Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Latest

CONFIRMED: Russia opposed to Kurdish separatism in Middle East

Russia is comitted to the existing borders of Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.

Avatar

Published

on

This morning, Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov was asked to clarify the Russian position on a referendum for unilateral secession among ethnic Kurds in northern Iraq. Iraq has condemned the move on multiple occasions.

Today, Peskov stated the Russian position in the following way,

“Russia’s position is the one in favour of territorial integrity of regional states”.

This is confirmation that Russia supports the existing borders of all states in which Kurdish militants seek to carve out new political territory. Such states include Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.

This is fitting with Russia’s general commitment to the integrity of states globally as well as an indication of Russia’s historically good relations with Turkey and Iran, as well as Russia’s continually good relations with Syria and its restored positive ties with Iraq.

While Russia has generally had good relations with Kurdish groups over the centuries, Russia is clearly prioritising its relationship with states over relationships with non-state bodies.

Turkey which generally had better relations with Iraq Kurds vis-a-vis PKK aligned Syrian Kurds, has recently announced that it will implement sanctions against so-called Iraqi Kurdistan if the referendum, scheduled for the 25th of September, takes place.

With the exception of Israel, all regional powers are opposed to Kurdish separatism. The US has tended to distance itself from the Kurdish referendum in Iraq, in spite of the US having generally good relations with Iraq Kurds.

Currently, the US is in charge of a Kurdish led proxy militia in Syria known as the SDF. It is suspected that while the US will continue to urge dialogue between Baghdad and Iraqi Kurds, the US might take a more aggressive line in favour of Kurdish separatism in Syria owing to America’s humiliation in light of the failure of its regime change policy against Damascus.

In spite of international warnings to cancel the referendum, including from the UN, separatists in Iraq have stated that they will proceed with the unilateral vote on the 25th of September.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
colum
Guest
colum

Who were the signataries to the current borders of Syria, Iraq and Turkey?

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

Those borders are both recognized and guaranteed by the United Nations. All other questions are irrelevant.

colum
Guest
colum

No they ain’t. Aren’t the UN the same cabal that supported the creation of Israel (Britian was involved with both the UN and the loss of kurdistan). The UN is in the pocket of globalists and is not the peace keeping world police. Kurdistan was conveniently written of the map by a couple of key UN members for imperialist reasons thus it is no surprise the UN care little for the borders (also add the fact the UN came in after Kurdistan was conveniently removed after WW1). Now I know few are going to agree with my views, but my… Read more »

Melotte 22
Guest
Melotte 22

Kurds are ethnic minority in Syria representing approx.10% of Syrian population. Most of them are actually refugees from Turkey, accepted by Syria.
Once ISIS is defeated, it is in their best interest to accept Syria as their country and work with Syrian government for some sort of autonomy. Asking for anything more is going to be disastrous for Kurds. They should also avoid a trap of being a new US puppet in the region, once ISIS is defeated.

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

It is too late for the puppet thing. They are already being used by the U.$. as ‘canon fodder’ and dumb soldiers so that U.$. soldiers can stay out of harms way.

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

“The Kurds deserve at least a greater autonomy if not sovereignty in the areas of their home lands as a protected people.” I totally agree. They deserve a significant degree of autonomy within the context of existing nation states recognized by the UN. While it is a lousy model to site, for various reasons, the US Indian nations have something like that. And some “nations” have made out very well with casinos. Generally, compromise is better than civil war. The Catalans are about to test that theory.

colum
Guest
colum

To ‘cite’ your comment, Compromise is better than bloodshed, but compromise is the very least that must be done, especially by the ruling powers. Ultimately the situation the world over is one of wrongfully displaced peoples that has occurred via imperialism and conquest. I still believe the Kurds should be granted their own land and sovereignty or at the very least something akin to Northern Ireland. They need to be recognised as Kurds with their own culture and (unlike Northern Ireland) a fair represtation in the governments of the ‘supervising’ nations that make up the Kurdish homeland. The kurds cannot… Read more »

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

@ Colum re: “sovereignty or at the very least something akin to Northern Ireland. They need to be recognised as Kurds with their own culture” It is too late for that. They would end up as a pariah nation, landlocked between 4 other nations that they have ‘burnt’ one way or another. With the current state of affairs in the Middle East, there is ‘safety in numbers’ and the recognition they had as part of Syria was far greater than anything they had anywhere else. Now they are just being used by the U.$. as ‘an excuse for war’ on… Read more »

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

The Sykes–Picot Agreement
Splitting up of the Ottoman empire after WW1.
Try Google.

colum
Guest
colum

And they were?

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

It is spelled “GOOGLE.COM”
About 267 000 results (0,87 seconds)

colum
Guest
colum

I invited that, now tell me the name of the signataries of those who erased Kurdista.

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

There is not, nor has there ever been a ‘Kurdista’. They had been offered a large degree of autonomy under Hussein, Assad, and all the Turkish governments, instead they set about killing and erasing the Arabs, the Turks and to a much lesser extent the Iranians. Their antics have caused the Iraqis, the Syrians and the Turks to be really, really annoyed. Like the Chechens, they are about to be royally spanked. The Kurdish idiots, like the Chechens and the Georgians and a dozen other minorities believed that the Americans would ‘have their backs’. Even the Israelis believe it. They… Read more »

Suzanne Giraud
Guest
Suzanne Giraud

“There is not, nor has there ever been a ‘Kurdista'” 100% – until go-ogle or wikip start fiddling with more of our history.
They were always a nomadic tribe, with the same sick habits as their relations in that other occupied territory (where Kurds are also found) who practice ‘ethnic cleansing’
apartheid wherever they decide settle.

Gavin Allen
Guest
Gavin Allen

More pathetic nonsense from ADAM GARRIE… “Russia supports the existing borders of all states in which Kurdish militants seek to carve out new political territory. Such states include Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.” Yeah, right. Adam likes to ignore reality and swim in fiction. In Syria, the “Kurdish militants” project is actually a polyethnic Syrian project to bring real democracy to their society. But of course Adam likes to kiss the murderer Assad’s arse. “the US might take a more aggressive line in favour of Kurdish separatism in Syria” – the DFNS already exists, and is a part of Syria.… Read more »

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

Talk about “pathetic nonsense” there is no such animal as the DFNS. Not now, not ever. Nor will there be a ‘state’ in Iraq’. You think Iran is going to let the Kurds set up a ‘State’? Dream on dummy. The only reason US is in the area is to steal the oil. Iraq and Syria were willing in the past to allow certain autonomy under the control of the countries, but the Kurds (thanks to the Americans) have screwed that up. when ISIL and Nusra have been buried, then SDF and Peshmerga will be next. The Kurds have been… Read more »

Norman
Guest
Norman

You smell bad Gavin Allen.

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

Another example of the US shooting itself in the foot. Actually, more like the groin or head. Why not alienate both Turkey and Iraq by supporting the Kurds? ISIS will very soon be defeated in Syria and Iraq. When they are, the last excuse for US presence in northern Syria and Iraq will be gone. At that point, what will the US do? Yes, it can continue to bribe the Kurds financially to maintain their military presence there, but as the Syrians and Iraqis increasingly turn to war against the Kurds to regain what is lawfully theirs, the position of… Read more »

Freethinking Влади́мир
Guest
Freethinking Влади́мир

Iraq is entirely divided and that means the US always will find reasons to maintain their presence. Syria is different: the US will remain present, but in Kurdish occupied territory. The defeat of the US isn’t worth much because the western population doesn’t realize its defeat because it’s not a straightforward one. The masses haven’t learned to think in terms of hybrid and proxy wars, despite their high opinion of themselves.

Le Ruse
Guest
Le Ruse

Historically, the Kurds were always on the US/Israhell side & they always end it up with the shit end of the stick ?? So as J Wayne said, Life is hard & it’s harder if you’re stupid ??

Freethinking Влади́мир
Guest
Freethinking Влади́мир

They couldn’t have done it without US support. The Kurdish regions are nothing but more forward operating bases for the Americans.

seby
Guest
seby

The truth is, giving the Kurds (which ones?) a state is almost like giving the Romany a State. They indeed have had a sad history wherever they stayed put. It could be said Syria treated them the best. Anyway, we know what this is all about. The old divide and conquer game of imperialists. The biggest absurdity and a giveaway on this truth, is that the zionists (a previous beneficiary of imperial divide and conquer) are ok with giving them a State but not the Palestinians, who really have the most right to one. That is if you use a… Read more »

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

@ Seby re: “The biggest absurdity and a giveaway on this truth, is that the zionists (a previous beneficiary of imperial divide and conquer) are ok with giving them a State but not the Palestinians, who really have the most right to one. ” And that is the crux of it isn’t it. The Palestinian have MORE right to live in ‘Palestine’ than anyone else; but it was stolen from them under the most horrible of subterfuges. They got lied to on a grand scale. It is a disgrace what has been inflicted on Palestine. But, irony of ironies, the… Read more »

tapatio
Guest
tapatio

Reality is that the Kurds, like the Jews (a European tribe), the Wahhabi and Salafists, are nothing but a TRIBE…………..they are not a nation.

Like the Jews and their Wahhabi and Salafist minions, they should NEVER be granted nation status. The decision of the General Assembly, to grant the Jews nation status, in 1947, was catastrophic for the Middle East and a disaster for the world.

Latest

Trump Has Gifted “No More Wars” Policy Position To Bernie Sanders (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 148.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou discuss how US President Donald Tump appears to have ceded his popular 2016 ‘no more wars’ campaign message and policy position to Bernie Sanders and any other US 2020 candidate willing to grad onto a non-interventionist approach to the upcoming Democrat primaries.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

“Is Bernie Stealing Trump’s ‘No More Wars’ Issue?” by Patrick J. Buchanan…


The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016.

“The president has said that he does not want to see this country involved in endless wars… I agree with that,” Bernie Sanders told the Fox News audience at Monday’s town hall meeting in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Then turning and staring straight into the camera, Bernie added:

“Mr. President, tonight you have the opportunity to do something extraordinary: Sign that resolution. Saudi Arabia should not be determining the military or foreign policy of this country.”

Sanders was talking about a War Powers Act resolution that would have ended U.S. involvement in the five-year civil war in Yemen that has created one of the great humanitarian crises of our time, with thousands of dead children amidst an epidemic of cholera and a famine.

Supported by a united Democratic Party on the Hill, and an anti-interventionist faction of the GOP led by Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee of Utah, the War Powers resolution had passed both houses of Congress.

But 24 hours after Sanders urged him to sign it, Trump, heeding the hawks in his Cabinet and National Security Council, vetoed S.J.Res.7, calling it a “dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional authorities.”

With sufficient Republican votes in both houses to sustain Trump’s veto, that should be the end of the matter.

It is not: Trump may have just ceded the peace issue in 2020 to the Democrats. If Sanders emerges as the nominee, we will have an election with a Democrat running on the “no-more-wars” theme Trump touted in 2016. And Trump will be left defending the bombing of Yemeni rebels and civilians by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia.

Does Trump really want to go into 2020 as a war party president?

Does he want to go into 2020 with Democrats denouncing “Trump’s endless wars” in the Middle East? Because that is where he is headed.

In 2008, John McCain, leading hawk in the Senate, was routed by a left-wing first-term senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, who had won his nomination by defeating the more hawkish Hillary Clinton, who had voted to authorize the war in Iraq.

In 2012, the Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who was far more hawkish than Obama on Russia, lost.

Yet, in 2016, Trump ran as a different kind of Republican, an opponent of the Iraq War and an anti-interventionist who wanted to get along with Russia’s Vladimir Putin and get out of these Middle East wars.

Looking closely at the front-running candidates for the Democratic nomination of 2020 — Joe Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker — not one appears to be as hawkish as Trump has become.

Trump pulled us out of the nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry and reimposed severe sanctions.

He declared Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, to which Iran has responded by declaring U.S. Central Command a terrorist organization. Ominously, the IRGC and its trained Shiite militias in Iraq are in close proximity to U.S. troops.

Trump has recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, moved the U.S. Embassy there, closed the consulate that dealt with Palestinian affairs, cut off aid to the Palestinians, recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights seized from Syria in 1967, and gone silent on Bibi Netanyahu’s threat to annex Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

Sanders, however, though he stands by Israel, is supporting a two-state solution and castigating the “right-wing” Netanyahu regime.

Trump has talked of pulling all U.S. troops out of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet the troops are still there.

Though Trump came into office promising to get along with the Russians, he sent Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and announced a pullout from Ronald Reagan’s 1987 INF treaty that outlawed all land-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

When Putin provocatively sent 100 Russian troops to Caracas — ostensibly to repair the S-400 anti-aircraft and anti-missile system that was damaged in recent blackouts — Trump, drawing a red line, ordered the Russians to “get out.”

Biden is expected to announce next week. If the stands he takes on Russia, China, Israel and the Middle East are more hawkish than the rest of the field, he will be challenged by the left wing of his party, and by Sanders, who voted “no” on the Iraq War that Biden supported.

The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016. And the anti-interventionist wing of the GOP is growing.

And when added to the anti-interventionist and anti-war wing of the Democratic Party on the Hill, together, they are able, as on the Yemen War Powers resolution, to produce a new bipartisan majority.

Prediction: By the primaries of 2020, foreign policy will be front and center, and the Democratic Party will have captured the “no-more-wars” political high ground that Candidate Donald Trump occupied in 2016.

Do You Appreciate Reading Our Emails and Website? Let us know how we are doing – Send us a Thank You Via Paypal!

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Over 200 killed, hundreds injured in series of blasts at Sri Lankan hotels & churches

A series of bombings hit churches and hotels across Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, killing more than 200 people.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


A series of eight explosions rocked Catholic churches and luxury hotels in Sri Lanka as Christians began Easter Sunday celebrations, with over 200 killed and hundreds injured, media reported, citing police.

The blasts started at around 8:45am local time at St. Anthony’s Church in Colombo and St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, a Catholic-majority town outside of the capital. The Zion Church in Batticaloa on the eastern coast was also targeted. At around the same time, the Shangri-La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury five-star hotels were also hit, police confirmed.

Two more explosions happened later in the day, targeting two more locations in Colombo. All attacks appear to have been coordinated.

At least 207 people were killed, Reuters reported, citing police. More than 450 were injured in the attacks.

Alleged footage of the aftermath, shared on social media, showed chaos and large-scale destruction inside at least one of the churches.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Mike Pompeo reveals true motto of CIA: ‘We lied, we cheated, we stole’ (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 147.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a look at a Texas A&M University speech, and subsequent interview, with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The former CIA Director admitted, ‘as an aside’ to the question asked, that the Intelligence agency he headed up before being appointed as the top US Diplomat had a motto “we lied, we cheated, we stole”…which, according to Pompeo, contained entire CIA training courses based on ‘lying, cheating and stealing.’

Pompeo finally speaks some truth.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Videos

Trending