|
Nawshairwan Mustafa: His impact on the
contemporary Kurdish politics
20.2.2010
By Mufid Abdulla
|
|
|
|
February 20, 2010
How Nawshirwan Mustafa has made an impact on
contemporary Kurdish politics: results and
prospects?
Nawshirwan Mustafa has published political essays,
articles and notes throughout his political life but
his work has yet to be collated in a single volume.
I am hoping to publish a collection of his writings
in chronological order. This will reveal the man’s
consistency over the years. His writings relate to
various stages in a lifetime of struggle and I will
seek to identify these phases in Mustafa’s
development and consider how they impacted on
Kurdish politics. This article explores the process
by which he began to focus on the project of nation
building.
As a founding member of the Patriotic Union of
Kurdistan (PUK), his loyalty to the party and his
left wing faction (Kamala Ranjadarani Kurdistan) was
beyond question. PUK members always knew him for his
advocacy of party discipline but also for his
rejection of rule by individuals and promotion of
people power. After the liberation of Kurdistan in
1991 he contributed to the study of our history by
writing his memoir and books such as ‘The Kurds in
the Soviet Game’ (published in 1993). Having
dissociated himself from the armed struggle and from
Komala Ranjdarani Kurdistan (which he dissolved in
1991), he began to advocate a broad-based political
approach, taking into account globalisation and the
end of the Cold War and refuting the old ideology
which had become a blind alley for the Kurdish left.
Mustafa’s experiences within the PUK and his faction
made him aware of the difficulties he would face in
trying to argue his case. Many times he tried to
discuss the issues with the general secretary but
always without success. He was operating in a
culture in which political disagreements still
tended to lead to bloodshed. The man was facing a
constant challenge, both from within his party and
from his opponents outside it. However, Mustafa
always believed that it is the role of a leader to
be in the vanguard, regardless of the risks.
From the outset he refused to take any role in the
Kurdish government, not because he was lacking in
managerial experience and skill but because he felt
it wasn’t necessary for former freedom fighters and
military leaders to occupy all the political posts
when Kurdistan has plenty of expert administrators
and technocrats to do the job.
Mustafa’s vision of people power, both before and
after liberation, has been an ethical and political
project. When he used the language of revolution it
was to support the struggle and not to promote
himself. After the liberation of parts of Kurdistan
via 1991 uprising, the ensuing civil war and general
instability hindered his efforts to reform the
party. For years he avoided doing anything that
might add salt to the wounds. By 2004 Mustafa’s
patience was exhausted and he sent a statement to
the general secretary calling for drastic changes
but, after several wholly unproductive meetings, he
concluded that it was impossible to reform the PUK
from within.
His resignation letter to the PUK general secretary
was a logical development but he decided not to
issue any public statement so as to avoid creating
disturbance in the ranks. Mustafa then set up his
own media group - the Wusha company - and research
centre. The Wusha company has developed a
sophisticated website, newspapers and radio station.
It provides a platform for opposition writers and
intellectuals, inside and outside Kurdistan, and
acts as a watchdog, highlighting the various
activities (and corruption) of the Kurdistan
Regional Government (KRG).
In 2009 Mustafa announced that they had reached a
turning point in Kurdish politics in which there was
a consensus for more decisive action. He concluded
that it was impossible to improve people’s live
without creating a political vehicle with a clear
programme and policies. Mustafa started the Gorran
initiative because people were asking for it. He
gained a considerable of support from inside the PUK
although some people asked whether it was too late
and why it hadn’t been done before. His response was
that he had preferred a low key approach to reform
because he wanted to avoid any risk of violence and
civil war.
The KRG and party politics
In one of his articles, on the Sbeiy website, he
called for the separation of Kurdish political
parties from the state. In the 2007 piece entitled
‘We and Them’ (“we , the opposition without teeth or
a vehicle and them, the two ruling Parties, the PUK
and KDP”), Nawshirwan elaborated the principle
differences.
He wrote that the armed struggle had taken its toll
on the political parties in Kurdistan although it
had been an essential part of the national
liberation movement and resistance to occupation,
assimilation and genocide. The parties had bravely
struggled for the rights of people: “for the last
hundred years in Kurdish history,www.ekurd.netpolitical
parties have played a pivotal role in all political
and social transactions”. After 1991, however, when
Kurdistan was liberated and the political parties
were able to operate freely in the towns and cities,
they failed to adjust to this new reality after
years of using very different methods of struggle
against enemies of people. Against this background,
Mustafa argued, the Kurdish parties continued to
copy the style and methodology of the old Communist
Party of the Soviet Union.
His stated, “after the liberation the political
parties managed to set up the three powers -
legislative, executive and judicial - but they are
all tools in the hands of two political parties”. He
went on to argue that the “Kurdistan is how it was
in Eastern Europe: party politics runs the whole
system and controls all aspects of life. Your
loyalty to your party comes first, followed in
second place by loyalty to your people and nation”.
He advocated a brave and profound alternative, while
seeking to preserve essential features of
Kurdistan’s traditional society and infrastructure.
Mustafa’s approach is aimed not at crushing the two
ruling parties but at winning the support of the
people. At the same time he warns the Kurdish
political leaders and robustly criticises them for
failing to safeguard the interests of their
disadvantaged supporters.
These are his three fundamental demands which
underpinned Gorran’s electoral success on 25th July
2009:
1. The National Council should be replaced by a
Parliament with the power to review and pass
legislation on all the issues affecting the people
without manipulation by the political parties.
2. The Cabinet of Ministers should be replaced by an
Executive Committee that appoints committees to run
all the departments of state and develop policies.
3. The judicial system should be independent and
completely free of any influence, direct or
indirect, by the ruling parties.
Who is responsible for the
failure of Article 140: America, the Arabs or the
Kurds?
Kirkuk has been at the centre of controversy from
the birth of the Kurdish nationalist movement up to
today. The disputed areas, including Kirkuk, were
tragic victims of Saddam’s ethnic cleansing. In the
new Iraq the issue of Kirkuk continues to block any
overall resolution to Kurdish problems in the south
of Kurdistan. The reasons for Mustafa’s anger and
frustration about this are clear. He unequivocally
blames Kurdish leaders based in Baghdad for their
failure to use two historic opportunities - in 1970
and 2003 - to promote a just settlement. On both
occasions the Kurdish leaders participated in
negotiations but ended up advocating a referendum on
Kirkuk. He clearly argues that, “not a single nation
can abandon an inch of their land or put their own
property up for referendum”.
Mufid Abdulla
Copyright © 2010 ekurd.net.
All rights reserved
Top |
Kurd Net
does not take credit for and is not responsible for the content of news
information on this page
|
®
