Recently, Kurdish students at Loughborough University in the UK were denied the right to a Kurdish booth in the University's International Day event. See the following reports by KurdishMedia.com about the event and the response written on behalf of the Kurdish American Youth below:

Kurdistan excluded British university’s ’International Day’ - http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=6694
Loughborough University recognizes Taiwan but not Kurdistan - http://www.kurdishmedia.com/news.asp?id=6714

Dear Mr. Roberts et al:

I write you today as a long time advocate of human rights for all of the world's citizens who also happens to be one of the 35 million proud members of the Kurdish nation. I also write on behalf of the Kurdish American Youth, a sub-organization of the Kurdish National Congress of North America, based in California.

The policy of the University of Loughborough in denying a booth to the Kurdish nation in its International Fair is illogical, ethnocentric, and perhaps even illegal. It reflects the bias that pervades many of the worlds most oppressive governments, and is inappropriate policy for a day that should signify unity, not division, between cultures. For the Kurds to have been officially denied a booth for the reasons brought forth by the Loughborough establishment-- the lack of an official Kurdish passport-- was a grievous mistake by the University. It was also a sad event for advocates of the rule of law and human rights in the UK and beyond.

The University is one of the only remaining venues where individuals can discuss important issues freely without the ugly banes of racism, misunderstanding, and bigotry circumventing their communication. It is out of line with the very spirit of the University for such a dubious distinction between legitimate and non-legitimate nations to be made. If we assert that international formality rendered legitimacy to a nation, than we would be legitimizing the abominations of Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa during their very recent existences in official capacity. At the same time, we would be asserting that the Scottish, Native American, and countless other stateless nations are unworthy of expressing their distinct cultural expression in for such as the one at Loughborough University. If this is what the University seeks to achieve by denying the Kurdish nation a booth at the International Fair, the policy is both highly offensive to all rational individuals, whether they be Turkish, Arab, British, or Kurdish, and furthermore illegal by the standard of international human rights law .

The case for the legitimacy of the Kurdish nation is not one that can or should be discussed here. It is well-known to most UK citizens that one of their largest minorities, the Kurds, maintains a distinct culture and identity. The struggle for recognition on behalf of the world's largest nation without a state will not be contained by Loughborough's current policy. What the policy will serve to do is set an illogical and illegal precedent for racism at the University level. As an advocate of human rights, I am troubled by the possibility that this policy will be deemed acceptable and adoptable by other UK Universities. The important fact I wish to stress to the Loughborough establishment is that such a policy cannot be motivated by anything short of ignorance. It is not remotely reasonable nor acceptable; it only emboldens those who wish to quell fully justified expression of identity by force and manipulation. This policy needs to be reversed immediately and an apology issued on behalf of the University to the Kurdish students of Loughborough.

It leaves no choice to the advocates of Human Rights such as myself to consider any further action necessary, including legal and political, to remedy this abomination. Such seeds of misunderstanding must not be allowed to manifest themselves into larger more pronounced expressions of hate. The esteemed and highly respected colleagues at Loughborough should see to it that such attention is not brought to a matter that will undeniably tarnish the reputation of Loughborough. We therefore demand an apology and a reversal of the University's policy. In its absence, a campaign will be commenced by our organization highlighting the racism of the University's policy on international media until such an apology is given.

Sincerely and with Urgency,

Ali Ezzatyar
Doctoral Candidate in Law
Berkeley School of Law, at the University of California