This dissertation is an attempt to pose a challenge to the reified image of Kurdishness and Kurdayeti (awakening Kurdish nationalism), from an ethnographical perspective. The focus group is the comparatively understudied Kurmanji-speaking Kurds of Urmia county in Iran, both in rural and urban contexts. The questions is why do the Kurds of this study, in particular, and Kurds all over the Middle East, in general, have a high potential for mobilization during politically charged moments? / 博士(グローバル社会研究) / Doctor of Philosophy in Global Society Studies / 同志社大学 / Doshisha University

“Freedom isn't free”; an English expression that Kurds in Iran used it during Iranian revolution (1979) in a new context: a nation who wants freedom and democracy, must pay the price.This study describes what the Kurds as minority have done for freedom and democratization during the Iranian revolution; it analyses later what have the Iranian Kurds get paid. Kurdish question in Iran after the last revolution is the central question here. The purpose is to answer why the revolution as a political opportunity didn’t offer or provide the Kurds demands. The study explains why political situation in Iranian Kurdistan changed for the “worse” after revolution while they participated in the uprising with their hands and hoped for the “best”.A qualitative case study that proceeds Will Kymlicka's theory about minority rights and Robert Dahl's theory of democracy to examine the degree of both the Kurds' capacity to democratize their territory and to describe in-depth understanding of the ability of revolution and the new government to deal with Kurdish question democratically. / <p>2023-01-20</p>

This thesis seeks to examine the Kurdish novel, The Flower of Shoran (1998) by Iranian Kurdish author, ‘Atā Nahāyi in the context of Kurdish identity search and nationalism and struggle to build a nation state. Considering that the setting of the novel is between the two World Wars which is arguably the most critical phase of Kurdish nationalism, the present study tries to give a brief overview of the historical events that shaped and oriented Kurdish nationalism. Subsequently, Nahāyi’s perspective on the question of Kurdish identity and nationalism in Iran which are the underlying themes of the novel is discussed. Also a detailed summary has been provided along with the translation of the first two chapters of the novel to illustrate how a fairly successful Kurdish novel such as The Flower of Shoran has dealt with the Kurdish question of identity and nationalism in the context of Kurds' struggle for autonomy and recognition as a distinct nation. / text

This study explores US foreign policy toward national movements (NMs), focusing on Kurdish groups across all parts of Kurdistan: Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. It investigates the central question of why the US views certain Kurdish NMs as strategic allies while labeling others as terrorists. The PKK and PYD—sister organizations sharing the same ideology and leader—serve as a prime example of this inconsistency: the PKK is designated a terrorist organization, while the PYD has emerged as a key US partner. Similarly, Iraq's Kurdish ruling parties were initially placed on the third-tier terrorist list, only to later become Washington's most reliable allies in Iraq. The study reveals that this discrepancy is mainly due to the impact of joint combat operations. Driven by US strategic interests, these operations strengthen ties with NMs partners. Positive joint operations, free of insider attacks, are instrumental in building rational trust that evolves into affective trust over time. This trust elevates them to in-group status, fostering a shared identity. The affective bonds forged during these combat experiences shape policy makers' perceptions, further reinforcing these relationships. Furthermore, diplomatic engagements in the post-combat phase complement this process, deepening trust and enabling the US and NMs to address challenges collaboratively while advancing broader strategic objectives. / Doctor of Philosophy / This study examines US foreign policy towards national movements (NMs), focusing on Kurdish groups in Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. It investigates why the US sees some Kurdish groups as strategic allies while labeling others as terrorists. A key example is the PKK and PYD—two related organizations with the same ideology, symbols and ideological leader. The PKK is considered a terrorist group, while the PYD has become an important US partner. Similarly, Iraq's Kurdish ruling parties were once on a third-tier terrorist list but later became the United States' most reliable allies in Iraq. The study finds that this inconsistency is largely due to the impact of joint combat operations. These operations, driven by US strategic interests, help strengthen ties with NM partners. Positive joint operations, where there are no insider attacks, build trust. Over time, this trust evolves into stronger, emotional bonds, turning these groups into in-group partners with a shared identity. These bonds influence policymakers' views and deepen the relationship. Additionally, diplomatic engagement after these combat operations further strengthens trust, allowing the US and NMs to work together on challenges while advancing broader strategic goals.