Since the beginning of the twentieth century, two major issues have become constant sources of war, conflict, and destruction in the Middle East: the Kurdish and the Palestinian issues. The consequences were not limited to one people or one country, but rather extended to the entire region. Both express the right of a people living on their historical land without recognition of their independent state, suffering from dispersion, division, and the burden of occupation or control by other peoples.
The Kurds, whose historical homeland extends from the Zagros Mountains to the plains of Mosul and Aleppo, found themselves, after the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916, victims of the colonial division between Britain and France, where Kurdistan was torn between four countries: Türkiye, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. Although the Treaty of Sèvres in 1920 offered hope for the birth of an independent Kurdish entity, the victorious powers quickly reneged on their promises. The page of Sèvres was turned, and the Treaty of Lausanne came in 1923 to fix the borders and abandon any commitment to the national rights of the Kurds. Since then, the region has entered a cycle of wars, uprisings, and bloody repression.
As for Palestine, it was a victim of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the subsequent British Mandate, which paved the way for the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were uprooted from their land and displaced into exile, and their cause became an open conflict that has not been extinguished despite dozens of UN resolutions.
While the Palestinians have enjoyed broad international recognition of their right to self-determination, the Kurds have remained, to this day, deprived of any such recognition, despite repeated revolutions and uprisings in Iraq, Türkiye, Iran, and Syria.
The two peoples share a common fate: the deprivation of an independent homeland and exposure to policies of displacement, cultural assimilation, and persecution. Political fragmentation and internal divisions have also played a role in weakening both causes. Palestinians were divided between conflicting factions, such as Fatah and Hamas, among other factions, while the Kurds experienced divisions between parties and movements in the four parts of their homeland. Both liberation movements were subject to regional and international pressures, which led to vertical and horizontal rifts within their structures.
This weakened their ability to develop a coherent political project that would lead to their ultimate goal. Surrounding powers exploited these divisions to deepen crises and prolong the conflict.
The historical leadership of the two peoples embodies the features of these similarities and differences: Yasser Arafat, the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization, became a symbol of the Palestinian cause. He moved between international forums and was able to make Palestine a present title in the media and international politics, despite all the failures and divisions that accompanied his career.
Mustafa Barzani, the leader of the Kurdish revolution in Iraq, became a national symbol for all Kurds. He led the armed struggle for decades from the mountains of Kurdistan and sought to raise the voice of his people in international forums. However, Arafat enjoyed the umbrella of Arab and international recognition, while Barzani continued to fight within the complex balances between Baghdad, Tehran, Ankara, Washington, and Moscow.
With the passing of the two historic leaders, new leaderships emerged, continuing the struggle and establishing a different era. In Kurdistan, Masoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani were able to transform the armed struggle into an institutionalized political project. They were the founders of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, the first Kurdish entity recognized within the Iraqi federal system. This entity established a democratic and parliamentary experience compared to the regional environment and became a national reference for Kurds in all parts. In Palestine, the leaders of the PLO inherited official authority after the Oslo Accords. The Palestinian National Authority was the first official entity for the Palestinian people on their land, despite its limitations, the difficulties imposed by the occupation, and the internal division.
Attempts at cooperation between the two liberation movements never reached the level of partnership, even if they intersected at times. The two issues were governed by different international balances: Palestine was at the heart of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and Kurdistan was at the heart of regional disputes between Türkiye, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. Nevertheless, the humanitarian and political ties remained unbroken; Kurdish and Palestinian leaders met on more than one occasion, affirming their shared goal of freedom and independence, even if geography and politics prevented the building of a common front.
Today, more than a century after Sykes-Picot and Balfour, the two peoples still live under the burden of occupation or forced subordination. The difference, however, is that the Palestinian cause, despite its stumbling factions, still enjoys international recognition and a political entity represented by the Palestinian Authority. Meanwhile, the Kurds continue their struggle in four separate regions, and have succeeded in establishing a federal region in Iraq, which is considered the most prominent experience, alongside with an autonomous administration in northern Syria, but without clear international recognition.
Ultimately, what unites the two causes is greater than what divides them: the goal of freedom and self-determination, the tragedy of displacement, and the hope of new generations to build two states. While the differences have been imposed by geography and international politics, the unity of purpose remains stronger and more enduring, affirming that the two peoples—the Kurds and the Palestinians—represent two sides of a single tragedy in the Middle East, as well as two sides of a renewed hope for a different future.