It would seem almost impossible to discuss the potential of any possible "Kurdistan" without asking about what Turkey thinks about the issue. Turkey has always been absolutely opposed the establishment of any type of Kurdish state, and has done its best to suppress Kurdish language and culture within its own borders. And the Kurds themselves will have problems agreeing on an acceptable policy of "non-intervention" on the behalf of other Kurds located in Turkey, Syria, and Iran. Even as the US crusades against terrorism, the US-allied Turks claim that Kurds in Iraq are supporting terrorism in Turkey.

Hitchens avoids a very key question: Would a Kurdish government seriously enforce a policy of being happy with indepence within its "own" borders without fiddling about in neihboring nations? Part of the problem is that while the US would like the Kurds to give up on Turkey, we are almost certainly encouraging them to "infiltrate" Syria and Iran. Irredentism may well come back to haunt us.

If the Kurds in Turkey won't be well behaved, the Turks may decide to treat them as they did the Greeks on the Anatolian peninsula, and simply march them all across the border to "their own" new Kurdistan/Iraq. How would Hitchens propose that the US deal with any such eventuality? Al Qaida is kids play of a threat compared to Turkey. Whether you are pro-Turkish or a Kurdish symapthizer, I think you would have to admit that the history of Kurdish/Turkish relations overshadows the long term situation.

I agree with Mr. Hitchens that we should not allow Kurdistan to be overtaken or left to its own defense. Too many times have we abandoned these people when all the do is fight and follow whatever policy we dictate.

You are right when you say that "Turkey won't be well behaved", but it is the sense that they will do everything in their power to keep a formally recognized independent Kurdistan. Meaning, they will use everything within their power to keep Turkish Kurds from migrating to Kurdistan, as will the Syrians with their respective Kurdish population.

This situation places the United States in a most precarious situation because on the one end we want and should continue our support for the Kurdish people, but at the same time we do not want to alienate our allies, the Turks as well. Turkey, as of right now, is the closest example of what "we" ,by that I mean the politicians in power in the executive branch, would like to see a Muslim nation be like politically organized.

Smart post Fozzy.

The problem is not just that Kurds have a bad habit of messing around in Turkey, but that they are the best thing happening right now in what's left of Iraq. They may be the kernel of something generally positive and stable for that country (in a galaxy far, far away) and maybe even part of a larger positive trend for the region (in a galaxy light years away). At least I hope. For that reason I hope we support the Kurds vigorously regardless of our ultimate relationship with the country of Iraq.

History does tend to foist these difficult decisions on leaders, don't they, where they must choose to support a bad but "practical" group/leader, or an impractical but "good" group/leader. I don't yet know exactly how good the Iraqi Kurds or a future Kurdistan would be, but they do at least seem the most practical. I hope we do support them fully, and bring them into the larger world by demanding that they focus on developing themselves and not meddle with fantasies of "Greater Kurdistan" or avenging their history.

Turkey has recently moved significant forces next to its border, perhaps thinking to send a message without invading. Iraqi Kurdish leaders have been extremely careful to not call for a Kurdish nation, although given the Kurdish flags that are about the only ones flying there, I think they can be said to be biding their time.

Thanks Fozzy -- well said. You have to look at Turkey and Turkey is not mentioned once in this article, which had me glancing over it at best. It is an article like this that reminds me of the tragedy of Western ignorance regarding these issues -- they are regional issues and looking at it from a very narrow angle can get everyone into trouble, as it clearly has in Iraq. What if someone wrote an article wondering about giving specific sects of immigrants their own territories in the US. I am married to and friends with many immigrants, but this is preposterous, isn't it?! Where the heck do we get off?! And along these lines, what business does this author have writing about something he clearly has little idea about? I am married to a Turk and have spent significant time there and with fair-minded, gentle members of the Turkish American community. Kurdish rebels are setting bombs around Turkey and have been responsible for killing tens of thousands of Turkish people there over the last 30 years. Start reading about the neighbors and then maybe I'll read such a column!