Tuesday, April 16, 2013

A Modern History of the Kurds: A Book Review


Jeff Martin                                                                                                                  4/13/13

A Modern History of the Kurds: A Book Review

From the time of the Ottoman Empire up to its civil war in the aftermath of Saddam’s genocidal campaigns, David McDowell’s “A Modern History of Kurds” tracks Iraqi Kurdistan’s (an important distinction that will come into play later) history and gives rise to a number of questions and theories pertaining to the nation without a state. The chief argument lies in the notion that modern Kurds problems are rooted during their times of being a mere colony under both Ottoman and Iranian flags. As I further researched into Kurdish autonomy I have found myself agreeing with him more often than not. However for the sake of a critical review, I shall make the argument that the majority of the problems lie exclusively within the timeframe of the Baath government’s genocide of the Iraqi Kurds in 1988 and the violent quelling of the Kurdish rebellion in 1991 & 1995.

In the book, McDowell goes through the various eras of Kurdish history and then focuses on local ethno-nationalism in the three Kurdistans (Iran, Iraq, and Turkey) and their respective histories. What develops is a pattern shared by all three cases that portrays the Kurds as a rebellious citizenry, remembering their servitude to previous empires have became the thorns in the sides of three governments, Baghdad, Tehran, and Ankara. McDowell does a good job in investigating the relationships not only between Kurds and the three nations but also between the various factions and tribes of Kurdistan, namely the KDP and PUK and the presence of the PKK which is notable for a campaign of violence against the Turkish government. He also delves into the ethno-nationalism of the three Kurdistans and how they differ from one another. When we think of Kurdistan, we tend to view it as a monolithic one culture nation; in reality they are distinct in culture, dialects, and economics. Iraqi Kurdistan is the most economically stable and most autonomous (and the focus of my research) and what Arbil does the rest of the nation follows. Yet that doesn’t mean that Kurdish civilization is a monolith. On the contrary, it is extremely varied and unlike any other in the region and McDowell illustrates that point to a tee.

By the time you get to the middle pages, the thesis previously stated is already shattered. There are so many issues when it comes to Kurdish nationalism that is still rooted in the 19th century and McDowell connects the two perfectly. The fractured nature of the tribes and parties themselves stemmed from their previous holdings in the two empires and even though they have grown far apart in terms of culture, they still retain a common identity. This knowledge will help me tremendously during my research as I connect Iraqi Kurdish preference of autonomy over statehood to that of the other Kurdistans and their own collective push for nationalism ranging from the fight in Turkey to reestablish their identity after President Ataturk suppressed it to the Iranian Kurdish infighting over the direction of their area. McDowell constantly bombards me with facts about some of the lesser known aspects of Kurdish history and while it I’m very grateful for him to impart his knowledge, it makes it a very tough read and even going through it constantly, there are still some parts that are still mysterious to me. When it comes to material like this, you have to really delve deep into it, something that cannot be done in just a few nights of light reading.

Overall, A Modern History of the Kurds accomplishes what it set out to do in the first place which is provide a neat timeline of the various significant events, factions, and external influences which shape Kurdistan into what it is today. It proves to me that these problems are not just consequences of modern conflict, but of long standing divisions and grievances ever since the caliphate fell over 100 years ago. This will help me tremendously through my research as I figure out just how deep these problems go and if they are a hindrance to Kurdish autonomy in Iraq.


1 comment:

  1. I would like to know more about the relationship between Turkish Kurds and Iraqi Kurds. In a previous presentation I gave to another class I attempted to identify the great problems Turkish Kurds influenced by the PKK presented to goverance in the secular Turkey. In Iraqi's new governmental framework I would be interested to know whether there is a relative level of pressuring being applied by Iraqis Kurds as a means of influencing policy or is resulting in potential violent outbursts like those threatened and engaged upon by the PKK in Turkey.

    ReplyDelete