The Kurdish factor in Saudi Arabia's Middle Eastern policy: an analysis in the context of relations with Iraq and Iran

Aver'yanova-Zaitseva Diana Aleksandrovna ORCID: 0009-0007-6540-4558 Postgraduate student of the Department of History and Politics of Russia, National Research Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod 603022, Russia, Nizhny Novgorod region, Nizhny Novgorod, Gagarin Avenue, 23 averyanov_007@bk.ru Baravi Melina Vladimirovna ORCID: 0009-0004-6063-6948 Postgraduate student of the Department of History and Politics of Russia, National Research Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod 603022, Russia, Nizhny Novgorod region, Nizhny Novgorod, Gagarin Avenue, 23 melinabaravi@gmail.com

Ryzhov Igor' Valer'evich ORCID: 0000-0002-6417-1517 Doctor of History Professor, Head of the Department of History and Politics of Russia of National Research Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod 603022, Russia, Nizhny Novgorod region, Nizhny Novgorod, Gagarin Avenue, 23 ivr@fmo.unn.ru Other publications by this author

The relevance of the research topic lies primarily in the fact that the Kurdish population lives in many countries of the Middle East, including Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey. Their desire for autonomy or independence affects regional stability and power dynamics. Understanding how Saudi Arabia perceives and resolves the Kurdish issue in this broader geopolitical context is crucial to understanding the complexities of regional politics. Moreover, Saudi Arabia and Iran are major regional powers with competing interests and influence throughout the Middle East. The Kurdish factor adds another layer to their rivalry, as both countries may seek to use Kurdish groups to achieve their strategic goals. An analysis of Saudi Arabia's approach to the Kurdish issue in comparison with its relations with Iran allows us to understand the dynamics of this ongoing rivalry.

Do not forget that the Kurdish issue also has implications for security and stability in the Middle East. Tensions between Kurdish groups and central governments, as well as regional conflicts involving Kurdish militias, may increase instability. Understanding how Saudi Arabia perceives and takes into account the Kurdish factor in developing its policy contributes to assessing the dynamics of regional security.

Methodology and methods of research. The authors used a systematic approach as the methodology of the article, the application of which is due to the fact that a number of socio-economic, military-political, religious and ethnic factors influence the formation of Riyadh's regional policy.  Using empirical and theoretical methods, such as synthesis and analysis, the main problems affecting the system of regional policies of the Kingdom, in particular relations with Iraq and Iran, are analyzed. The research is based on general scientific methods – a historical approach and an analysis of scientific literature. These methods are used to establish historical processes within which the architecture of decision-making is established and their weight in the process of making foreign policy decisions. In addition, based on a theoretical analysis of data (official websites of organizations, mass media reports, etc.), an objective picture of the current state of internal relations among the Kurds is given. In the process of working on this study, chronological and structural methods and comparative analysis were used, as well as a structural and functional method, which allowed us to consider all the components of the Middle East subsystem of international relations as a single regional subsystem, as well as the method of critical geopolitics, which allowed us to reflect the dynamic nature of international relations in the Middle East.

 The degree of scientific development of the topic. The historiographical base of this study was made up of the works of foreign authors. This issue is at an advanced stage of scientific development, as evidenced by the extensive body of cited literature. The depth and breadth of scientific coverage indicate a thorough study of the complexities associated with the Kurdish issue in the framework of regional policy.

A key contribution to this discourse are such scientific articles as, for example, "The Paradiplomacy of Kurdistan in Iraq and Kurdish Statehood" by Abbas Zadeh Youssef and Kirmanj Sherko, which examines the nuances of the dynamics of the Kurds' desire for statehood and their consequences for regional stability. From our point of view, a valuable historiographical source is Al-Rashid Madawi's work "Saudi Arabia and the Challenge of the American Invasion of Iraq", which contains a fairly in-depth analysis of Saudi Arabia's reaction to geopolitical shifts, shedding light on its position on the Kurdish issue against the background of changing regional dynamics.

"Iraqi Kurds and State-Building" by Ahmed Mohammed, offers an in-depth study of the Kurdish desire for statehood, giving valuable insight into the historical and modern aspects of Kurdish identity and political independence. Current perspectives are also presented in such reports as "Iran and Barzani: Deteriorating relations and the risk of an inevitable clash?" Ali Othman and "Kurdish Independence... Fears and forebodings" by Al-Rashid Abdulrahman offers an up-to-date look at the evolving dynamics between Kurdish groups, Iran and Saudi Arabia. These materials highlight the relevance of the current events and their implications for regional stability and security.

Introduction

From the very beginning of Operation Desert Storm in 1990 until the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime by the United States in 2003, Saudi Arabia acted as the main Arab ally of the United States in addressing issues related to Iraq and global stability. However, during and after this period, the pressure on US-Saudi relations in connection with the need to resolve the situation in Iraq and the confrontation with Saddam Hussein reached an unprecedented level, especially aggravated by the consequences of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the upcoming American intervention. This "special" context of US-Saudi relations with regard to Iraq subsequently shifted into a more conventional pattern, when the interests and strategies of both countries with regard to Iraq often intersected or clashed, depending on specific circumstances.

Since the formation of Saudi Arabia and Iraq after the First World War, bilateral relations have constantly faced difficulties. The post-Saddam Hussein era poses new challenges regarding oil geopolitics, the influence of Iraqi democracy on Saudi Arabia, cross-border religious dynamics - especially among the Shiite population in both countries - and the consequences of Saudi support.

In the complex geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, relations with the Kurds are important for Saudi Arabia. This strategic interaction is multifaceted and is conditioned by a combination of geopolitical considerations, energy security interests and humanitarian issues. One of the main reasons for Saudi Arabia's interest in developing ties with Kurdish groups lies in strategic geopolitical calculations. Located in a region marked by political instability and conflict, Saudi Arabia views the Kurds as potential allies in ensuring stability and countering common adversaries. Since the Kurds control territories spanning parts of Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran, Saudi Arabia sees an opportunity to establish partnerships that could provide additional leverage and influence on regional dynamics.

The identity of the Kurds and the issue of their political status

The Kurds, an ethnic group living predominantly in the region known as Kurdistan and covering parts of Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria, represent one of the world's largest stateless nations with a population of more than 30 million people. Possessing a separate language, culture and identity, the Kurds have long sought self-determination and autonomy.

The "Kurdish issue" is central to discussions about the Kurds, encompassing their long struggle for recognition of cultural and political rights, including self-government and independence. Historically oppressed by the Governments of Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria, where they constitute a significant minority of the population, the Kurdish problem remains a complex and unresolved issue, shaped by political, social and ethnic factors.

The origins of the Kurdish problem can be attributed to the period after the First World War, when the Treaty of Sevres promised the Kurds the creation of an independent state, but was never fully implemented. Subsequent events, including the creation of modern nation-states in the Middle East and Kurdish uprisings in various countries, further fueled the Kurds' desire for self-government. Efforts to address Kurdish grievances and achieve a peaceful settlement face serious challenges, including regional power dynamics, geopolitical interests, and internal divisions within Kurdish communities.

The current state of the Kurdish problem varies from region to region. For example, in Turkey, it remains a key aspect of domestic politics, and the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) has been waging a long-term insurgency, seeking to expand the rights and autonomy of the Kurds. Similarly, Kurds in Iran face repression and limited political participation, while in Syria they seek greater autonomy amid the complexities of the Syrian conflict.

Iraq presents a special scenario where the Kurds have made notable progress towards autonomy since the establishment of Kurdistan in 1992. Governed by the Kurdistan Regional Government (PKK), the autonomous Kurdish region faces ongoing tensions with the central government in Baghdad over revenue distribution and territorial disputes. The very history of the Kurds in Iraq is rich and confusing, spanning centuries of struggle, resilience and resistance to oppression. Their history begins in ancient Mesopotamia, where Kurdish tribes and clans inhabited the region, contributing to its cultural tapestry [Mansour, 2018, p.5]. During the era of Ottoman rule, the Kurdish territories in what is now Iraq were ruled semi-autonomously by local chieftains known as "pashas". Despite this, the Kurds were discriminated against and periodically rebelled against the Ottoman government.

After the First World War, significant changes took place in the region. As mentioned earlier, the Treaty of Sevres initially promised the Kurds an independent state, but this promise was never fulfilled. Instead, the Territory fell under the British mandate, and Iraq emerged as a nation-state in 1921. However, the Kurds found themselves on the periphery of society as part of the new Iraqi state, which led to discontent and sporadic uprisings against the central government.

Throughout the 20th century, the Kurdish uprisings against the Iraqi government have been a constant theme. Among them, the 1946 uprising led by Mustafa Barzani stands out, the purpose of which was to create an independent Kurdish state. Despite the initial success, the uprising was eventually suppressed by Iraqi forces.

The most devastating chapter in the history of the Kurds in Iraq occurred during the Saddam Hussein regime in the 1980s. The Anfal genocide campaign targeted Kurdish communities in northern Iraq, resulting in the deaths of thousands of people and displacement of the rest of the population. The aim of this campaign was to suppress the Kurdish uprising and destroy their culture and identity. Under the auspices of Operation Anfal, a series of mass killings, mass deportations and attacks on Kurdish villages and towns took place. Between 50,000 and 100,000 were killed as part of these actions. One of the most famous and terrible incidents within the framework of the Anfal genocide is the chemical attack on the city of Halabja in 1988, which killed thousands of civilians, including many women and children. This tragedy remains one of the largest chemical attacks against civilians in history [Mansour, 2018, p.12].

The post-Saddam era has brought significant changes to the Kurdish region of Iraq. After the overthrow of the Hussein regime in 2003, Iraqi Kurdistan gained de facto autonomy. The creation of the Kurdistan Regional Government (PKK) formalized this autonomy by giving the region its own parliament, armed forces and control over some territories [Zeidel, 2018, p.49]. However, tensions with the central government of Iraq persisted, especially over issues such as income distribution, disputed territories such as Kirkuk, and oil exports.

The issue of Kirkuk and Iraq's oil exports has deep historical roots, shaped by centuries of geopolitical maneuvers and ethnic rivalry. Kirkuk's strategic importance dates back to ancient times, when it served as a key trading hub on the Silk Road connecting the Mediterranean world with Central Asia. During the Ottoman era, Kirkuk's importance grew as the empire expanded its control over Mesopotamia by exploiting the region's rich oil reserves. However, the modern oil industry was born only at the beginning of the 20th century, when in the 1920s British researchers discovered extensive oil fields in Kirkuk.

The subsequent partition of the Ottoman Empire after World War I laid the foundation for the incorporation of Kirkuk into the newly formed State of Iraq. The city's oil wealth became the focus of competing interests: British and then American companies fought for control of oil production and exports. Ethnic contradictions in Kirkuk have also played a significant role in shaping its history. The city is home to a diverse population - Kurds, Arabs, Turkmens and other ethnic groups, each of which has its own claims to the region. Throughout the 20th century, successive Iraqi governments pursued a policy of "Arabization" in Kirkuk, displacing Kurdish and other non-Arab communities. It is worth noting that the Kurds, in particular, have long been trying to defend their rights in Kirkuk, considering it as an integral part of their ancestral homeland. Kurdish uprisings against the central government in the 20th century often included demands for autonomy and recognition of the Kurdish identity in Kirkuk. After the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime, Kirkuk became a hotbed of tension between the central government of Iraq and the Kurdistan Regional Government (PKK). Disputes over the distribution of oil revenues, control of oil fields and the status of Kirkuk itself have often strained relations between Baghdad and Erbil. In recent years, efforts have been made to resolve the Kirkuk problem through negotiations and power-sharing agreements. However, the ethnic, economic and political interests underlying this issue continue to pose challenges to finding a long-term solution to the dilemma of Kirkuk and oil exports in Iraq [Abbas Zadeh & Kirmanj, 2017, p.587].

In 2014, the emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) posed a significant threat to the stability of Iraq, which forced the Kurdish Peshmerga forces to play an important role in the fight against the extremist group. The Kurds' effective resistance against ISIS has strengthened their international standing and highlighted their role as a key ally in the fight against terrorism.

It is worth noting that tensions between the PKK and the central government in Baghdad persisted, especially on issues related to oil revenues (Kirkuk territories), territorial disputes and political representation. The referendum on Kurdish independence held in 2017 further exacerbated these contradictions. Baghdad rejected the results and imposed punitive measures against the PKK.

Despite these problems, the Kurds have maintained their position as an influential political force in Iraq. The PKK continues to defend its autonomy, while simultaneously participating in negotiations with Baghdad to resolve outstanding issues and secure its place in the Iraqi state. Across the region, efforts to resolve the Kurdish problem require consideration of complex geopolitical dynamics and entrenched interests. Despite the serious problems, the Kurds still seek self-determination, which underscores the enduring importance of the Kurdish issue in the broader Middle East context.

The influence of the Kurdish issue on the dynamics of Saudi Arabia's foreign policy towards Iran

There is a rather complex and often tense interaction between the two regional giants, which is due to a variety of historical, religious, ideological and geopolitical variables. Saudi Arabia and Iran have a long-standing rivalry that originates in their polar interests of regional leadership and in their interfaith contradictions. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the Shah and established an Islamic theocracy led by Ayatollah Khomeini, intensified this rivalry and led to the emergence of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In general, the main task of the 1979 Iranian revolution was to create a political structure with geographical expansion beyond Iran's political borders through a process of political modeling. The first features of Shiite geopolitics were formed precisely with the victory of the Iranian revolution, which was based on the character of the religious-theocratic regime. It should be noted that Shiite geopolitics is an expression of Shiite geography, which affects the international relations of power. By pushing Shiite communities to connect with Iranian centralism, and then forming a growing international force, Iran is becoming an international pole seeking to change the international order based on multipolarity. In other words, Shiite geopolitics is essentially an Iranian geostrategic project reflecting the nature of geopolitical assumptions [Othman, 2017, p.6].

Analyzing Saudi-Iranian bilateral relations, it should be noted that the countries support opposing forces in regional crises and are involved in a protracted war for influence throughout the Middle East. This rivalry takes the form of political intrigues, proxy conflicts and attempts to influence the results of significant regional events. An example is their respective roles in the Syrian civil war, in which Iran supports the Assad regime and Saudi Arabia supports rebel organizations. The events of the "Arab Spring" in 2011 and the subsequent regional unrest created certain difficulties for both Saudi Arabia and Iran. While Iran saw opportunities to expand its influence amid regime change and popular uprisings, Saudi Arabia viewed these events as a threat to its own stability and sought to counter Iranian influence.

The KSA seeks to balance Iran's influence through strategic alliances with like-minded regional and international partners [Asl?, 2016, p.23]. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), serves as a platform for collective security and cooperation against perceived threats. In addition, Saudi Arabia maintains strong ties with the United States, which shares concerns about Iran's regional ambitions and nuclear program.

Saudi Arabia's policy is aimed at curbing Iran's influence by isolating it diplomatically, economically and militarily. This includes efforts to mobilize international support for sanctions against Iran, especially with regard to its nuclear program. Saudi Arabia also seeks to limit Iran's regional influence by supporting allies and proxies aligned with its interests, such as the Yemeni government in its conflict against Iran-backed Houthi rebels. In other words, the civil war in Yemen, which began in 2014, turned into a proxy conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Saudi Arabia intervened militarily in support of the internationally recognized government against the Houthi rebels. The conflict has exacerbated tensions between the two regional Powers and contributed to the humanitarian crisis in Yemen.

The alliance with the United States was the Kingdom's choice to combat the threat from the "Iranian neighbor", and it was effective and successful in its mission, proving mutually beneficial for both sides for decades [Eilts, 2004, p.219]. Recently, however, the United States has gradually begun to shift its strategic priorities away from the Middle East. The attacks on Saudi Aramco's oil facilities in Abgaik and Khurais in September 2019 and Washington's inconclusive response marked a turning point in Saudi Arabia's perception of security. Riyadh has realized the futility of relying solely on an alliance with the United States and has stepped up efforts to diversify its security and military partners, including strengthening security cooperation with China and Russia. And on March 10, 2023, as a result of negotiations in Beijing, Saudi Arabia and Iran reached an agreement to restore diplomatic ties and open embassies within two months. In fact, reconciliation with Iran is a manifestation of this relative shift in Saudi security doctrine, "security in exchange for oil." By restoring relations with Iran, the kingdom hopes that diplomacy will help reduce its exposure to direct Iranian attacks, as well as collateral damage caused by the deterioration of U.S.-Iranian relations and mutual military escalation between Iran and Israel. The Saudi-Iranian deal also makes commercial sense: Riyadh believes that its security is extremely important in order not to disrupt the exploration, transportation and sale of oil, and Saudi Arabia's efforts to reduce dependence on oil exports and diversify the economy create new models of regional partnerships and rivalry, so now it is reconsidering its difficult relationship with Iran, and also changes the vector of development of bilateral relations with Iraq, in particular with the Kurds. Saudi Arabia is seeking to balance Iranian influence in the region, and this goal is consistent with its broader geopolitical agenda. Iran has historically maintained close ties with Kurdish groups, especially in Iraq and Syria. By interacting with Kurdish organizations, Saudi Arabia seeks to reduce Iran's influence and prevent Tehran from further expanding its influence in the region. And accordingly, support for Kurdish interests serves as a means of containing Iranian influence and advancing Saudi Arabia's strategic goals.

As noted earlier, Saudi Arabia seeks to balance Iranian influence in the region, and this goal is consistent with its broader geopolitical agenda. Iran has historically maintained close ties with Kurdish groups, especially in Iraq and Syria. By interacting with Kurdish organizations, Saudi Arabia seeks to reduce Iran's influence and prevent Tehran from further expanding its influence in the region. Support for Kurdish interests serves as a means of containing Iranian influence and advancing Saudi Arabia's strategic goals.

After the Iraq war in 2003, Saudi Arabia cautiously but purposefully began to establish ties with the Kurdistan Regional Government (PKK), recognizing the geopolitical and economic importance of Kurdistan in the post-Saddam Hussein era. Initially, Saudi Arabia approached the situation with reservations, but soon recognized the strategic importance of developing cooperative relations with the Kurds [Al-Rasheed, 2006, p.158]. It should be noted that this cooperation was multifaceted and covered various areas, among which economic cooperation occupied an important place. Saudi Arabia's recognition of significant oil reserves in Kurdistan has prompted the kingdom to embark on large-scale investments in Kurdish oil fields. These investments were not only significant, but also strategically important, as they reflected Saudi Arabia's intention to gain a stake in the lucrative Kurdish energy sector. Moreover, Iraqi Kurdistan (IK) (mainly Kirkuk) boasts significant oil reserves, which makes it an important player in the global energy market. Recognizing the importance of diversifying the energy partnership, Saudi Arabia seeks to ensure access to Kurdish oil resources through increased cooperation with the Kurdish authorities. Such cooperation not only contributes to the achievement of Saudi Arabia's long-term energy security goals, but also strengthens its position on the global energy landscape.

Saudi Arabia's engagement with the PKK went beyond economic interests and included broader strategic considerations. The Kingdom viewed Kurdistan as a potential ally in a region fraught with political instability and volatile alliances. By developing ties with the KRG, Saudi Arabia sought to strengthen its influence in Iraq and throughout the Middle East, while simultaneously hedging against regional opponents.

In addition to economic investments, Saudi Arabia has actively supported infrastructure projects in Kurdistan, from transport networks to educational institutions. These initiatives were aimed not only at stimulating economic growth, but also at promoting social development and stability, thereby strengthening the Kingdom's position in the region. In addition, this interaction was reinforced by a subtle understanding of the Kurds' desire for autonomy and self-determination. Respecting the territorial integrity of Iraq, the Kingdom recognized the legitimate political rights of the Kurds and sought to use their regional influence to advance mutual interests.

Overall, the cooperation between Saudi Arabia and the PKK represented a strategic alignment of interests driven by economic opportunities, geopolitical considerations and mutual respect. Through its multifaceted engagement with Kurdistan, Saudi Arabia has positioned itself as a key player in the changing dynamics of the Middle East, laying the foundation for a lasting partnership that will shape regional politics and economics for many years to come.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it should be noted that the dynamics of relations between Saudi Arabia and the Kurdistan Regional Government (PKK) have undergone significant changes since the 2003 Iraq war, culminating in the controversial 2017 independence referendum and continuing to this day. Initially conditioned by the general opposition to Saddam Hussein's regime and subsequent efforts to stabilize post-war Iraq, relations between Saudi Arabia and the PKK developed against the background of changing regional dynamics and geopolitical considerations.

After the Iraq war, Saudi Arabia gradually began to cooperate with the PKK, considering the Kurdish autonomy as a potential counterweight to Iranian influence in Iraq. Economic ties flourished, and Saudi investments played a key role in the development of the PKK, albeit within the framework of the Iraqi federal structure. However, the 2017 independence referendum was a definite "test of the strength" of these bilateral relations, as Saudi Arabia, along with other regional and international players, expressed concern about the potential destabilizing consequences of the separation of the Kurds. While Saudi Arabia has reaffirmed its support for Iraq's territorial integrity, it has maintained dialogue with the PKK, recognizing the complexity of Kurdish aspirations and the need for inclusive governance in Iraq.

In the long term, the future of relations between Saudi Arabia and the PKK remains uncertain, which will also depend on developing regional dynamics, Iraq's internal politics and broader geopolitical trends. Engagement with the PKK on issues of mutual interest, such as security cooperation and economic development, can create opportunities for constructive dialogue and partnership as Saudi Arabia seeks to balance its strategic interests with regional stability.