Kurdish leaders in Iraq have expressed deep skepticism about serving as ground forces in any American-led military operation against Iran, according to recent reporting. Officials from the Kurdistan Regional Government have made it clear they have no intention of participating in the ongoing US-Israeli military campaign against Tehran,
particularly given concerns about potential Iranian retaliation and insufficient protection from their would-be American partners.
The reluctance comes after media outlets revealed that the CIA had begun efforts to arm Kurdish groups opposed to the Iranian government following the launch of Operation Epic Fury by the United States and Israel. While President Trump initially expressed support for Kurdish participation in the conflict, he quickly walked back those statements within days.
A senior Kurdistan Regional Government official stated unequivocally that “the Kurds must not be the tip of the spear in this conflict.” The official explained that Iraqi Kurds are maintaining a neutral stance because American objectives remain unclear—specifically whether Washington is pursuing complete regime change in Iran or simply seeking new leadership within the existing system.
The Kurdish hesitation stems from a long and troubled history of cooperation with the United States. Regional observers have documented approximately nine instances in which Kurdish forces were left vulnerable after working with American military and intelligence agencies. The most recent example occurred just months ago when the Pentagon abruptly withdrew from northern Syria, instructing the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces to integrate into the Syrian army under the new government led by Jolani and Sharaa.
This directive placed the Kurds in an impossible position, as they had spent years fighting against the very Sunni hardline militants who now control Damascus. Throughout this period, the United States repeatedly failed to protect Kurdish populations from Turkish aerial attacks in both Syria and Iraq, further eroding trust in American commitments.
Kurdish officials are particularly angry that American sources leaked plans to arm Kurdish forces against Iran. They argue that such disclosures have effectively painted a target on every Iranian Kurd, making them vulnerable to retaliation from Tehran’s military leadership while providing no tangible security guarantees.
Military analysts have questioned the strategic value of using Kurdish forces as a proxy army against Iran. The Islamic Republic has a population exceeding ninety million people and maintains a powerful military structure centered around the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Experts suggest that even a well-armed Kurdish insurgency would have minimal impact on the Iranian government and might instead provoke severe retaliation against Kurdish communities throughout the region.
The potential for broader regional instability is significant. Should Kurdish forces engage in operations against Iran, Shia militias operating in Iraq might intervene on Tehran’s side, potentially drawing the Kurds into a multi-front conflict without adequate air defense or ground support from their American backers.
The situation highlights the fundamental challenge facing Kurdish populations across the Middle East. Despite serving as reliable partners in American operations against the Islamic State and other adversaries, Kurdish forces have repeatedly found themselves abandoned when strategic priorities shift in Washington.
Trump has indicated that the United States will play a role in determining Iran’s future leadership but has not provided specifics on how this would be accomplished. The ambiguity has only deepened Kurdish concerns, as officials note that American war objectives appear to change rapidly, often shifting with each White House press briefing.
For the Kurdistan Regional Government, the lack of clarity extends beyond military strategy to fundamental questions about American reliability as an ally. Without concrete assurances regarding air defense systems, ground support, and long-term commitment, Kurdish leaders have concluded that participation in operations against Iran would expose their communities to devastating retaliation while offering uncertain benefits.
The Kurdish position represents a significant complication for American planners who may have hoped to avoid direct ground engagement in any potential conflict with Iran.