Dr. Jiyar Aghapouri is Director of the Center for Peace and Human Security (CPHS) at the American University of Kurdistan. He is also a Visiting Fellow at the University of Oxford’s Global Security Program and previously served as a Research Consultant and Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) from 2021 to 2024. Additionally, Dr. Aghapouri has worked as a consultant on various UNICEF-led projects in the Middle East.
Dr. Aghapouri earned his PhD in Politics and International Relations from the University of Auckland and completed a postdoctoral fellowship on Migration and Displacement at LSE’s Gender, Justice, and Security Hub. His areas of expertise include migration and displacement, diaspora, human security, inclusion politics, ethnic/national identities, gender, social cohesion, media activism, media ethnography, Middle East politics, and Kurdistan.
This interview has been authorised for publication by Dr. Jiyar Aghapouri.
We thank you, Dr. Jiyar Aghapouri for accepting our interview with the Saint Pierre International Security Center.
SPCIS: How do migration and displacement in the Middle East, particularly in Kurdistan, impact ethnic and national identities?
Migration and displacement in the Middle East, particularly in the context of Kurdistan, is related to ethnic and national identities. Displacement often intensifies the collective sense of identity among Kurds, a stateless nation or nation without a state of their own spread across Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria. Forced migration uproots communities, challenging traditional frameworks of identity and compelling individuals to renegotiate their cultural and national affiliations. For the Kurdish diaspora, digital platforms such as social media have become crucial tools for fostering a transnational sense of Kurdish solidarity. My research has analyzed how the Kurdish diaspora leverages social media to construct what I term a “grassroots national identity,” allowing individuals to collectively reimagine Kurdishness in decentralized, inclusive ways while also navigating internal divisions related to dialects, tribal affiliations, and religion. For example, my article Towards Pluralistic and Grassroots National Identity explores how diasporic Kurds use platforms like Facebook and Instagram to amplify cultural symbols, advocate for Kurdish political causes, and transcend geographical barriers.
The second aspect of my research on migration and displacement is centered on the migration and displacement withing and to the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) which spurred by events such as the rise of ISIS—has further complicated ethnic dynamics. The KRI became a sanctuary for diverse ethnic and religious groups, resulting in cohabitation that fosters solidarity but also heightens intergroup tensions over resources and political representation. In one of my co-authored papers published in the Journal of Migration and Human Security we discuss how humanitarian responses often fail to address the nuances of identity negotiations among displaced communities, particularly the intersectional challenges faced by women. Thus, displacement simultaneously creates opportunities for collective identity-building while exposing underlying fault lines in the Middle East’s multi-ethnic fabric.
SPCIS: What are the key challenges faced by displaced populations in maintaining social cohesion in host countries?
Displacd populations encounter significant challenges in maintaining social cohesion in host countries, primarily driven by economic marginalization, cultural differences, and strained access to resources. Economic insecurity often becomes a major barrier, as displaced people are frequently relegated to low-paying, informal jobs or dependent on humanitarian aid, limiting their financial independence. Limited access to formal employment, as highlighted in much of the displacement literature, can exacerbate tensions between displaced populations and host communities, particularly when there is competition for housing, healthcare, and education. However, my research in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) reveals a unique dynamic in which the host society, particularly Kurdish communities, has extended solidarity and support to displaced individuals, especially Syrian Kurds, due to shared ethno-national bonds. This favorable reception highlights the potential of ethno-cultural connections in mitigating tension, although disparities in resource allocation can still pose challenges.
Cultural integration presents another layer of complexity, as displaced populations often navigate the dual challenge of adapting to host societies while preserving their cultural identities. Refugee camps and informal settlements tend to isolate displaced individuals, creating spaces where cultural practices are maintained but integration into the broader host society is hindered. Social media, which I have explored extensively in my research, plays a double-edged role—it can serve as a platform for preserving cultural identity and fostering connections with the homeland but can also deepen feelings of exclusion when narratives of the host and home countries diverge. For instance, displaced populations often use digital platforms to share their struggles and cultural expressions, but these can clash with local perceptions in the host society, reinforcing stereotypes and divisions.
To create and expand social cohesion, host countries must adopt policies that extend beyond immediate humanitarian relief. These policies should promote inclusive education, access to formal employment, and spaces for intergroup dialogue to bridge cultural divides. Our findings also suggest that empowering displaced populations to contribute economically and socially can strengthen relationships between communities and hosts, enhancing social cohesion and integration. The KRI provides valuable lessons in demonstrating how shared cultural ties can facilitate smoother integration processes, offering a potential model for other host countries.
SPCIS: How does gender discrimination intersect with issues of displacement and migration, especially in conflict regions?
Gender discrimination significantly compounds the challenges of displacement and migration, particularly in conflict regions like the Middle East. Women and girls are disproportionately affected by violence and exploitation during displacement. In our works, we have studied how gender intersects with migration through the experiences of return migrants, IDPs and migrant domestic/household workers through a comprehensive study with London School of Economics and Political Science. Some of these groups face unique vulnerabilities, including sexual violence, forced marriages, and exclusion from decision-making processes in camps and host societies. For example, in the Kurdistan region, displaced Yazidi women who survived captivity under ISIS not only face trauma but also societal stigma, making their reintegration particularly challenging.
Moreover, gender inequality is often perpetuated by the very structures meant to support displaced populations. For instance, in our publication at the journal of Migration and human Security, we discussed that humanitarian aid programs sometimes fail to account for women’s specific needs, such as access to reproductive healthcare or opportunities for economic empowerment. My research has also shown how displaced women, despite these challenges, often act as agents of change within their communities. They organize grassroots initiatives, advocate for their rights, and challenge patriarchal norms, highlighting the need for gender-sensitive approaches in both policy and humanitarian aid. Addressing the intersection of gender and displacement requires not only immediate protection measures but also long-term strategies to empower women and dismantle systemic gender inequalities.
SPCIS: How do you see the role of Kurdistan in the broader political dynamics of the Middle East?
When we refer to Kurdistan in a geopolitical context, it is important to specify which part of Kurdistan we are discussing. Kurdistan is a broad geographical region divided primarily among four countries—Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria—each of which has historically demonstrated hostility toward basic Kurdish human rights and the Kurdish aspirations for autonomy or independence. This partition has led to unique political and cultural conditions in each part, making it impossible to discuss the entirety of Kurdistan within the constraints of this question. For instance, the suppression of Kurdish language, culture, and political activities has been a common thread across these states, illustrating the systemic challenges Kurds face in asserting their identity and rights.
At present, the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) holds a semi-official status, recognized both by the international community and the Iraqi constitution as a federal entity. Kurds in Syria are still striving for recognition through the establishment of an autonomous region in Rojava, though this process has been severely hindered by Turkey’s military interventions and ongoing hostilities. In Iran and Turkey, Kurdish political movements are largely driven by civil activism, with the Woman-Life-Freedom movement from Rojhelat (East Kurdistan in Iran) exemplifying a powerful grassroots response to systemic repression. This movement not only spread across Iran but also resonated strongly in Middle Eastern diaspora contexts, emphasizing the transnational dimensions of Kurdish struggles.
Focusing on the KRI, this region plays a critical yet complex role in the Middle East’s political dynamics. It has emerged as a relatively stable and autonomous entity, forging strategic alliances with Western powers and navigating delicate relationships with neighboring states—many of which are adversarial to one another. Its pivotal role in the fight against ISIS, where Kurdish Peshmerga forces were recognized as key allies, underscores its importance in regional security. However, this autonomy has also brought challenges, particularly in managing tensions with Baghdad over issues such as oil revenue and power sharing, constitutional loopholes, and territorial disputes, as well as interference from neighboring countries like Turkey and Iran, which view Kurdish aspirations with suspicion due to fears of similar movements within their own borders.
Economically and culturally, Kurdistan serves as a bridge between diverse communities in the Middle East. Its abundant natural and human resources being a peaceful area for diverse ethnic and religious minorities position it as a significant player in regional economy and pollical affairs. Culturally, the region’s history of resistance and resilience has made it a symbol of Kurdish identity and pride across borders. However, internal divisions between political parties pose significant obstacles to achieving a unified Kurdish agenda. A significant point to be added is the role of Kurdish diaspora and transnational networks which have become influential in amplifying Kurdish issues on the global stage, shaping international perceptions and garnering support for Kurdish causes.
Looking ahead, the KRI role in the Middle East will hinge on its capacity to address internal divisions, foster unity, build a more inclusive and democratic political framework, and navigate its relationships with regional neighbors and global powers. By leveraging its strategic location, abundant natural resources, and resilient Kurdish identity, the KRI has the potential to contribute to regional stability and development. However, the question of whether Kurdistan can transition into an independent nation extends far beyond internal issues and depends on broader shifts in the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. The Kurdish aspirations for independence are intricately tied to the prevailing geopolitical order in the region. While internal political unity and institutional reforms are necessary to demonstrate governance capabilities, these alone cannot achieve statehood in the absence of favorable geopolitical circumstances. For example, the 2017 independence referendum demonstrated the limitations of unilateral action when the KRI faced backlash not only from Iraq but also from powerful neighboring states like Turkey and Iran, which have long opposed Kurdish self-determination due to fears of “separatist” movements within their own borders. The international community, while sympathetic to Kurdish aspirations, remains cautious about disrupting the delicate balance of power in the Middle East, prioritizing regional stability over the recognition of a new state.
As I mentioned, the realization of Kurdish independence would require significant shifts in regional power dynamics. These changes might emerge from major geopolitical upheavals, such as regime changes in neighboring states, the redrawing of current colonial Sykes-Picot designed borders following large-scale conflicts, or external intervention by global powers reshaping the region’s political landscape. For example, a weakened central government in Iraq or sustained instability in Turkey and Iran could create opportunities for the Kurds to assert its independence. However, it is still conditional to the alignment of global powers such as the United States, France, the UK, and Russia in support of Kurdish statehood which could provide the necessary international backing for such a transition. However, such scenarios remain highly uncertain and fraught with challenges.
Moreover, when it comes to KRI itself, its pursuit of independence must also be balanced with its current role as a stabilizing force in the region. Its collaboration with Baghdad on security matters, such as the fight against ISIS, and its economic partnerships with Turkey on oil exports have underscored the region’s pragmatic approach to maintaining stability while advancing its interests. A push for independence without the backing of key regional and international players could jeopardize these gains and leave the KRI isolated, as we saw some manifestations of isolation following the referendum in 2017. Therefore, while Kurdish independence remains a long-standing aspiration, it is contingent on external factors and regional shifts that are beyond the KRI's direct control.
So one may ask what KRI can do when it is too restricted for pursuing statehood both domestically and globally at this stage! I would say the KRI can strengthen its position by addressing internal governance challenges, fostering unity among political factions, and promoting economic diversification beyond oil dependency. By building stronger institutions and ensuring the equitable distribution of resources among its population, the KRI can demonstrate its viability as a state-like entity, furthering its cause in the eyes of the international community. Simultaneously, strategic diplomacy and engagement with regional and global actors will remain crucial in navigating the complex web of Middle Eastern geopolitics.
Comments