Kurdistan, Partisanship and Jerusalem


Kurdistan Is the Solution

Ben Cohen correctly reinforced the view that America’s anti-Islamist effort should be expanded, but he offered no geopolitical remedy for this misbehavior (“Don’t Forget Qatar and Turkey,” Dec. 21).

For the past decade, we have written essays arguing that recognizing Kurdistan would resolve multiple concerns, not the least of which would be the ability to plant the American flag in a dangerous neighborhood, peopled by Arabs who desperately need governments that could emulate the role model of a flourishing non-Islamist Muslim nation.

The alternative is a Syria that is essentially bisected between Turkey and Iran — with the blessing of the Russians — that would then evict the “western imperialists,” the United States.

Seemingly forgotten is the fact that Kurdistan existed in 1000 B.C.E., flourished in 1000 C.E., was mandated to be re-established 100 years ago, and was to have been reaffirmed electorally (per the Iraqi Constitution) 10 years ago.

This stabilizing force would block Qatar’s links to Iran plus neo-Ottoman Turkey from controlling Iraq and Syria, legitimizing American investment of lives and treasure during this millennium.

Our view is consistent with the newly released National Security Policy Statement from the Trump Administration, for it reverses Obama’s obeisance to both of these menacing countries.

Sherkoh Abbas | President, Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria

Robert B. Sklaroff | Rydal

Blind Partisanship

A recent letter writer’s main point that Trump should be considered man of the century can be subject to differences of opinion (“Trump Kept His Promise,” Dec. 21). But unfortunately, he betrays his bias by using such Fox News/rightwing terms as “lying and antagonism by the left” and “partisan leftism.”

He further dismisses any collusion by the Trump administration with Russia as “bogus.” Such blind partisanship is unfortunate.

Peter Whitman | Glen Mills

Tired of Waiting

In the wake of the U.S. announcement of Jerusalem as recognized capital of Israel, the negative response of countries around the world was to be expected (“Embassy Move Provokes Fear of Violence, Triumph of Recognition,” Dec. 14). What was surprising and disappointing was the response of some Jewish organizations.

Union for Reform Judaism President Rabbi Rick Jacobs stated on behalf of the organizations of the movement that they “affirm what the Reform Jewish movement has long held: That Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Jewish people and the State of Israel. Yet while we share the president’s belief that the U.S. Embassy should, at the right time, be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, we cannot support his decision to begin preparing that move now, absent a comprehensive plan for a peace process.”

My question is: After 22 years of this American law being passed and no real peace process, when is the right time? I don’t believe another 22 years, or 222 years, will matter. Those forces who deny Jewish rights to Jerusalem are all too often on the same page as those who deny Jewish rights to self-determination in Israel generally.

Jews need to be unified in understanding that the real issue is not only Jerusalem — it is recognition of permanent Jewish sovereignty over the land of Israel. No amount of kowtowing to the groups that hate Jews and Israel will make permanent peace come any sooner.

Ira R. Sharp | Huntingdon Valley


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here