|
ERBIL, Kurdistan-Iraq THERE ARE NOT many
places in Iraq where the locals want to celebrate
American Independence Day. But, in Iraq's
self-governing Kurdistan region, the newly elected
government decided to host a Fourth of July party
for their American allies.
Top coalition officers were invited along with US
civilians, food and drinks ordered (the secular
Kurds serve and drink alcohol), and the Kurdistan
prime minister had prepared his speech. Then
America's top diplomat in the region delivered an
ultimatum: She would not attend unless the Kurds
flew Iraq's flag at the party. The Kurds refused and
canceled the party.
The current Iraqi flag was chosen by Saddam
Hussein's Ba'ath Party to signify the unity of Arab
lands. For the non-Arab Kurds the flag is not only a
symbol of their second class status but they also
associate it with the atrocities-- including use of
poison gas-- of the former regime. Many of Iraq's
Arab leaders have been sensitive to Kurdish
concerns. When they visit the region, they do not
make a fuss over the flag.
For Iraq's Kurds, the flag episode epitomizes
America's ingratitude for their role as an ally in
the war to overthrow Saddam Hussein and as the
strongest supporter of US postwar policies. They
note that American diplomats have no qualms about
calling on Shi'ite politicians who display portraits
of Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini and that the United
States has pushed for the inclusion of Sunni Arabs,
many former Ba'athists, in the constitution drafting
committee.
Iraq's Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafaari was warmly
received at the White House even though his party,
Dawa, was on the State Department terrorist list
until a few years ago for the 1982 suicide bombing
of the US embassy in Kuwait.
US indifference to Kurdish sensibilities could have
far reaching consequences. The Kurds are engaged in
a struggle with the Shi'ite majority of Iraq's
constitution drafting committee over the principles
that will guide the new Iraq.
The majority draft would make Iraq a ''federal
Islamic republic." Rights of women would be sharply
restricted as Islamic law replaces Iraq's relatively
progressive civil code on matters of inheritance,
divorce, and child custody. The document is
anti-Jewish, denying Iraqi Jews rights granted other
Iraqis. The Shi'ite majority is even proposing to
incorporate the ''marjah" -- Iraq's leading Shi'ite
cleric -- into the constitution, a step that could
give the Ayatollah Sistani powers similar to those
Khomeini exercised in the first decade of Iran's
Islamic Republic.
The Kurds oppose all these measures. They are
secular and insist that any reference to the Islamic
character of Iraq be balanced by a declaration that
no law can violate fundamental human rights. They
are proud of the progress that women have made in
the 14 years of Kurdish self-rule in the north of
Iraq and do not want it rolled back. They share none
of the antipathy Arab Iraqis feel toward the Jews.
With a population almost unanimously in favor of
independence, Kurdistan leaders insist that Iraq
have a federal structure that will allow them to
retain their secular, Western-oriented political
system even if the rest of Iraq falls under the sway
of the religious parties. They are alarmed by
growing Iranian influence in Baghdad and in the
Shi'ite south, and see a strong, self-governing
Kurdistan as a barrier to enlarging Iran's
influence.
No constitution can be approved unless the Kurds go
along, and the Kurds want to be in the position to
walk away from a constitution that is illiberal and
too centralized. But, instead of support from the
Bush administration, they feel intense pressure to
make compromises so as to meet the Aug. 15 deadline.
While the Bush administration professes a hands-off
policy toward constitutional deliberations, it has
been lobbying hard against a provision that would
give Iraq's regions control over natural resources.
Having been dependent on payments from Baghdad in
the past, the Kurds know that meaningful
self-government requires control over their own
petroleum.
The Bush administration apparently believes a
Shi'ite region in the south would be less favorable
toward US oil companies than the Shi'ite-run Oil
Ministry in Baghdad, but in reality there is
unlikely to be a difference. To the dismay of the
Kurds, there has been no similar American engagement
with regard to the anti-Jewish or antiwoman
provisions of the proposed constitution.
The United States should take a genuine hands-off
approach toward the new constitution. The content is
far more important than meeting the deadline for its
completion, and the Bush administration should not
punish America's best friends in Iraq if they walk
away from a document that blatantly contradicts the
democratic values President Bush now says are the
reason for our continued presence in the country.
Peter W. Galbraith, a former US ambassador to
Croatia, is senior diplomatic fellow at the Center
for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation.
www.boston.com
Top |
® 