Thread by @sfrantzman

Thread: Have you noticed that some of those who claim to oppose the Iranian regime, claim to support minorities in Iran, such as Kurds. But I'd bet that when the regime falls some of those voices would quickly shift to supporting a "strong, nationalist" Tehran

There would be talk of "territorial integrity" and "sovereignty" and "we don't want to alienate and disenfranchise the majority"...and "we don't want destabilization"...some of those minority groups in Iran who think the West or US supports them will find themselves sidelined

The track record in other places shows this. Minority groups are often used when it is convenient, but long-term there is little interest in having federalism or rights for them. And often they are accused, if they want "too many" rights, of "destabilizing" a country.

I'd be wary of those who one day support the betrayal of Kurdish rights in Syria on behalf of Ankara or Damascus "unity" and opposed the referendum in Iraq under auspices of "destabilizing" but then talk up Kurdish rights in Iran.

Personally I'm consistent, I'm for minority groups having rights and not being sidelined. The Syrian regime sidelined Kurds since its inception...and oddly that tended to be ok to Western policymakers...the same ones who are always concerned about the SDF or KRG being "inclusive"

Can't figure out why the Saddam regime was basically accepted by most Western democracies in the 1980s...but when there are calls for more federalism in Iraq...or any other community has rights...it's "sectarian...destabilizing"

Somehow the Assad regime or Saddam wasn't "destabilizing"?...oddly many western countries can find ways to have regionalism (i.e Quebec) or rights for various groups...but when it comes to foreign policy it's all about "strong centralized, stable" regimes...authoritarians...

I understand that weak states and ungoverned spaces have led to extremism over the last decades. But what about functioning regions, such as Somaliland...why do governments insist on forcing it to be part of a partly failed state...for "territorial integrity"...

Words like "sectarian" and "separatist" need to be interrogated. I remember reading in 2014 when ISIS attacked Mosul that some claimed that the "sectarian" Maliki had caused this...maybe he had...but ISIS was also "sectarian"...so how about fair use of that term.

We were told that Sunni insurgents gained followers among the "disenfranchised"...ummm ok...well how about doing the same math for other groups (i.e Kurds) that are disenfranchised in Turkey or Yemen or wherever. Somehow Saddam was often ok when he disenfranchised others...

There is talk, for instance, that the US should support Azerbaijan against Armenia to stir up Azeri protests in Iran against the regime. But I bet the day after the regime falls in Iran, those who wanted to work with Azeris will accuse them of "separatism"

So some consistency would be good. I'm for Azeri or Kurdish rights, but I don' believe in supporting minorities and then betraying them to empower "strong" and "stable" governments at their expense. That is hypocrisy...and we see it a lot.

I don't believe for one minute those who claim to support Azerbaijani rights in Iran will care about that region (southern Azerbaijan) the day after the regime falls...they will rush to Tehran to find a "strong nationalist, pro-western" leader...and forge the minorities.

We saw this betrayal in Syria where the US State Dept. diplomats openly told the SDF that "your future is with Damascus" in 2018...and then accused them of working with Damascus...oddly...that's unfair to the locals, to give them hope and then not give them a say in future

So when someone says "I support Kurdish rights in Iran" or "look the Azeris are protesting"...ask them "when the regime falls do you support Kurds and Azeris choosing their future, or will you be encouraging a crackdown on "separatism" and "destabilizing"...?

And if you think I'm making up the story about the US openly telling the SDF to work with Damascus (i.e US role is temporary, tactical and transaction...we are using you as a tool)...just check it out; atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atla…