For an
ethnic entity under assault by a central power, there are two ways to go: to
work for a central democratic regime that respects the existence and rights of
that ethnicity or to attempt to secede if there is no hope of democratizing the
center.
It would be
wrong, however, to attribute the tendency to seek a separate state to only the
nationalist drive of ethnic groups. I think the main responsibility lies with
the center to demonstrate the possibility of coexistence and power sharing with
ethnic minorities.
Without
this, it is hard to put all the blame on the nationalist tendencies of ethnic
groups. So long as their rights are denied and their demands for power sharing
are ignored, no one can blame them for developing secessionist ambitions. While
a separate state would not necessarily guarantee the enjoyment of these rights
at the level of the individual, under such an independent political entity no
one would be able to stop them from seeking such rights.
This has
been the case of the Kurds of Iraq for decades.
“In 1970, a
commission headed by Saddam Hussein visited Mullah Mustafa Barzani’s
headquarter[s] in Saman, Arbil. There had been an ongoing Kurdish armed
struggle for autonomy since 1961, and the Baghdad government was offering a new
agreement in order to settle the Kurdish issue. Mullah Mustafa said that he
would not lay down arms unless Baghdad recognizes the autonomy of Kurds. …
Saddam Hussein accepted the conditions of Mullah Mustafa and the ceasefire
began. During this meeting, [Massoud] Barzani, the son of Mullah Mustafa, asked
Saddam Hussein how Baghdad would solve the democracy problem in all of Iraq.
Saddam Hussein said that ‘the system [with which] we govern the rest of Iraq is
none of your business. You will have autonomy in Kurdistan. Why do you care
about this?’”
The
relevance of Massoud Barzani’s question has come to be understood well over the
years, according to Dr. Burak Bilgehan Özpek of the Turkish Union of Chambers
and Commodity Exchanges (TOBB) Economy and Technology University, who wrote the
provocative and eye-opening article on the future of Iraqi Kurdistan from which
the above has been excerpted and that was published in the summer issue of
Insight Turkey (www.insightturkey.com).
In his
article, titled “Democracy or Partition: Future Scenarios for the Kurds of
Iraq,” Özpek warns all interested parties that the maintenance of Iraqi unity
requires a functioning democracy in Baghdad and respect for power sharing
between the center and the federal entity. “The centralization policy of [Iraqi
Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki threatens the unity of Iraq rather than
helping with consolidating the country,” according to Özpek.
Let’s read
further.
“Despite the
Kurds’ establishment of their regional government and attainment of increased
autonomy, they have not initiated an assertive policy agenda of seeking
secession from Iraq. This means that their gains have not encouraged them to go
for independence. However, Kurdish politicians have started to hint that they
will consider independence if the centralization of power under Nouri al-Maliki
continues.”
And it
continues, according to Özpek.
“Maliki,
through his efforts to centralize power by controlling the strategic
ministries, the military, the electoral commission and the economy, and by
excluding Sunni and Kurdish figures from the political and bureaucratic system,
is undermining the de facto power-sharing tradition implemented in Iraq after
the US invasion.”
Massoud
Barzani, president of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), defines Maliki
as a dictator and, as quoted by Özpek, has said: “Unfortunately, after many
years, the situation is being changed and turned into the previous version. We
don’t accept the return of dictatorship. … The problem here is not only the
Kurds, it is with all Iraq. If Iraq was democratic, federal and plural then it
will be one and united. We don’t threaten the unity of Iraq; it is dictatorship
that threatens the unity of Iraq.”
Massoud
Barzani also said that “a dictator in Baghdad cannot rule Kurdistan and if
Baghdad attempts to do so the Kurds would go their separate way. The process
has already begun and it is only [a] matter of time and regional development to
decide when and how it happens.”
While the
Maliki government aims to subordinate the KRG by cutting their budget and
imposing an Arab identity on the military, the KRG regards such attempts as
those of a dictator to consolidate his power and centralize the political
system. Thus, Maliki’s strategy reminds Kurds of their historical fears
inherited from Baathist Iraq, which was a perfect model of a strong and central
state.
If he were
to meet Maliki, Massoud Barzani might ask the same question he asked Saddam
Hussein 42 years ago and remind Maliki what happened to Iraq after Saddam’s
arrogant response.
Unless a
full-fledged democracy is established, it will be impossible to put an end to
the secessionist tendencies of strong ethnic minorities that even hold regional
autonomy. This is a lesson that Turkey should also seriously consider.
