Am I the only person remarking on this– but aren’t the Kurds doing pretty well in the current government-forming process?
They have two of the top five jobs. In addition, they have the Foreign Affairs portfolio, and the Public Works portfolio (a.k.a. the huge patronage possibilities portfolio). I am really, really glad that after decades of getting screwed by Saddam and his neighbors, these Kurds look as though they may be well positioned to look out for their own interests in the months ahead.
It ain’t ever easy being a minority. But over the past 13 years, the Kurds have been able to set their society on its feet–with the help of the Western air umbrella–and in particular, they’ve been able to create a fairly stable-looking system of political representation. (After a small but bloody intra-Kurdish civil war along the way there in the mid-1990s.)
They’re lucky. The crystallization of differing political interests into well-formed political parties is far less well advanced in the Sunni Arab or especially the Shi’a Arab community. That means that if–as I surely hope–the country moves into a situation of increasing and mainly democratic self-rule, the country’s non-Kurds may continue to be at a relative disadvantage compared with their Kurdish compatriots.
It would be a terrible pity if one form of minority rule in Iraq were to be replaced with another. That’s not a totally present possibility right now. But if there were bad internecine fighting within the Shi-a community in the months ahead, they could end up–once again–missing out on a possibility to exercise the amount of political power that should be due to them, given their numbers.
It sure ain’t easy–in Iraq or elsewhere–for the rights of a numerical majority to be balanced with those of a numerical minority (or, minorities). There’s no magic formula to get this done… Everyone needs to work out their own way forward. But I guess that’s the hard task ahead–for all Iraqis.
The questions surrounding Kurdish autonomy are among the most difficult in the world.
On one hand, the Kurds, like anyone else, should have the freedom to manage their own affairs. Why should Iraq’s artificial, colonial borders be sacrosanct, dooming them to a minority status which if Iraq were a true democracy would essentially deprive them of their democratic rights?
On the other hand, allowing the Kurds to exercise true freedom could cause serious trouble in Turkey and Syria and result in a lot of death and destruction.
Any choice will have terrible repurcussions. But I guess if I had to choose, I’d stand, or fall, on principle. If the people of that region want to vote overwhelmingly for a separate state, they should get it.
It has been obvious for a long time that the Kurds have been doing very well out of the invasion; I am surprised you have not noticed it. They have what they want – effective independence – and a big say in the Baghdad government. As far as I can see, there is no longer very much interest among the Kurds for what happens in Baghdad – a majority would certainly vote for independence – and few Arabs from Baghdad go to Kurdistan. It is evident that here are the main seeds of future conflict in Iraq, indeed the only seeds when the Americans leave (for the Sunni and Shi’a will settle their differences easily). It is going to be quite difficult to convince the Kurdish public to go back, and accept a federal system where they may have a lesser position than they do now. Evidently there are the well-known objections of Iran and Turkey to Kurdish independence, but the crunch point will certainly be Kirkuk: neither the Kurds nor the Arabs are ready to let the other have the oil-fields.
I believe all the Iraqis are capable of self-governing, but while we’re talking about the Kurds, don’t forget that they’re getting a shitload of US money. That tends to take the sting out of governing. Remember the CPA memo:
“We have bestowed approximately $600 million upon the Kurdish leadership, in addition to the salaries we pay, in addition to the USAID projects, in addition to the taxes we have allowed them to collect illegally.”
http://aan.org/gyrobase/Aan/viewArticle?oid=oid%3A134346
Not to mention the money from running guns and stolen cars.
The Kurds have been getting a s***load of money since 1991 – hardly adequate compensation for the many US and European seductions followed by betrayals over the decades, particularly since all that money and assistance has obviously been intended to seduce them – yet again – into supporting the American agenda in Iraq. It is also hardly adequate compensation either for America’s unstinting support of Saddam while he was committing his worst atrocities against Kurds (the Anfal, Halabja, etc.) – support that even extended to Rumsfeld making a trip to Baghdad to reassure Saddam that when the Americans spoke against chemical weapons they didn’t mean him. But then the Kurds have little choice but to take whatever help they can get whenever and from whomever they can get it, even though they know in the end they will be betrayed once again.
And let’s not delude ourselves about the political situation in Kurdistan. Talibani and Barzani are dictators who are every bit as ruthless, bloody and corrupt as any others, though Barzani probably has a slight edge on Talibani in that regard. I knew Mulla Mustafa, and Mas`oud is no Mulla Mustafa!
Alastair, I have been saying all along that I have never worried about civil war between Sunni and Shi`a in Iraq – there are a lot of mixed Sunni-Shi`a areas, tribes and families, after all. If there will be a major internal conflict it will be among Kurds, Arabs and don’t forget the Turkomen. In fact, I have heard from a number of Iraqi sources that there has been a low-level three-way civil war going on in Kirkuk for over a year.
And finally, maybe the majority of Kurds would vote to separate from the rest of Iraq, but I am not so sure. Some of the most deeply and fiercely Iraqi people are Kurds. Most of the Kurds I know do not want Iraq divided, and are passionate on this point. Of course, this is most likely not a representative sample, but there are a great many Kurds who feel this way.
I don’t think the Kurds are doing well because of their moral position, or immoral position. It doesn’t have anything to do with compensation. I don’t even care about the money. But let’s understand that if we threw the same money at the rest of Iraq, it would be more peaceful and successful too. Not necessarily well-governed or pro-US, but peaceful.
Iraq has never needed American money. Iraq has more than enough resources, both natural and human. During 70’s and ’80’s Iraq managed, all by itself and despite being under despotic rule, to reach the status of an emerging first world country. It was only after Iraq got involved in a lengthy and very, very costly war with Iran – egged on, aided and abetted from beginning until the end by a succession of American governments – that it began to decline.
Dear Basically,
The Kurds have received huge amounts of money and other assistance from the United States over the past decade plus for exactly the same reasons Saddam did and the mujaheddin in Afghanistan did. It is because they have been and still are seen as useful – even necessary – to the achievement of U.S. goals in Iraq. The moment they are no longer useful they will be thrown to the wolves, or even brutally attacked just as Saddam was, just as the Afghan muhaheddin were, and just as the Kurds themselves have been time after time in the past.
As Kissinger said in the ’70’s after the U.S. abandoned its no-longer-useful former proteges, the Iraqi Kurds, to their tragic fate, foreign policy is not charity work.
P.S. My dearest friend known as Tiger Agha, who is a Kurd, who is very nice, very lovely, and who hates the Iraqi puppets, has just pointed out to me that much if not most of the money that has been so generously bestowed upon the Kurds has managed to find its way into the pockets of Mas`oud Barzani and Jalal Talibani.
Helena, I had much the same thought as you when reading the cabinet list, but today saw this on Juan Cole :
The distribution of posts in the caretaker government disappointed the religious Shiites and the Kurds, both of whom felt stiffed. The Kurds only got one vice presidency and the foreign ministry, along with a couple of other lower-profile positions (Nasrin Barwari stayed on as Minister of Public Works, which is actually potentially an important position). They wanted the presidency or vice presidency, and consider their share of government posts disproportionately small, marking them as second class citizens.
And Shirin, I think you’re absolutely right to be nervous about Kirkuk.
Helena Cobban on the Kurds in Iraq
Am I the only person remarking on this– but aren’t the Kurds doing pretty well in the current government-forming process? They have two of the top five jobs. In addition, they have the Foreign Affairs portfolio, and the Public Works…
texas holdem
texas holdem texas holdem holdem holdem
texas holdem
texas holdem texas hold’em online poker texas hold’em