Unity forced upon na­tions of Iraq

The Kurdish Globe - - NEWS - Dr. Rawaz M.khosh­naw

There are many pages in his­tory we can go back to and study, but few that should re­main for­ever open. I have al­ways been fas­ci­nated by the study of his­tory, but, un­for­tu­nately, read­ing any­thing re­lated to the Mid­dle East, Iraq, and the Kurds in par­tic­u­lar is truly painful.

De­ci­sions made many years--some­times decades, if not cen­turies--ago con­tinue to cause in­cal­cu­la­ble mis­ery, pain, and in cer­tain cases, tragedy.

In light of the painful 10-year-old Iraqi po­lit­i­cal process, it is cru­cial to re-ex­am­ine how this state of Iraq was formed and for what pur­pose.

The most up­set­ting an­swer I have come across in my read­ing on Iraq’s his­tory af­ter the First World War and the col­lapse of the Ot­toman Em­pire was in Peter Gal­braith’s book The End of Iraq, which refers to Percy Cox>s rec­om­men­da­tions to Win­ston Churchill, the Bri­tish Min­is­ter for Colonies at the time, re­quest­ing that the state of Mo­sul (south­ern Kur­dis­tan) be an­nexed to Bagh­dad and Basra to form a new coun­try: Iraq. In his words: «Iraq must be sec­tar­i­anly bal­anced”--that is, an Iraq with­out the Sunni Kurds in­cluded would be ma­jor­ity Shi’ite, which did not seem to please Mr. Cox. Thus Kur­dis­tan came to be an­nexed to the rest of the Iraqi state. Whose in­ter­ests did that serve? And why should the unity of this ar­ti­fi­cially-formed state be so sa­cred? How many more Kurds have to be An­faled for their right to state­hood to be rec­og­nized? And how many more years of bloodly Sunni-Shi’ite con­flict are needed?

Iraqi Sun­nis are al­ready ex­it­ing the coun­try in a silent ex­o­dus and mi­nori­ties are dis­ap­pear­ing...

This unity serves the in­ter­ests of noth­ing but blood­shed and tragedy. It only en­dures for lack of the courage to de­clare the death of a state that was still­born any­way. We can­not keep this corpse on life sup­port in­def­i­nitely.

Ev­ery­one in the re­gion and the in­ter­na­tional com­mu­nity has be­come in­dif­fer­ent to the on­go­ing blood­shed in Iraq. The num­bers of Iraqi people killed daily no longer trou­bles any­one.

It is time to ask Iraqi Shi’ites, Sun­nis and Kurds if they want to live in sep­a­rate states; per­haps, then, peace will come to this part of the world. Did this same so­lu­tion not pre­vent blood­shed in the Balkans and bring sta­bil­ity?

State­hood and na­tional part­ner­ship within a state must be by choice if they are not to be a failed mar­riage from day one; and like all failed mar­riages, noth­ing can re­pair them but di­vorce.

We Kurds in Iraq should be pre­pared to take this de­ci­sion sooner or later and I be­lieve the sooner the bet­ter. Wait­ing for the per­fect cir­cum­stance to make this hap­pen is noth­ing but fan­tasy: no one will do this for us; no one would dare shake up the re­gion fur­ther, as they are ac­cus­tomed to the cur­rent state of ev­ery­thing in Iraq.

A fi­nal word. We have tried to co-ex­ist for a century now and have wit­nessed a tremen­dous fail­ure. It is time to think of three states and to make it hap­pen with the least pos­si­ble vi­o­lence and blood­shed. Let us al­low each of Iraq’s three na­tions to fo­cus on build­ing their re­gions peace­fully, to the ben­e­fit of the wider re­gion and the world, for this land is one great gold mine from top to bot­tom, right to left.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Iraq

© PressReader. All rights reserved.