KRG builds trust, but others… doubt!
The Erbil-Baghdad problems are not existing problems. Some of them are related to history that has to be settled within a historical and crucial decision. Some of those problems, such as federalism, region's powers, oil and gas issues, Peshmerge, and Article 140 are even apparently existing, political and constitutional, but they correlate with the disagreement and the (racial and ethnic) understanding of the authority in Baghdad.
Kurdistan Region Government has a great deal of responsibility. It should build trust in Kurdistan and among political parties, that’s why it started a series of meetings with journalists, political parties and Kurdish representatives in Baghdad separately. It should also build trust with Baghdad. It should also rebuild the trust for some of Kurdish representatives in Baghdad. It’s also crucial to empower the trust with Europe and the US.
It’s ordinary that there’s lack of trust between Erbil and Baghdad, Europe, the US. One of them is the main side of the problems and others are foreigners and some others are considered as friends.
But the problem itself and the depth and difficulty of the problem is that when KRG distrust the Kurdish representatives in Baghdad, and some think that Erbil is the factor behind the problems with Baghdad, and when there are people saying that government is working and making decisions beyond their wills. So the government and other officials such as Kurdistan Region Presidency began mutual meetings with the parties taking part in the government and their representatives, and journalists as well. I think this is an ordinary thing. Let’s correlate a part of it with the democratic component and the political process in Kurdistan Region, along with the pluralism in ideology, religion and various political interests. When any society wants to be healthy, it should tolerate pluralism, difference of interpretations, political accountability and monitoring, just the opposite of the democratic tendency, they seem to be source of distrust in Kurdistan, and another point is connected with the disagreements between political parties.
Some may intend to exploit the weaknesses, and disagreements in favor of scaling up their supporters, or to move their encircled problems out of the closed frames, and some others think it is something ordinary to use the financial crises for weakening the position of its main opponent. So far, all are related to politics and the competition of persons and political parties, even if they’re not natural, but harmful, they could be read as policy making and political competition. On the other hand it can be said that this is the world of politics; pluralism has this kind of tendency and intentions, but if the different viewpoints are turned into measurements and principles that each political party can deal with Baghdad separately, this will be a catastrophe.
It’s dangerous if the government, in which all the main parties are taking part, hesitates to work for building trust between its components. Or some of them still are not working through the viewpoint that they’re players and decision makers, others are oppositions inside government. And some others may think of gaining more votes and positions through exploiting the weakness and using the crises as a factor to put pressure on the government.
It’s good for KRG to set the atmosphere that could lead to tightening the relations and trust among political parties, media outlets and people. If the national frontiers were not strong and unified, the other frontiers would be weak and full of cracks and leaks.