U.S. Kurdish policy reproduces colonial patterns of exclusion, ignoring indigenous self-determination and regional geopolitical realities
Original framing: “U.S. attitude to the Kurdish question reflects colonial mindset, says Nilufer Koc” — The Hindu
The original framing omits the historical role of European colonial powers in drawing arbitrary borders that disenfranchised Kurds, as well as the parallel struggles of other stateless nations. Indigenous Kurdish political frameworks, such as democratic confederalism, are absent, as are the voices of Kurdish women and youth who have led grassroots resistance. The article also fails to contextualize the Kurdish question within broader decolonization movements in the Middle East.
Medium structural omission detected in mainstream coverage.
The narrative is produced by a Western media outlet amplifying a Kurdish political spokesperson, but the framing still centers U.S. foreign policy as the primary actor. This obscures the deeper role of NATO-aligned states in maintaining the status quo while serving the power structures of nation-states that benefit from suppressing Kurdish self-determination. The focus on U.S. 'attitude' individualizes systemic issues, deflecting from the collective responsibility of international actors in perpetuating Kurdish marginalization.
The Kurdish question is rooted in the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres and the subsequent Sykes-Picot agreements, which fragmented Kurdish lands into artificial states. The U.S. and European powers have consistently treated Kurds as pawns in Cold War and post-9/11 geopolitics, repeating patterns of colonial divide-and-rule. Historical parallels exist with the Partition of India and the Palestinian Nakba, where external powers dictated borders without local consent.
The U.S. approach to the Kurdish question is not an isolated policy but a symptom of a broader colonial mindset that treats stateless nations as geopolitical tools.