Jornal Comunidades Lusófonas, interviewed Ugur Injaz, a national from Kurdistan who made a sketch about his country and the entire surrounding area. It is not easy to characterize Kurdistan, as it is at the “crossroads of the Arab world”, with cultural diversity. “The British and French governments have forced the Kurds, who have almost nothing in common with their neighboring communities, to live under completely different cultural, linguistic and national frameworks.” Its wealth of natural resources, including oil, gas, water and fertile agricultural land, are very attractive to many countries. Regarding Portuguese emigration, Ugur revealed that in the 90s there were Portuguese companies operating in the country, but he thinks that there are none now.
Jornal Comunidades Lusófonas – As an expert on Kurdistan, how do you classify it: as a country, as a city, as a quadripartite territory. How do you classify it?
Ugur Injaz – Kurdistan is a country rich in history and culture but without an independent Kurdish state. It holds different meanings depending on the context: in Iran, there is a province called “Kurdistan,” though it represents only a fraction of Kurdish lands referred to as “Eastern Kurdistan.” In Iraq, the “Kurdistan Region of Iraq” is a semi-autonomous area governed by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). In Syria, northern regions, including Aleppo, to the Mediterranean Sea are often called “Western Kurdistan.” In Turkey, around 30 to 35 million Kurds – roughly 40% of the population – live predominantly in the east.
JCL – Give us a brief introduction to Kurdistan?
Ugur Injaz – Kurds are one of the oldest ethnic groups in the Middle East, with a history dating back thousands of years. They are an indigenous nation, having lived on these lands since ancient times. The Kurdish language belongs to the Indo-European family, with several dialects that reflect their rich cultural diversity.
The Kurds share a strong sense of identity rooted in their language, traditions, and resilience. Kurdistan’s diversity and historical significance make it a key cultural and economic part of the Middle East, offering vast potential for development and collaboration. Kurdistan is a multi-religious and culturally diverse region where various communities coexist peacefully.
While nearly 60% of Kurds are Muslim (though exact figures are unavailable due to the lack of state-provided data), there are also significant populations of Alawis, Christians, Jews, Yazidis, and Zoroastrians. This diversity makes Kurdistan a unique place of coexistence in the Middle East. Christianity, in particular, has played an important role in Kurdistan’s history.
The Kurds have contributed to the religion both intellectually and culturally. In modern times, this was symbolized by Pope Francis’s historic visit to Kurdistan and Iraq in March 2021. The visit, facilitated by an invitation from the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq, underscored the region’s openness.
Prime Minister Masrour Barzani, led the delegation to the Vatican to secure this historic event. This stands in contrast to the canceled visit of Pope John Paul II during Saddam Hussein’s regime, highlighting the difference in attitudes between the Kurdish leadership and others in the region. During the war against ISIS, the Kurdistan Regional Government played a crucial role in protecting minorities in the region, including Kurdish Christians, from terrorism and persecution. For the Kurds, religion is not a cause for division but rather a source of cultural richness, contributing to a beautiful mosaic of coexistence and mutual respect.
JCL – The Middle East chess game is very complex to explain. Can you tell us why there are always so many upheavals in that region of the world?
Ugur Injaz – The world has never been a peaceful place. From the earliest days of human history, conflicts have arisen – often over seemingly trivial matters. For example, the story of Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve, symbolizes humanity’s propensity for conflict. It was a time of no oil, no resources, nothing. Similarly, Europe has its history of strife, from medieval wars to the devastating World Wars of the 20th century.
My intention is not to compare regions to determine which has faced more conflict but to highlight that war and discord have been constants throughout human history. The Middle East, since the mid-20th century, has been a focal point of global instability. Conflicts involving both regional and international powers have perpetuated a cycle of violence and tension. This volatility stems from political divisions, economic interests, and the complexities of the region’s geopolitics. As a business and investment consultant specializing in the Middle East, my perspective on this issue is economy-focused rather than political.
Geopolitical analysis is an essential part of our work, as we strive to provide the best possible advice to our clients. Ultimately, our role is to guide them in making informed decisions about investing substantial resources – often millions of dollars – in this complex region. To understand the region’s politics, one must follow the flow of money and power.
Looking at the Middle East map, we see two major geographic and economic zones: the Persian Gulf in the east and the Levant in the west. Historically, before the discovery of oil, the Levant – modern-day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Kurdistan, and Damascus – was the economic and trade center of the region, with trade routes connecting it to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, Istanbul, and further into Europe.
However, the discovery of oil shifted economic and political significance to the Gulf region, particularly in the latter half of the 20th century. Nations that were once peripheral on the Middle Eastern stage became key players in global geopolitics. This economic transformation brought new challenges and complexities to the region’s power dynamics. In the 20th century, Middle Eastern geopolitics were relatively straightforward to analyze, primarily involving state actors.
Today, the situation resembles a chessboard, as you described. Two main factors contribute to this complexity: Global Economic Interdependence, and Non-State Actors and Fragile States. The global economy has evolved into a tightly interconnected web. Manufacturing, for instance, relies on supply chains that span continents – raw materials sourced from Africa, semiconductors produced in Asia, innovation developed in the United States, and skilled talent provided by Europe.
A disruption in any part of this chain creates ripple effects that impact not just the immediate region but the entire global system, including the Middle East. This interdependence is evident in the Middle East’s geopolitics and economics.
Take Israel as an example: despite political and historical tensions with neighboring states, its technology and innovation are vital to the region’s development. Many countries implicitly depend on Israeli advancements in agriculture, water management, and cybersecurity. Similarly, Iraq, which holds the world’s fifth-largest proven oil reserves, remains an essential supplier of energy. Despite conflicts with some neighboring countries, Iraq’s oil and gas exports are critical for sustaining the global energy supply. Another significant example of this interconnectedness is the India–Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), a proposed trade route designed to enhance trade and connectivity in the current geopolitical landscape.
The corridor will link India to Europe through the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Greece. On the surface, cooperation among these countries might seem challenging due to their differing political stances – consider Saudi-Israeli relations or Saudi-UAE dynamics. However, when economic interests come into play, pragmatism often prevails. At the same time, Iraq has introduced the Development Road project, which aims to connect the Persian Gulf to Europe through Turkey via an extensive road network, railways, ports, and cities.
This ambitious initiative, however, brings another layer of complexity due to the involvement of Kurdistan. Stability in this project requires both Iraq and Turkey to engage with Kurdish authorities and stakeholders, addressing political sensitivities while ensuring the infrastructure’s security and success. These examples highlight how economic interdependence often drives collaboration, even among nations with deep-seated political differences, underscoring the intricate balance between regional conflicts and shared interests in the Middle East.
In the last century, Middle Eastern politics were dominated by state actors. However, the modern era has seen the rise of non-state actors, reshaping the region’s political dynamics. This shift can be traced back to the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which imposed artificial borders that failed to reflect the sociological and demographic realities of the region. To make it clear, Sykes-Picot pushed the Kurds to live under Arab regimes and alongside Arab communities. This status quo has persisted for over 100 years.
Imagine proposing that Austrians live under German rule – despite sharing the same language, religion, and lifestyle, such a suggestion would seem utterly absurd. Yet, the British and French governments forced the Kurds, who share almost nothing in common with their neighboring communities, to live under entirely different cultural, linguistic, and national frameworks.
This decision created artificial states, fostering instability and division in the region that persists to this day. It has contributed to the fragmentation of states like Iraq and Syria. The collapse of these states as functioning entities created a power vacuum that allowed non-state groups to emerge and thrive.
Over the past few decades, we have witnessed an extraordinary proliferation of non-state actors in the Middle East. These groups, ranging from militias and insurgents to violent extremist organizations, have assumed increasing significance in the region’s economic, social and political life. Their growing influence has added layers of complexity to the already intricate political landscape.
Non-state actors not only destabilize fragile states but also play a significant role in regional geopolitics. They have the ability to transcend borders, align with foreign powers, and even challenge the sovereignty of existing governments. As these actors continue to grow in significance, they highlight the urgent need to address the root causes of state fragility, including governance failures, lack of economic opportunities, and unresolved social divisions, to bring about long-term stability in the region.
JCL – As everyone knows, wars are essentially economic. Is that why Kurdistan is so divided and fragmented? Where does religion fit into this context?
Ugur Injaz – The divisions and fragmentation of Kurdistan are deeply rooted in economic and geopolitical reasons. The Kurdish lands are rich in natural resources, including oil, gas, water, and fertile agricultural land, and hold significant geographic importance as a strategic crossroads. These factors have made Kurdish regions valuable to the states under which they are governed, leading to long-standing tensions and disputes. For example, the Kurdistan Region of Iraq possesses approximately 5% of the world’s total gas reserves. This is a huge amount. This is a resource with the potential to transform not only the region’s economy but also global geopolitics.
However, political disputes with the Iraqi government have hindered the full utilization and export of these resources. Baghdad has often used its control over energy revenues as leverage in political negotiations, complicating the Kurdistan Regional Government’s ability to achieve economic independence.
The international dimension of this issue is clear; Kurdish oil and gas exports could provide Europe with more affordable energy, which would have significant implications for global energy markets. As for religion, it does not appear to be the primary factor in the fragmentation of Kurdistan. The majority of Kurds are Muslim and have contributed to Islamic thought for centuries. If religion were the driving force behind the borders, it would be difficult to explain why other predominantly Muslim states in the Middle East exist without similar disputes.
The Anfal genocide campaign under Saddam Hussein, in which thousands of Kurds were massacred, did not provoke widespread condemnation from the Muslim world. This silence suggests that ethnic nationalism, rather than shared religion, played a decisive role in the treatment of the Kurds. Similarly, the Kurdish fight against ISIS highlights this dynamic. The terrorist radical Islamist organization targeted Kurdish populations despite the shared “religion”. These examples suggest that nationalism, occasionally intertwined with religion, has been a more significant factor in the region’s political divisions.
JCL – The Arab world is very peculiar. There are many experts who speak about the Arab world. In your opinion, how do you classify it?
Ugur Injaz – The Arab world is often perceived as a single, unified entity, particularly from an external, Western perspective. However, this view oversimplifies a region that encompasses 22 countries across the Middle East, North Africa, and East Africa. While these countries share a common language, Arabic, and cultural ties, each has its own distinct history, political system, and societal structure. For instance, Yemen and Lebanon cannot be easily categorized together despite their shared language, as their political and economic realities are vastly different. Historically, attempts to unify the Arab world have often failed due to these differences.
One prominent example is the United Arab Republic (U.A.R.), a union between Egypt and Syria initiated in 1958 under President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s Pan-Arab nationalism. Nasser envisioned a unified Arab world based on shared culture, religion, and language. However, in practice, the union was dominated by Egypt, which alienated Syrian political and economic elites. This disparity led to Syria’s withdrawal in 1961, following a military coup that expelled Egyptian forces.
The failure of the U.A.R. underscores that speaking the same language does not necessarily translate to shared national identity. While Arabic is a unifying factor, nations like Syria and Egypt have distinct historical trajectories, priorities, and governance systems.
The Syrian withdrawal from the U.A.R. exemplified how attempts at unification based on linguistic and cultural commonalities often overlook these deeper distinctions. Today, the Arab world remains diverse and fragmented. Political systems range from monarchies like Saudi Arabia to republics like Tunisia, and cultural practices vary widely across regions.
These differences are not only a reflection of historical and geographical factors but also of the unique ways in which each country has interacted with the global community. This diversity makes it critical to approach the region with an understanding of its nuances rather than broad generalizations.
As a business consultant working closely with Arab states, I have witnessed firsthand the importance of understanding these distinctions when navigating the region. Each country has its own cultural nuances, economic priorities, and business practices. For instance, Dubai’s cosmopolitan environment is vastly different from Saudi Arabia’s more traditional society, despite their geographical proximity.
Similarly, Morocco, often categorized within the Arab world due to its language, has a distinct African identity and approach to business. These differences matter significantly for successful partnerships, investments, and negotiations. I’ve seen foreign businesses struggle when they assume a one-size-fits-all approach, such as attempting to apply their experiences in the UAE to Saudi Arabia or other Arab countries.
The Arab world is thus a mosaic of diverse nations, united by language but separated by politics, history, and culture. My expertise lies in identifying and respecting these unique characteristics, enabling my clients to build meaningful connections and achieve tangible results in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kurdistan, and Iraq.
