Iraqi Kurdistan’s quest for independence hasn’t gotten much international support so far. But on Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made growing Israeli backing for an independent Kurdistan official, turning his government into Erbil’s lone pillar of support.

Israel “supports the legitimate efforts of the Kurdish people to achieve their own state,” the prime minister’s office said in a statement Wednesday. A host of other senior Israeli officials, including cabinet ministers and a top general, have also recently voiced support for Iraqi Kurdistan’s Sept. 25 independence vote.

Though the referendum will not be legally binding, supporters hope that it will bolster Erbil’s hand in any future negotiations with the central government. Announced in June, the vote is the culmination of years of escalating tension between Erbil and Baghdad over territory, oil revenues, and military supremacy.

For Israel, supporting an independent Kurdistan makes plenty of sense: It’s spent years courting non-Arab allies in the region, and Iraqi Kurds have over the last decade carved out a reputation as tough fighters. This week, a top Israeli general called growing Kurdish identity “the only positive development concerning the destiny of the Middle East,” according to Turkey’s Daily Sabah.

But the Kurdish referendum has spooked nearly everybody else — including countries who’ve worked hand-in-glove with the semiautonomous northern Iraqi region, such as Germany, Turkey and the United States.

During a visit with Kurdish Regional Government President Masoud Barzani in August, U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis urged him to emphasize the fight against the Islamic State, and not let other issues distract from that goal.

“Our point right now is to stay focused like a laser beam on the defeat of ISIS,” Mattis told reporters in Erbil.

European Union and Turkish officials have similarly urged the Kurdish government not to hold the referendum. The EU fears the referendum could further destabilize Iraq, while Turkey, which has a sizeable Kurdish population, sees an independent Kurdish state in Iraq as a potential Pandora’s box that could further unsettle its own Kurdish minorities. (Fears of Kurdish irredentism have fueled Turkish intervention across the border in Syria, too).

In contrast, Israel has maintained covert military, intelligence, and business relationships with Kurdish communities in Iraq since the 1960s — primarily as a buffer against its Arab adversaries throughout the region.

“This was based on an old policy that Israel had called the ‘periphery policy,’” Natan Sachs, director of the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution told Foreign Policy. “Since Israel faced hostility from the Arab world, it would seek non-Arab allies in the region. The Kurds were part of this,” he said.

That dynamic has continued on to the present day, Sachs says, though it has grown increasingly complex as Israel’s relationships with various regional powers have improved over the years.

Turkey plays a unique role in this situation.

Though relations between the two countries have improved recently — after the 2008-9 conflict in the Gaza Strip strained the relationship and a 2010 Israeli attack on a Turkish aid flotilla to the enclave furthered the rift — they are still rocky and unpredictable.

Now, Netanyahu finds himself balancing his country’s relationship between the two sides. Israel therefore feels like it has less to lose in potentially angering Ankara.

“Before, Israel wouldn’t have done this [endorse the referendum], or at least they would have been more careful about Turkish opinion,” Sachs said. “Now, while relations have returned to a normal posture, there’s no expectation of warmth.”

Both the Israeli and Iraqi Embassies in Washington and the Kurdistan Regional Government representation in the United States were unavailable for immediate comment.

Photo credit: EITAN ABRAMOVICH/AFP/Getty Images

Like this article? Read an unlimited amount of articles, plus access to our entire 46-year printed archive, the FP App, and the FP Insights Tool when you subscribe to FP Premium for 20% off!

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, Ukraine’s deputy prime minister for European and Euro-Atlantic integration, tossed out plenty of messages during her visit this week to Washington, stressing especially the need for sustained U.S. support for Ukraine’s “fight against Russian aggression.”

But she also had a very clear message for one Mikheil Saakashvili, the now-stateless former president of Georgia and governor of Odessa. Saakashvili was stripped of his Ukrainian citizenship this July while out of the country, and then forced his way back into Ukraine, without documents, on Sept. 10.

Misha, as he is known by millions, had previously sworn that he would get his day in court, insisting that Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko had breached international law by rendering him stateless. Saakashvili lost his Georgian citizenship when he got a Ukrainian passport, and there was indeed immediate speculation from the international community as to whether Poroshenko and the Ukrainian government had acted illegally.

For Ukrainian authorities, though, the apparently guilty party is Saakashvili himself.

“I hope that everybody understands that he has violated [the] Ukrainian border and he has violated Ukrainian law by passing through the border without going through the border control,” Klympush-Tsintsadze told Foreign Policy. “I would like to see law and the rule of law working in terms of sorting out this case.”

Does that mean kicking him out of the country, or taking him to court?

“I think procedures are there to go [to] court in Ukraine. If he is not satisfied by the result, by the outcome, then he can get to European court on human rights and deal with the issue there.”

Saakashvili’s stateless anabasis comes amidst a war of words between the controversial Georgian and Ukraine’s leaders.

“It is from his home, Ukraine, that Mikheil Saakashvili will continue the fight to regain his citizenship, which was cancelled in July by President Poroshenko, violating both Ukrainian and International law, making him a de facto ‘stateless’ person,” read the statement released by Saakashvili’s team after he returned to Ukraine.

Saakashvili himself took aim at Kiev, provocatively comparing its behavior in his case to the way Russia might handle human rights.

“The fact that so many different opposition leaders came in support yesterday shows that what happened to me goes further than just me, it is about Maidan’s heritage, it is about what direction Ukraine is taking, whether it is the Russian violations of human rights…or the pro- European respectful of the rule of law,” he said in the statement.

Klympush-Tsintsadze said she was “saddened by the fact that former President Saakashvili is not separating his personal agenda from the interest of my country, which I care for.” She also noted that Saakashvili’s lawyers did not appeal to Ukrainian courts to contest his loss of citizenship while he was out of the country.

“He did not choose to go by law. He’s more focusing on the public affairs,” Klympush-Tsintsadze said. “Which he’s very good at.”

Photo credit: YURI DYACHYSHYN/AFP/Getty Images

Like this article? Read an unlimited amount of articles, plus access to our entire 46-year printed archive, the FP App, and the FP Insights Tool when you subscribe to FP Premium for 20% off!