|
Why it is southern Kurdistan and not
‘northern Iraq’
5.5.2008
By Raz Jabary
|
|
|
May 5, 2008
The reason why the term southern Kurdistan is
regarded as disputed by countries with their own
respectful Kurdish populations is simply that it
indicates ‘other’ Kurdistans with its remaining
cardinal directions. However,www.ekurd.net
it has to be noted
that this phenomenon ought not to be a concrete
obstacle towards the factual recognition of the
formerly named area, with several main verifications
and falsifications of why this is, as outlined below
in a short analysis:
The former reason why the term ‘northern Iraq’ is
flawed is the fact that its geographical meaning
comprises a much wider scope of reference then
intended to. ‘Northern Iraq’ could refer to main
places like Bayji, Fathah, Hadr, Hammam al Alil,
Tall Huqnah and of course Tikrit, the birthplace of
the former Arab Iraqi dictator and still a main
stronghold for neo-Ba’athists in Iraq. |
Raz Jabary |
All of these places lie
both outside the formal borders of the Kurdistan
Region and are not part of main geographical and
historical Kurdish inhabited spots. In the same way,
north-eastern Holland is not similar to Friesland,
the north of Spain does not resemble Basque Country,
and, the west of Great Britain does not necessarily
refer to Wales.
The fact is that historical, geographical and
ethnic-based Kurdish places like Xaneqin and Kifri
are further southerly located than the places
mentioned above. It follows that the use of the term
‘northern Iraq’ does not only refer to a too wide a
scope, but in fact also misses out on not comprising
main Kurdish places like the ones just mentioned.
This is explained by the fact that the
Kurdish/non-Kurdish border areas that run from
northern Kurdistan through to western,www.ekurd.net
southern and
eastern Kurdistan are namely not in any way placed
in line with the global parallels but in fact extend
down at an angle to these parallels.
It is furthermore a legitimate invalidation of the
use of the term ‘northern Iraq’ that brings to mind
its incorrectness based on the national Iraqi and
regional Kurdish constitutions that both present the
political and geographical verification of Kurdistan
in an official manner. To initiate with, Article 4
of Chapter one of the Iraqi constitution refers
clearly to federal agencies and institutions in the
region as being located in the ‘region of
Kurdistan’. In total, the term ‘Kurdistan’ is used
four times throughout the constitution (Chapter one;
articles 4 and 113, Chapter two; article 137).
In conclusion, when referring to southern Kurdistan,
the term ‘northern Iraq’ is geographically,
legislatively and politically flawed in a sense that
it both misses out and excessively includes places
not intended to, and, follows no official reference
in both constitutions that are enacted in Kurdistan,
resulting in the legislative and political
incorrectness of the term.
You may reach the author via email at: razjabary
(at) hotmail.co.uk
About the author :
Raz Jabary is a Contributing Writer to Kurdish
Aspect. He is a prominent youth debater in Wales and
was chosen one amongst the top-21 best national
Welsh youth debaters in October 2006 by the
CEWC-Cymru debating board. He participated in
several CEWC debates as well as in a session of the
European Youth Parliament in the Welsh National
Assembly in Cardiff, Wales.
To learn more about the author see:
http://www.answers.com/topic/Raz-Jabary
Comments
Dear Raz,
I read your article, it raises an important issue
about whether any of the two different usages
'Northern Iraq, Southern Kurdistan' are formal. Let
me clarify possible different available frameworks
for tackling this issue:
1) Juridical-Administrative (constitutional,
political, administrative, sovereign and
quasi-sovereign territories)
2) Sociological/Anthropological (social
organization, tribal, cultural distribution over an
area...)
3) Geographic (natural or political geography/ or
both)
I will explain the first framework, because you are
referencing Iraq's Constitution to clarify and point
out a correct usage to refer to the part of
Kurdistan located within the borders of Iraq. Iraq's
Constitution refers to Kurdistan in Arabic 'E~qlim
Al-Kurdistan', in Kurdish it is interpreted 'Herim-y
Kurdistan' and in English it is 'Kurdistan Region'.
This is a formal and legal reference to the portion
of Kurdistan within the borders of Iraq. Thus,
neither of the two usages 'Northern Iraq' and
'Southern Kurdistan' are correct formal.
Socio-anthropological and geographic categorization
are different fields of study, and they generate
different outcome.
It is important to point out that certain local
towns, countryside and the province of Kirkuk have
yet remained outside 'Kurdistan Region'. Articles 58
of TAL and 140 of Iraq's Constitution have specific
formulae enshrined in them to repatriate those
regions including the province of Kirkuk into
'Kurdistan Region' which is a 'quasi-sovereign'
region that has a federal relationship with Iraq's
central government.
All the best,
Karim Hasan, Ph.D. candidate, Ottawa, Canada.
You may reach the author via email at: kahasan (at)
rogers.com
Top |
Kurd Net
does not take credit for and is not responsible for the content of news
information on this page
|
® 