish military). The PYD, because it is not interested in independent kurdistan, is attached to reforming Syria itself through the NCB, a broad Marxist-socialist-secular umbrella party. The NCB is basically the most moderate of the various rebel groups, being the most open to a peace agreement keeping Bashar Al Assad and very secular (they are very much throwbacks to the classic stage of Arab "socialism", which was merely a worship of modernity). Their equivalent in Turkey, the HDP ,is also opposed to independence, even if Erdogan (or the military) because it is a sort of "every minority join together" affair. (And as for the Kurds status as a minority, fertility rates of Turks are below replacement levels and of Kurds are way above).

A certain number of politicians in both Iraq and elsewhere have called for autonomous regions or an actual federation. Basically my main diagnosis is that it is a bit of a distraction in that what is really neede: a general protection of Sunni areas from Shia militias, which are backed by Iran and caused the backed up against the wall effect that led to Daesh, and more unity not less.

The Iranian Kurds don't want to go, and again they are PKK affiliated so don't want an independent nation.

Isis's territory in Syria will be destroyed in the next few years, that's for sure. They'll still leave an unpleasant legacy which will stink up the region; but the organisation of the territory doesn't strike me as tight nit and efficient as they'd like to be feared as. I doubt Assad will be leading it, if reports from Russia are to be believed. He'll probably take everything that isn't bolted down and "retire gracefully", install a puppet who will give some concessions to the Kurds and quickly try and get back the old status quo.

To put the situation irt Taliban in context Pakistan is extrenely cowardly and doesn't want to target the Taliban because they might strike back.