Inside the plan to support Iranian Kurds amid US-Israel operations

Amid the ongoing US-Israel military campaign against Iran, reports indicate that the Trump administration and the CIA are considering providing arms to Iranian Kurdish opposition groups.

The move is reportedly aimed at stretching Iranian military resources, facilitating internal unrest, or securing territory in northern Iran that could act as a buffer for Israel, says Al Jazeera.

Proposed strategy and leadership talks

The proposed plan would involve arming Kurdish groups to challenge Tehran's control in northern regions. President Trump has reportedly held talks with several Kurdish leaders, including Mustafa Hijri of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (KDPI), Masoud Barzani of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), and Bafel Talabani of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK). Talabani confirmed his call with Trump, describing it as a discussion on building a "strong partnership."

The CIA is said to be negotiating with multiple Kurdish factions to aid in this strategy. While the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK) is identified as an Iranian Kurdish opposition group near the border, sources do not explicitly confirm its involvement in these negotiations.

Historical context

The CIA has a long history of supporting rebel groups to destabilize governments critical of US foreign policy. Historical interventions include the 1953 coup in Iran, CIA-backed insurgencies in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, and Vietnam, and support for rebels in Libya in 2011. Outcomes have ranged from regime change to prolonged civil conflict, and in some cases, US forces abandoned local allies after uprisings began.

In Iraq, US support for Kurdish groups during the 1991 uprising contributed to the eventual establishment of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in 2005. More recently, US partnerships with Kurdish forces in Iraq and Syria were key in defeating ISIL (ISIS), although Washington later shifted support to new governments, leaving some Kurdish groups vulnerable.

Risks and expert concerns

Analysts warn that arming Kurdish factions could further destabilize Iran rather than create a unified opposition. Neil Quilliam of Chatham House said the plan is "poorly thought out" and could lead to internal conflict among opposition groups.

Experts note several potential risks:

Internal conflict and fragmentation: Providing arms could pitch opposition groups against one another, rather than unifying them against Tehran.

Strategic afterthought: Analysts suggest the plan appears to be an "afterthought" in broader military strategy, without a clear long-term endgame.

Risk of abandonment: Historical precedent shows the US may withdraw support after an uprising, potentially leaving Kurdish forces to face violent retaliation.

Regional diplomatic strain: Arming Kurdish groups could cause friction with neighbors, including Turkiye, Syria, and Iraq. Turkiye considers many Kurdish militant groups as "terrorist" organizations and may view a well-armed Kurdish force on its border as a major security threat.

Military escalation: The tactic is intended to stretch Iranian military forces, particularly the Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which has already targeted Kurdish positions in response to the wider war.

Implications

While the initiative aims to weaken Tehran, experts caution that it could result in prolonged domestic conflict without producing lasting regional stability. Analysts suggest Washington's alliance with Iranian Kurds is not considered "strategic," and the US may feel comfortable stepping back, leaving the region in a state of uncertainty.

The discussions highlight a continuation of US patterns in foreign interventions, where short-term tactical objectives can carry long-term political, military, and humanitarian consequences.