They are a people who have been waiting for a century for their homeland. They represent the world’s largest people without a state. They comprise the fourth largest ethnic group in the Middle East, totalling a 25 million-strong population. They are the Kurds. And they have had enough. This was demonstrated by the independence referendum at the end of last month, which overwhelmingly showed that Iraqi Kurds wanted to break away from Baghdad in a final show of self-determination. Yet being the Middle East, things never run smoothly. It is a region where the West seemingly backed the Arab Spring, the people-led movement that sought to overthrow autocratic regimes that ruled over their people as opposed to serving them. Though true revolution never stood a chance, not when proxy power plays still remained the name of the game. Which may explain why today the US and most of the region is largely united against a sovereign Iraqi Kurdistan. From Iran to Turkey to Syria the message is clear: autonomy is the best deal going. The Hezbollah chief has gone as far as terming the move a US-Israeli attempt to carve up the region, despite Washington’s public denunciations to the contrary. If Bibi’s neighbours afford weight to Hezbollah claims — then the repercussions could prove great. For he would be cast in the very public role of supporting a direct threat to the territorial integrity of Iraq, Iran and Syria. One unintended consequence of this could be an aggressive shoring up of support for the two-state solution Hassan Nasrallah may have a point. Meaning there is likely to be more to the Israeli move than meets the eye. For the bitter irony of expressing natural sympathy for the aspirations of the Kurdish peoples can surely not be lost on the Jewish state as it continues to illegally occupy Palestinian lands. What Nasrallah is worried about is that the referendum vote will subsequently pose a threat to all those countries with sizeable Kurdish populations. And this will end in a Partition sparking internal wars without end. Admittedly, if this were to happen, then the US would have yet more reason to go for an increased regional presence. And amid all the turmoil it would be well placed to seek stronger ‘ownership’ of Middle Eastern natural resources. Though the lesson of its military misadventure in Iraq should not go unheeded. For that war of aggression is said to have opened up the region’s chemical weapons black market supply lines that today pass from Baghdad to Libya’s Tripoli to Ankara to Damascus. All at a time when the US-led NATO war machine is said to be serious about tackling the threat of ISIS. Yet Israeli political pundits have pooh-poohed allegations of sleight of hand. Pointing out that the Jewish state’s ties to the Iraqi Kurds go way back — to when the latter left someone else’s homeland for another’s. These familial ties are what are said to shape Israel’s sensibilities towards the idea of independence. Moreover, a sovereign Iraqi Kurdistan would represent at least one friendly face in a hostile neighbourhood. For at the moment the Jewish state’s only real ally is Saudi Arabia, whose support is largely said to be not of its own volition but at Washington’s behest. Presently, Israel enjoys at best a cold peace with Egypt and Jordan. Meaning that while the regimes in both are amenable to it — the same cannot be said of their populations. And then, as always present in Israeli strategic calculations is the question of Iran. An independent Iraqi Kurdistan would act as a buffer to Iran, as well as to the threat of Iranian-backed Shia militias operating in Iraq, which would only serve to expand Tehran’s regional reach. Thus this may well be what Israeli support for the Iraqi Kurds comes down to: an opportunity to weaken Iran to the extreme, a move undoubtedly supported by the US, however indirectly. Yet it is still a risky gamble. What if its own small Kurdish population — numbering just 200,000 in total — calls for independence? Nevertheless, there are far more serious considerations that Israel’s Netanyahu needs to consider, keeping in mind regional dynamics. If his neighbours afford weight to Hezbollah claims — then the repercussions could prove great. For Bibi would be cast in the very public role of supporting a direct threat to the territorial integrity of others, including Turkey, which much to the annoyance of Israel sees Hamas as a legitimate Palestinian partner for peace. But beyond Ankara, it would also incur the wrath of Iran, Iraq and Syria. One unintended consequence of this could be an aggressive shoring up of support for the two-state solution. Thus the Israeli move to express support for the Kurds of Iraq should be seen for what it is: a reckless move aimed at the US, which the Jewish state feels has not been considering with due seriousness its concerns over Iran’s expanded reach into Syria. This is to say nothing of the Russian-Iran-Turkey tripartite agreement upon de-escalation zones in that country. Or it could be a more calculated move in response to the rapprochement between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas in the West Bank. For as long as was there was in-faction fighting the Jewish state could bask in the manufactured spotlight — which contended that if the Palestinians couldn’t secure political peace between themselves, then they were the problem. But today, all that is set to change. The Palestinian Authority and Hamas are reaching rapprochement in the West Bank. Meaning that with or without an independent Iraqi Kurdistan the prospect of self-determination for the Palestinians could be back on the table. The writer is the Deputy Managing Editor, Daily Times. She can be reached at mirandahusain@me.com and tweets @humeiwei Published in Daily Times, October3rd 2017.