SUNDAY
- donbrooks777
- Aug 24
- 21 min read
New BLOG – Great ARTICLES
SUNDAY 8-[24]-25
SPIRITUAL:
MSA's Hidden Muslim Brotherhood Origins Exposed:
Watch the live stream here at 700pm ET
The SDN SITREP 8-24-25
Your No-BS Source for Preparedness & Conservative Christian Commentary
BLUF MAIN TOPIC: The Muslim Students Association (MSA) and its roots in Muslim Brotherhood. One of the most mainstream Muslim organizations on North American campuses - hundreds of chapters, tens of thousands of alumni (including Huma Abedin). But few realize: It was founded in 1963 with guidance from Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami activists. Early funding flowed from the Muslim World League and other Gulf patrons. Its leaders helped build ISNA and NAIT. And Brotherhood influence still echoes in MSA's DNA.
The Muslim Students Association appears innocent enough on the surface - just another campus club where Muslim students gather. But dig deeper and you'll find troubling connections most Americans never hear about. Founded in 1963, the MSA wasn't simply a grassroots student movement but received direct guidance from Muslim Brotherhood operatives along with Jamaat-e-Islami activists. These aren't conspiracy theories but documented facts.
The money trail tells an even more concerning story. Early MSA chapters received substantial funding from the Muslim World League and various Gulf patrons, creating an international network with questionable motives on American soil. Their leadership went on to establish major Islamic organizations including ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) and NAIT (North American Islamic Trust), expanding their influence beyond campus borders.
Perhaps most alarming is how Brotherhood ideology continues influencing MSA chapters today. Their strategy has never been violent overthrow but patient infiltration - placing members in positions of cultural and political influence. Just look at alumni like Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton's longtime aide who married into the Soros family in 2025. The Brotherhood's "civilization jihad" strategy explicitly aims to undermine Western society from within, using our own freedoms against us while operating under seemingly benign banners like student organizations.
PRACTICAL TIPS | MAIN TOPIC
Understanding radical influences on our college campuses requires vigilance and action. If you have children heading to university, take time to research which organizations operate on their campus. Many MSA chapters present themselves as moderate while internal documents reveal more extreme positions. Look beyond the friendly recruitment tables during freshman orientation.
Parents should have frank conversations with college-bound children about how extremist groups recruit. They rarely lead with radical ideas, instead starting with community support, cultural events, and friendship before gradually introducing more hardline ideologies. Teach your kids to question organizational funding sources and leadership connections.
For those living near universities, pay attention to campus speakers. MSA chapters frequently invite controversial figures with documented extremist ties, often funded through mandatory student fees. Attend public events when possible and respectfully challenge concerning viewpoints. Document and share troubling rhetoric or activities with local media and university administration.
Consider supporting moderate Muslim voices who oppose extremism. Groups like Muslims Against Antisemitism and the Muslim Reform Movement offer alternatives to Brotherhood-influenced organizations. Their members often face threats and intimidation for speaking out against radicals who claim to represent all Muslims.
When you encounter MSA fundraising initiatives, research where the money actually goes. Some seemingly humanitarian causes have ended up supporting UNRWA and other organizations with questionable ties. Always verify before donating.
EXCLUSIVE CONTENT | MAIN TOPIC
Christians and conservatives must actively counter the Brotherhood's influence strategy rather than simply complaining. First, support legislation requiring transparency for foreign funding of campus organizations. The Brotherhood's strategy relies on hiding behind seemingly innocent fronts while channeling Gulf money through complex networks.
Work to elect school board members and university trustees who understand these issues. Campus radicals don't appear overnight - they're groomed through K-12 educational materials that whitewash Islamic extremism while demonizing Western civilization and Christian values. Push for curriculum transparency and balanced education about world religions.
Conservative alumni need to get organized. Liberal graduates donate millions to promote leftist campus policies, while conservatives often disengage from their alma maters. Form alternative alumni associations and leverage financial influence to demand viewpoint diversity. Make donations contingent on fair treatment of conservative and Christian student groups.
Build coalition relationships with moderate Muslims who oppose Brotherhood influence. They're natural allies but often feel abandoned by conservatives who paint all Muslims with the same brush. This exactly serves the Brotherhood's purpose - isolating moderates makes them easier targets for radicalization.
Consider running for local office where you can impact zoning decisions for Islamic centers with Brotherhood ties. Many radicals use religious freedom claims to establish footholds in communities, but careful application of existing laws can ensure proper vetting.
Most importantly, maintain a strong Christian witness. The Brotherhood strategy thrives where faith is weak. Strong churches and families who live their values provide natural immunity against radical ideology. Our battle isn't against Muslims as people but against extremist ideology that threatens American freedom.
COMMUNITY SPOTLIGHT
Thank you Tim Smith for the best user submitted story yesterday "Burglars posing as cops.":
JOIN THE CRUSADE!
Email questions to Support@SurvivalDispatch.com
Godspeed,
Chris Heaven, CEO
CANADIAN:
Juno Jump Start
Poilievre blasts Carney for failing to fulfill campaign promises:
Poilievre blasted Carney for botching a trade deal and failing to deliver on key campaign promises, Ron Chhinzer explains how the criminal ‘justice’ system is failing Canadians, and more.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre blasted Prime Minister Mark Carney for botching a trade deal and failing to deliver on key campaign promises, hours after Carney announced Canada would drop most counter tariffs on U.S. goods.
Following a phone call with U.S. President Donald Trump, Carney announced Friday that Canada would drop its 25 per cent tariff on items such as orange juice, wine, clothing and motorcycle products originally targeted by the Liberal government at the beginning of the year.
Poilievre told reporters in Ottawa that he would have preferred to see Canada receive something in return, ideally a freer trade agreement between the two countries, but instead he said Carney capitulated with no concessions from the U.S.
“I was happy to hear that he got the president on the phone. I know that Mr. Carney has been trying to do that now for about a month, and today, the President accepted his call, and the Prime Minister took the opportunity to make a series of very generous concessions to President Trump,” Poilievre said. “I was expecting that when the call was reported that we’d find that President Trump had given us something in return, that Mr. Carney being the negotiator he promised he would be, that he would get something after giving something.”
He said the latest round of dropped counter-tariffs added to a growing list of capitulations from the prime minister, despite his foremost pledge during the campaign being that he would fight Trump and his tariffs as an “elbows up” prime minister.
“His elbows have mysteriously gone missing, and this call follows on other concessions. He promised during the campaign he would have dollar for dollar retaliation. He pulled that back. He made concessions on the military while getting nothing in return,” Poilievre said. “He pulled back on his digital services tax, a terrible tax, but you’d think he’d get something in return for it, nothing, and today, he removed even almost all of the tariffs on the United States and got none lifted from Canada.”
He also noted a lack of country-building projects, which Carney pledged he would deliver, as well as issues with crime, safety and immigration. Poilievre added that Canada gave a billion-dollar loan to Beijing to build ships, money he argued could have been spent on Canadian workers, especially while China imposes its own tariffs on Canada.
“Mr. Carney, capitulations would be laughable if they weren’t so tragic, they will harm our farmers, our workers, our people. More importantly, from his point of view, they are a broken promise. They are exactly the opposite of what Mr. Carney ran on,” Poilievre said. “His signature promise in the last election was that he was going to put elbows up, negotiate a win and match American tariffs….he’s not thrown one elbow since he took office, except at our own workers.”
He noted Carney is nowhere closer to increasing the supply of homes and dropping their prices or “building Canada,” and all of the “anti-resource laws” that make natural resource projects “impossible” remain in place.
“He was going to build more and at faster speeds than ever before….he’s bragging that he’s close to setting up a construction office of bureaucrats who don’t swing hammers or operate heavy machinery but sit in front of computer screens in Ottawa department buildings,” Poilievre said. “Not one pipeline has been identified, not one LNG plant, not one nuclear plant, not one hydroelectricity dam, not one major project has been identified, let alone approved in the 160 days since he took office.”
Poilievre said Carney should adopt Conservative ideas and that he is willing to work with the Liberals to address these issues, setting partisanship aside.
When asked about Carney’s statement that Canada has the world’s best trade agreement with the U.S., Poilievre responded that in practice, Canada is the country most affected by U.S. tariffs.
“Well, most countries have a better deal in reality, because none of them have the same dependency on the American economy we do,” Poilievre said. “Any small tariff on Canada, any amount cut by the U.S., has an outsized effect, because…more than 20% of our economy is exports to the U.S., which means that we are the most dependent country on the United States, and any tariff at all will have more impact on our country than it does anywhere in the world.”
True North
Patrick Bestall
TRUMP:
Russiagate:
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard on Tuesday announced her office had stripped security clearances from 37 current and former intelligence officials, accusing them of politicizing and manipulating intelligence.
A DNI memo sent out on Monday included the names of officials who worked at the CIA, NSA, State Department and National Security Council, including former Obama DNI James Clapper, who Gabbard claimed told officials to "compromise" normal procedures to rush a 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment related to Russia's influence in the 2016 election.
"Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right," Gabbard wrote in an X post. "Those in the Intelligence Community who betray their oath to the Constitution and put their own interests ahead of the interests of the American people have broken the sacred trust they promised to uphold…"
Notable officials on the list include: Brett M. Holmgren, former Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research; Richard H. Ledgett, former NSA Deputy Director; Stephanie O’Sullivan, former Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence; and Luke R. Hartig, former Senior Director for Counterterrorism at the National Security Council.
Also included was Yael Eisenstat, a former CIA officer and White House advisor known for her involvement in the Facebook election integrity operation.
Gabbard said the decision was made at President Donald Trump's direction.
"Our Intelligence Community must be committed to upholding the values and principles enshrined in the US Constitution and maintain a laser-like focus on our mission of ensuring the safety, security and freedom of the American people," Gabbard wrote on X.
The memo noted the revocation was effective immediately and the officials' access to classified systems, facilities, materials and information would be terminated.
The officials' contracts or employment with the government are to be terminated and credentials surrendered to security officers, according to the memo.
Original article source: Gabbard removes clearances from 37 officials at Trump's direction over politicizing intelligence
Oleg Kodolov
YouTube
GLOBAL:
Ukraine Marks Independence Day With Drone Strikes on Russia:
Ukraine launched a wave of drone strikes on Russia Sunday, triggering a fire at a nuclear power plant as it celebrated Ukrainian independence day against a backdrop of fading hopes for recent peace efforts.
After a flurry of diplomacy and a push by US President Donald Trump to broker a summit between his Russian and Ukrainian counterparts, the prospects for peace appeared to stall on Friday when Russia ruled out any immediate meeting between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky.
The three-and-a-half-year war, which has killed tens of thousands of people, has ground to a virtual stalemate, though Russia has managed to eke out recent advances in a grinding offensive -- including claiming two villages in the eastern Donetsk region Saturday.
Ukraine hit back Sunday by sending drones on fresh attacks on Russian territory, including one that was shot down over the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant in western Russia, which detonated upon impact and sparked a fire, according to the facility.
The plant said the fire had been extinguished, adding there were no casualties or increased radiation levels.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly warned of the dangers of fighting around nuclear plants following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
Russian authorities said Ukrainian drones had also been shot down over areas sometimes far from the front, including Saint Petersburg in the northwest.
Ten drones were shot down over the port of Ust-Luga on the Gulf of Finland, sparking a fire at a fuel terminal owned by Russian energy group Novatek, regional governor Aleksandr Drozdenko wrote on Telegram.
Ukraine's smaller, outgunned army has relied heavily on drones to respond to Russia's invasion, notably targeting oil infrastructure to hit a key source of Moscow's revenues to fund the war.
Russia has seen soaring fuel prices since the attacks began.
Ukraine meanwhile said Russia had attacked it overnight with a ballistic missile and 72 Iranian-made Shahed attack drones, 48 of which the air force said had been shot down.
A Russian drone strike killed a 47-year-old woman in the eastern region of Dnipropetrovsk, the governor said.
- 'Ukraine is a fighter' -
The latest fighting came as Ukraine marked the anniversary of gaining independence in 1991 in the break-up of the Soviet Union.
"This is how Ukraine strikes when its calls for peace are ignored," Zelensky said in an independence day address.
"Today, both the US and Europe agree: Ukraine has not yet fully won, but it will certainly not lose. Ukraine has secured its independence. Ukraine is not a victim; it is a fighter."
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney travelled to Kyiv for the commemorations, calling for "a just and lasting peace for Ukraine".
Zelensky thanked other world leaders including Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping, King Charles and the pope for sending messages to mark the occasion.
Russia now controls around a fifth of Ukraine, including the Crimean peninsula, which it annexed in 2014.
The fighting has forced millions of people to flee their homes and destroyed cities and villages across the east and south of Ukraine.
Putin has repeatedly rebuffed calls from Ukraine and the West for an unconditional and immediate ceasefire.
On Friday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said "no meeting" between Putin and Zelensky was planned as Trump's mediation efforts appeared to stall, while Zelensky accused Russia of trying to prolong the offensive.
More from MAX News:
News MAX
We Were Told Food Dyes Are Safe:
—But What’s the Real Story? ... Special Report
PRIMETIME'S PICKs
We Were Told Food Dyes Are Safe—But What’s the Real Story?
We’ve been told very different narratives about just how safe the chemicals in our food are. We were told that foods like processed cereals are filled with the vitamins that kids need to grow strong and healthy.
But now, we’re being shown a very different picture about just how safe these processed foods actually are as the MAHA agenda kicks in.Join Joshua Philipp, Epoch Times senior investigative reporter and host of “Crossroads,” as he dives into the issue of artificial food dyes, their origins, and how exactly we were fed the narrative that these are good for us.
Here's what you can't miss today:
Enjoy the stories from The Epoch Times—and feel free to share the link with a friend or forward the entire newsletter!
EPOCH TV
Big states breaking into smaller:
Just as we predicted. "Going back to the way things were" before the age of colonialism.
In a crumbling world, 30 million dream of a state to call their own. Will their dream come true or end in a nightmare?
The Kurds, caught up in the violent restructuring of the Middle East, face an uncertain future
Amid the rapid disintegration of the old world order – one that had been built over decades around a unipolar architecture – the global landscape is entering a phase of tectonic change.
Global processes, from shifts in the geo-economy to the loss of monopolies on interpreting norms and rules, have stirred regional dynamics, awakening dormant or suppressed potentials. Against this backdrop of turbulence, more and more regions are emerging from a state of dependency and inertia, seeking to rethink their role in the world.
This process is particularly evident in the Middle East – a region that has historically been a crossroads of external interests and conflicts, and at the same time, a source of wealth, culture, and strategic significance. Today, the Middle East is entering a new era of transformation. The weakening of traditional security guarantors, the erosion of old alliances, the energy transition, digitalization, demographic shifts, and the growing self-sufficiency of individual countries in the region are creating conditions for internal reconfiguration.
This transitional period has already been marked by the beginning of a rethinking of identities, national strategies, and alliances. Traditional actors – both in the form of old elites and former external patrons – are gradually losing their dominant influence. In their place, new forces are emerging: technological clusters, generationally renewed elites, regional integration initiatives, and new geopolitical alignments that do not fit into previous frameworks.
The final outcome of this transformation remains unclear, but one thing is certain: the Middle East is moving toward a different politico-economic configuration. The balance of power, sources of influence, and even the very structure of regional order may change beyond recognition. The region may gain greater agency, become less vulnerable to external dictates, and take a more active role in the global restructuring – not as an object, but as a full-fledged architect of a new multipolar reality.
Against the backdrop of the Middle East’s accelerating transformation – where old geopolitical balances are collapsing and new centers of power are awakening – the Kurdish question is once again gaining acute relevance. One of the region’s oldest and most sensitive conflicts, its significance is growing not only due to internal dynamics but also because it is becoming a tool – and at times a battleground – for rivalry between regional and global players. The Kurdish issue is once again acquiring strategic weight, potentially threatening the territorial integrity of four key regional states: Türkiye, Iran, Syria, and Iraq.
The Kurds are one of the largest ethnic groups in the world without their own state. Their population is estimated at around 30–35 million people. Most Kurds live in compact areas along the borders of the four aforementioned countries – a region informally referred to as “Kurdistan.” In addition, a significant Kurdish diaspora exists in Europe, particularly in Germany, as well as in the South Caucasus.
Historically, the Kurds played an important role in the empires of the region, from the Sassanids to the Ottomans. But in the 20th century – especially after World War I and the signing of the Treaty of Sèvres in 1920 – they had a chance to establish their own state. However, the subsequent Treaty of Lausanne (1923) dashed those hopes, leaving the Kurds off the political map of the world. Since then, the Kurdish movement has taken many forms: from armed struggle to political autonomy, from revolutionary Marxist organizations to moderate parliamentary parties.
In Iraq, the Kurds have achieved the greatest success: after the collapse of Saddam Hussein’s regime, a de facto autonomous Kurdish region was established with its own government, army (the Peshmerga), and foreign relations. In Syria, amid the civil war, Kurdish formations emerged in the north of the country – primarily around the structure of the “Syrian Democratic Forces” and the autonomous administration of Rojava. In Türkiye, the conflict between the state and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) remains one of the most acute and prolonged. In Iran, particularly following recent events, the Kurdish movement has also intensified – both socially and militarily.
The Kurdish issue is inherently multilayered. On one hand, it represents the aspiration for self-determination, and for cultural and political autonomy. On the other, it is used by both internal and external forces as a tool of pressure. For instance, the United States relied on Kurdish forces in the fight against ISIS, while Türkiye views any Kurdish initiatives in southern Syria as an existential threat. As a result, the Kurdish question has evolved from a domestic issue into a factor with direct implications for regional stability.
As the old frameworks disintegrate, the Kurdish factor is likely to grow stronger. The threat of a cross-border Kurdish awakening could disrupt the fragile balance, undermining the territorial integrity of already unstable states. In the new conditions of Middle Eastern transformation, a key question arises for both the Kurds and their neighbors: will Kurdish political energy be integrated into new models of regional coexistence – or will it once again fuel prolonged conflicts and divisions?
Against the backdrop of the recent 12-day war between Iran and Israel, Kurdish opposition movements in the muslim state – especially in Eastern Kurdistan – have shown renewed activity. These organizations, supported from abroad, particularly by Israel and the US, are seeking to shape a specific international narrative: they aim to portray the actions of the Iranian authorities as a campaign of systemic repression against the Kurdish population. Through statements, appeals, and media platforms, Kurdish parties are working to focus global public attention on what they claim to be ethnic and political persecution, comparable to the tragic events of 1988.
However, behind this information campaign lies a much more complex picture. Credible sources indicate increased activity by underground Kurdish cells coordinating actions aimed at destabilizing the situation in Iran’s border regions. These structures – often linked to armed groups – are not only ideologically opposed to the Islamic Republic but, according to some reports, also receive support from foreign intelligence services, including Mossad. This type of coordination makes the Kurdish factor not merely an internal Iranian issue, but a significant element of external pressure on the country.
The intentions of Kurdish movements aligned with Israel and the US go beyond defending Kurdish rights. Their strategy is to portray Iran on the international stage as a state that systematically represses its own population on ethnic grounds. In doing so, they seek to undermine the legitimacy of Iranian institutions and create a moral justification for further sanctions and political pressure. This is especially evident in the context of arrests and executions, such as the cases of Idris Ali, Azad Shojaei, and Rasoul Ahmad, who were accused of collaborating with Israel. Such accusations are unlikely to be random – they reflect an existing and active connection between underground activists and external centers of power.
Thus, the Kurdish issue in Iran goes far beyond the framework of an internal national conflict. It has become a field of asymmetric struggle, in which opposition movements use the image of a “persecuted minority” to pursue strategic goals supported from abroad. This does not diminish the complexity of the Kurds’ situation in Iran, but it does require a sober assessment of how exactly – and in whose interests – this conflict is evolving amid the region’s new geopolitical reality.
No less acute than in Iran, the Kurdish issue remains highly contentious in Türkiye, where an armed conflict between Ankara and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has continued for decades. Despite recent signals of a possible de-escalation – including another call by Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan for a ceasefire and a return to negotiations – the Turkish leadership continues to view Kurdish armed formations as a persistent threat. It remains one of the central themes of both domestic and foreign policy in Türkiye.
Although some representatives of the PKK have indeed expressed a willingness to lay down arms and enter into dialogue with the Turkish authorities, this by no means implies that the threat has been eliminated. Experts widely agree that in recent years, the PKK has actively received support from various external actors – both regional rivals of Türkiye and global powers. Paradoxically, both Israel and Iran have supported Kurdish groups fighting against Ankara at different times. This has been particularly evident in Iraqi Kurdistan, in the Qandil Mountains where PKK bases are located – Iran, despite its own internal conflict with Kurdish movements, has provided logistical and military support to Kurdish armed units based on tactical considerations aimed at containing Türkiye.
For Türkiye, the threat is not limited to the PKK. In northern Syria, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) led by Mazloum Abdi are active – an organization that Ankara considers a branch of the PKK and classifies as a terrorist group. Despite US support for the SDF, Türkiye sees them as a real threat to its national security and conducts regular operations against them. In Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, Ankara faces a different, complex configuration: the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), led by Bafel Talabani, maintains tense relations with Türkiye and traditionally has closer ties with Iran and the United States compared to its rival, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), which is more aligned with Ankara.
Within Türkiye itself, the Kurdish issue is not only a matter of national security but also of electoral politics. Kurds constitute a significant portion of the country’s population, especially in the southeastern provinces, and play a critical role in the electoral landscape.
The support of the Kurdish electorate can be a decisive factor for the ruling coalition led by the Justice and Development Party (AKP) of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan – both in terms of consolidating power and the risk of losing it. In this context, any signals about resolving the conflict with the PKK are not just military or diplomatic maneuvers but also potential electoral strategies.
For Iraq and Syria, the Kurdish question long ago ceased to be a purely internal issue — it has become one of the key factors contributing to the disintegration of state structures and the loss of central authority over significant territories.
In Iraq, following the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, the situation changed rapidly: the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), having gained broad autonomy, became a de facto independent player that periodically challenges the unity of the country. Despite formal subordination to Baghdad, the Kurdish authorities in Erbil are in a state of ongoing political conflict with the central government, frequently raising the prospect of independence referendums. Baghdad’s response has been attempts to limit KRG funding from the state budget and to tighten control over oil resources.
However, these measures have not resolved the problem – instead, they have exacerbated social tensions. Protest potential is growing among the population of Iraqi Kurdistan, which is dissatisfied with both the central government and its own elites, whom they accuse of corruption and inefficiency. Against this backdrop, the recent events of July – when protests in the region escalated into violence and destruction – served as a troubling signal: Iraq risks descending into another wave of crisis, with the Kurdish factor once again acting as a detonator.
The situation in Syria is no less explosive. After the overthrow of Bashar Assad’s regime and the rise to power of the transitional government headed by Ahmad al-Sharaa, the new authorities have faced colossal challenges: the absence of effective mechanisms for integrating ethno-confessional groups and deep mistrust among national minorities, including the Kurds. These factors have triggered ongoing armed clashes, pushing the country to the brink of a new large-scale internal conflict.
A particularly influential role is played by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), led by Mazloum Abdi. This is one of the most consolidated and combat-ready armed formations in Syria, which – thanks to support from the US and Israel – has become a key player in the northeast of the country. The SDF has shown no willingness to disarm or integrate into the structure of the transitional government. Moreover, given the lack of trust in the new authorities, it is highly likely that the group will opt to pursue de facto independence.
It is important to note that Israel plays a special role in this configuration. Its regular strikes on Syrian territory, along with support for Druze and certain anti-government forces, are driven by a strategic objective: to weaken any central authority in Damascus, which Israel perceives as a potential threat. In the case of the Kurds, Israel follows a familiar pattern – using national identity issues as a lever of destabilization. If the current trend continues – the strengthening of Kurdish forces alongside the weakening of central institutions in Iraq and Syria – it could trigger a chain reaction leading to the final fragmentation of these states.
In light of current developments in the region, voices within the Kurdish academic and political elite are increasingly calling for the realization of the historic national dream: the creation of an independent Kurdish state. As one of the largest stateless peoples in the world, the Kurds rightly aspire to political recognition and sovereignty. These aspirations are entirely understandable and worthy of respect.
However, the Kurds cannot afford to ignore the lessons of the past. History has shown that external powers – primarily the US, Israel, and other interested actors – have repeatedly used the Kurdish issue for their own strategic goals, often sacrificing Kurdish lives and destabilizing the entire region in the process. It is vital to avoid once again becoming a tool in someone else’s geopolitical game.
On a global scale, the Kurdish issue has long been one of the levers of geopolitical pressure. For Israel, for instance, the destabilization of Iran and Türkiye through the support of Kurdish aspirations is part of a broader strategy to weaken its regional adversaries. The use of the Kurdish factor also undermines the territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria. However, it must be clearly understood: even if a hypothetical Kurdish state were to be established, this would not mark the end of conflicts. On the contrary, the new state would become dependent on external patrons, entangled in ongoing regional rivalries, and plunged into a state of permanent warfare – political, economic, and military.
Therefore, despite the ongoing transformation of the regional and global order, a reasonable and responsible step would be the establishment of a broad political dialogue among all the peoples of the region, including the Kurds. Instead of fragmentation and external dependency, efforts should be directed toward creating a shared space where the interests of all ethnic and confessional groups are taken into account. Only intra-regional integration can ensure a sustainable future, while belief in the idea that external powers will bring freedom and prosperity is nothing more than an illusion – one that replaces reality with false hope.
RUSSIA TV
Patrick Bestall
RUMOUR:
RUMOURS Circulating out there...:
I may not agree with everything from the content-producers that I share.
Apply critical thinking and use discernment to
come to your own conclusions regarding the content !
You need to MAKE-UP Your own MIND!
What we think that we now know...
REPORT Today
NO REPORT for SUNDAY
However, Here is Gazzettler [not always accurate] however, they do have insight into what is happening ‘Behind-the-Curtain’!
Trump wanted to give the people the one thing the elites feared most — true healing. That’s why they banned it worldwide and buried it deep. But now, his secret military alliance is smuggling it back in, bypassing the Deep State’s crumbling control. It’s already being quietly distributed to Americans, and the elites are losing their grip fast.
GAZZETTER
THE END
Comments