The Syrian Kurds are waging a battle to preserve their "uniqueness" in a country steadily heading towards dismantlement in light of the ongoing civil war and the underlying social and sectarian division and economic devastation. In their quest to restore the national identity they lost centuries ago, the Kurds have failed to make a distinction between the government and the opposition. Furthermore, they are unrestricted by any geographic borders. However, this battle seems like a failed one since the very beginning not because the Syrian Kurds are not good fighters but because the givens they are relying on in their attempt to reach a situation resembling that of the Iraqi Kurds will not allow them to reach their desired outcome for several objective reasons. The Iraqi Kurds had several decades' worth of a head start in rebelling against the central regime. They obtained several levels of autonomous rule before reaching the situation of the "territory" or "the unannounced republic" that is currently in place in North Iraq. This was the result of the special circumstances pertaining to the American occupation and the deal they made with the other Iraqi constituents, meaning the Shiites and subsequently the Iranians. The deal consisted of the Iraqi Kurds taking part in toppling the Saddam Hussein regime in return of granting them an incomplete independence. The authority of the American occupation in Iraq played a major part in imposing this deal and consolidating it. The Americans are still protecting the deal up until today even though they have left the country. As for the Syrian Kurds, they never actually rejected or defied the central authority in Damascus despite some small skirmishes that were quickly terminated. During the era of Hafez al-Assad, Damascus denied the Kurds any special rights and prevented them from learning their language in schools or using it in their publications. However, the Kurds were used (through Abdullah Ocalan's party) as a tool to confuse Turkey in the framework of the regional competition. This maneuver was cut short under the threat of the Turkish military mobilization. However, Syria supported the continued "partisan relationships" across the borders. On the other hand, the Iraqi Kurds distanced themselves from the militarily active party of Ocalan in the Turkish lands although they did turn a blind eye on this party's movements in their own areas. The Turkish air force used to raid the posts of the PKK in the Iraqi lands even though Turkey had acknowledged the Kurdish territory there. Ankara even angered Baghdad when it dispatched its Foreign Minister Davutoglu directly to Irbil without going through the central capital. The Turks obtained a pledge from the Iraqi Kurds indicating that the "territory" will not be interfering with the internal Turkish affairs. However, the Turks might consider that an autonomous rule in the northeastern part of Syria represents a much higher threat to their security and unity. Thus, they will do anything to prevent that. This is what the Turks told a prominent Syrian Kurdish official who visited Ankara a few days ago. The Syrian opposition is now accusing the Kurds of carrying out the regime's plan to weaken the opposition and keep it busy with lateral fights. This means that the Kurds have failed to obtain the necessary political cover to establish an autonomous rule in the liberated regions. In other words, the Kurds lack the necessary alliances to maintain this rule in the event that they succeed in establishing it. Their "entity" will remain under constant threat regardless of the political settlement outcomes that the Geneva 2 Conference will come up with. The Kurds did not participate in the uprising against the regime in order to demand their share. They rather took part in the fights only to control the areas where they are present. They might fight everybody later on and this is definitely a losing battle.
