Insight Turkey
Insight Turkey
Challenging ideas
On Turkish politics and International affairs

Insight Turkey > Reviews > Book Reviews |

The Kurds and US Foreign Policy: International Relations in the Middle East since 1945

Through this thoughtful and carefully researched account of US relations with the Kurds, Marriana Charountaki seeks to place a superpower’s relations with a nonstate entity in context. She succeeds admirably. US relations with the Kurds might seem at first glance incompatible due to the lack of an independent Kurdish state, but Charountaki in her book suggests otherwise.

 

Through this thoughtful and carefully researched account of US relations with the Kurds, Marriana Charountaki seeks to place a superpower’s relations with a nonstate entity in context. She succeeds admirably. US relations with the Kurds might seem at first glance incompatible due to the lack of an independent Kurdish state, but Charountaki in her book suggests otherwise.

In this respect, the book is something of a landmark, as it deals with and explores the nature of engagement between the US (the sole superpower) and a weaker nonstate political entity. US foreign policy towards the Kurds is a fascinating subject for two reasons. First, it shows that a superpower needs other agents to advance its interests. Second, it shatters the Realist notion that the international system is statecentric and that international relations are largely restricted to state actors. Charountaki also criticizes the current deficiency in contemporary scholarship towards political non-state entities, an area she argues should be addressed. Kurds were once largely neglected in International Relations scholarship, but their increasing proactivity and presence in the international relations of the Middle East makes this option no longer viable.

The Kurds in the Middle East arguably were the greatest losers in the aftermath of the Ottoman Empire’s collapse in the early 20th century the largest ethnicity in the region denied a state of their own after WWI. With their fragmentation into sizable minorities among major regional countries Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria Charountaki illustrates at great length the complex nature of the Kurdish Issue, which she eloquently describes as “multifaceted.” The book describes the fragmentation of the Kurdish Issue, leading to the rise of several “Kurdish Issues,” as opposed to one, each encompassing differing characteristics, and dependent on differing variables. The division of the Kurds among several nations, disunity and conflicts between the Kurds themselves, the hostile non-liberal nationalist character of the states they reside in and international powers’ interests in maintaining regional stability are all contributing factors to this fragmentation. The author demonstrates that US foreign policy towards the Kurds is not mono-lithic, varying in time and space. US policy towards the various Kurdish movements is different due to the non-state nature of the Kurdish issue and lack of a united US policy towards regional states. Thus, she explains it is impossible to describe a general US policy towards the Kurds.

The author also offers a critique of the available theories in International Relations for their lack of attention to the role, influence, and impact of non-state actors on international relations. The book starts with an excellent critique of all theories, challenging their neglect of the relations between state and non-state actors. Liberalism claims attention to non-state actors, yet fails to consider the role of political non-state actors and limits its focus mostly to transnational corporations and international institutions. State actors are no longer the only agents of the foreign policy making process.

Charountaki takes as her focus the years from 1945 to 2010. She persuasively demonstrates that US policy towards the Kurds has evolved through five distinct phases during this period. The final stage of which is an overt and official policy towards the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq, albeit it is unpronounced and within the framework of Iraq. The author narrates the transition of US Kurdish policy through these five stages, starting initially with “contacts” to a covert “relationship” and finally to an overt “institutionalized relationship” embodied in an official but undeclared US Kurdish policy. She illustrates the evolution from a Kurdish “thing” to a Kurdish “cause” and finally to a Kurdish “Issue,” demonstrating the gradual and increasing sophistication of US foreign policy. The change of US interaction with the Kurds from humanitarian assistance to strategic partnership as a non-state ally and an asset is testimony to the enhanced role of the Kurds in the international relations of the Middle East. Charountaki also illustrates that these five phases correspond to five changes in US foreign policy since World War II.

In doing so, Charountaki examines this intricate web of interdependency through two models. The first, demonstrating the complex relationships amongst the Kurds themselves on the one hand, and between regional powers and the US and the Kurds on the other. In the second, she uses a pivot diagram to demonstrate the Kurdish role in international relations through the position of the Kurdish Issue in inter-regional interactions and the role it plays between the latter and an external power like the US.

The book complicates its opening question on whether “the Kurds have influenced foreign policy,” as it distracts attention from the main thesis and subsequently does not deliver. The author rightly highlights the influence Kurds have had on the international relations of the Middle East, though it maybe an overstatement to propose that the Kurds have influenced US foreign policy. A more accurate assertion would be the role Kurds have played in advancing US policy through the changes of US strategy.

There is a lack of great depth with regard to US relations with the Kurds of Turkey, Iran, and Syria because her sources are scarce and somewhat elusive, as she has had to take a wide range of diverse material under consideration. Charountaki convincingly shows that International Relations theories are not sufficiently comprehensive and do not reflect the evolving nature of international affairs. However, she does not successfully establish a theoretical framework from which to examine the relations between state and non-state actors. There is also some confusion between George Bush senior and junior as well as in some of the dates provided.

Nevertheless, this work is an extensively researched and well written monograph, the author has made tremendous use of governmental archives and interviews. This is a remarkably useful book on a subject that demands attention. It fills a major gap in scholarship and is a necessary read for Middle East studies’ students, especially those dedicated to Kurdish studies. For students and scholars of US foreign policy it also provides fascinating insight into the consistency of US interests in the region.


Labels »  

We use cookies in a limited and restricted manner for specific purposes. For more details, you can see "our data policy". More...