So the reasons to stop a non-binding referendum are:
* Corruption in the Kurdish government
* Infighting in the Kurdish government
* Kurdish president in office long after his term ended
* Kurdish authorities discriminate against minorities
* Neighboring states are hostile to the idea
* Tensions would be heightened. Neighbors say such a state would "contribute to instability."
* Such a decision needs much more preparation
* An independent Kurdistan may not govern fairly or well.
* First, Kurds need to ensure democratic institutions are functioning, the economy is strong and they have support from their stronger neighbors.
Every single one of these reasons to be against an independent Kurdish state applies, to a far greater degree, to a Palestinian state.
But the New York Times for years has
fully supported an independent Palestinian state, with its corrupt leaders, its political infighting, its terrible record at building democratic institutions, its disregard for human rights. Oh, and also its explicit support for terrorists and terrorism.
The New York Times cheered every step of the way for Palestinian independence, even through the second intifada and the Hamas/Fatah split. It never told Palestinians that they weren't ready, or to wait some more until things get more peaceful, or anything like that. It never gave Israel veto power over a Palestinian state the way it gives Iraq and Turkey that power over Kurdistan.
And by any sane measure, the Kurds deserve a state more than Palestinians do.
Hypocirsy doesn't even begin to describe this editorial.
(full article online)
NYT says Kurds aren't ready for independence - but Palestinians are ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News