.Sunnis End Boycott in Iraq, Time for a Kurdish Boycott?
This week, Sunni Arabs ended a nine-month long boycott of the Iraqi government. The Sunnis agreed to rejoin the Iraqi government after what they suggested had been sufficient moves by the government of al-Maliki to persuade the ending of their boycott. Sunni leaders cited the recent amnesty law passed by al-Maliki's government as well as the crackdown on Shiite militias. These were somewhat red lines for the Sunni Arabs that they claimed had not sufficiently been addressed until just recently. Al-Maliki's government's decision regarding these Sunni concerns were enough for the Sunni bloc to regain confidence in the Iraqi political progress, according to Adnan al-Duleimi, the head of Tawafiq, the largest Sunni bloc in the government.
So what about Kurdish red lines? The Kurdish public has very often been critical of their own leadership regarding their demands. Many of these critics, which include average citizens to journalists, to even former high-ranking political leaders like Nawshirwan Mustafa, say that the leadership has been far too soft with their demands. Of course, we cannot forget to mention what seems to be the recent approval of the Kurdish oil contracts by the Iraqi government. However, the details of these negotiations are still unclear as to what they will mean in the future.
But what about the real supposed Kurdish red line? The one that has been of utmost concern for Kurds since long before the fall of Baghdad? That red line is Kirkuk. At one point, Kurdish leaders were strict on their policies regarding Kirkuk. During the the drafting of the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL), Kurdish leaders said that if the normalization of Kirkuk were not carried out by the Iraqi government in Baghdad and a referendum were not held on the city's status, the Kurdish bloc would withdraw from the Iraqi government and even attempt to take Kirkuk by force.
This referendum according to the Iraqi Constitution's Article 140 was supposed to be held no later than the end of 2007. Now, it is 2008, and the Kurds are still waiting for the referendum. In fact, not only are they waiting for Kirkuk, they have been waiting for a proper relocation to their former homes. The Arabization campaign under Saddam displaced thousands of Kurds, replacing them with Arabs in Kirkuk. The new Iraq promised to give them their properties back. And yet today, under an expired date for referendum, Kurds are still waiting for the Iraqi government to take action and give their properties back.
Perhaps if Kirkuk were any other faction's red line in Iraq, that faction would have carried out a boycott of the Iraqi government until proper action was taken in their favor. However, critics (and perhaps even supporters could not deny this) would say Kurdish leadership has comprimised one too many times and it's time to put this charade to an end.
As we sit and wait to see what kind of "plan" the United Nations is going to come up with regarding Kirkuk, we can't help but think back at the end of 2007 and the failure to implement Article 140. What could the U.N. possibly offer the Kurds that would be anything favorable if it is not to demand Iraq take action on Article 140? Kurds expect more than just the acquiescence of their government to the opposing factions in Baghdad. Kurds expect their leaders to make the demands, and take action when the demands are not met.
After all, Kirkuk is Kurdish both in history and in population...something even the leaders agree too. Compromising a referendum on deciding the city's status is something probably no other nation in the world would have done. What nation puts their own city up for a referendum after their army (peshmerga) had already once secured it? Kurds have shown their willingness to help the situation and Arab Baghdad has not returned the favor.
Time to stop the compromises, make demands, and expect results...and if al-Maliki still fails to listen, Kurds need to think about their own boycott.
Kurdish Aspect
So what about Kurdish red lines? The Kurdish public has very often been critical of their own leadership regarding their demands. Many of these critics, which include average citizens to journalists, to even former high-ranking political leaders like Nawshirwan Mustafa, say that the leadership has been far too soft with their demands. Of course, we cannot forget to mention what seems to be the recent approval of the Kurdish oil contracts by the Iraqi government. However, the details of these negotiations are still unclear as to what they will mean in the future.
But what about the real supposed Kurdish red line? The one that has been of utmost concern for Kurds since long before the fall of Baghdad? That red line is Kirkuk. At one point, Kurdish leaders were strict on their policies regarding Kirkuk. During the the drafting of the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL), Kurdish leaders said that if the normalization of Kirkuk were not carried out by the Iraqi government in Baghdad and a referendum were not held on the city's status, the Kurdish bloc would withdraw from the Iraqi government and even attempt to take Kirkuk by force.
This referendum according to the Iraqi Constitution's Article 140 was supposed to be held no later than the end of 2007. Now, it is 2008, and the Kurds are still waiting for the referendum. In fact, not only are they waiting for Kirkuk, they have been waiting for a proper relocation to their former homes. The Arabization campaign under Saddam displaced thousands of Kurds, replacing them with Arabs in Kirkuk. The new Iraq promised to give them their properties back. And yet today, under an expired date for referendum, Kurds are still waiting for the Iraqi government to take action and give their properties back.
Perhaps if Kirkuk were any other faction's red line in Iraq, that faction would have carried out a boycott of the Iraqi government until proper action was taken in their favor. However, critics (and perhaps even supporters could not deny this) would say Kurdish leadership has comprimised one too many times and it's time to put this charade to an end.
As we sit and wait to see what kind of "plan" the United Nations is going to come up with regarding Kirkuk, we can't help but think back at the end of 2007 and the failure to implement Article 140. What could the U.N. possibly offer the Kurds that would be anything favorable if it is not to demand Iraq take action on Article 140? Kurds expect more than just the acquiescence of their government to the opposing factions in Baghdad. Kurds expect their leaders to make the demands, and take action when the demands are not met.
After all, Kirkuk is Kurdish both in history and in population...something even the leaders agree too. Compromising a referendum on deciding the city's status is something probably no other nation in the world would have done. What nation puts their own city up for a referendum after their army (peshmerga) had already once secured it? Kurds have shown their willingness to help the situation and Arab Baghdad has not returned the favor.
Time to stop the compromises, make demands, and expect results...and if al-Maliki still fails to listen, Kurds need to think about their own boycott.
Kurdish Aspect
posted by madtom at 8:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home