|
The answer to all of Iraq's problems:
Centralism or Federalism?
26.1.2012
By Shwan Zulal
—
ekurd.net |
|
|
|
Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki greets during
the celebrations for the 91st anniversary of the
Iraqi Army at Baghdad's fortified Green Zone January
6, 2012. Photo: Reuters
January
26, 2012
LONDON, —
Fans of a federal union of states in Iraq are
accusing PM Nouri al-Maliki of taking on the role of
dictator in Iraq. They see separation of sects as
the only answer to Iraq's problems. Yet advocates of
centralised power in Iraq support the PM's actions.
Who's right?
The sorry state that Iraq is in today illustrates,
once again, the complexity of the country’s make up
and the deep divisions and mistrust within. The idea
of the democratic Iraq that was supposed to rise
from the ashes of tyranny is gradually
disintegrating. Only a month since US troops
withdrew from Iraq and the country doesn’t look as
though it can hold itself together. Prime Minister
Nouri al-Maliki seems to be ignoring all the warning
signs that Iraq may be sliding back toward the
levels of violence seen in 2006 and 2007.
Al-Maliki has been working to strengthen his power
base by removing senior opposition politicians, his
most controversial move being the issuing of an
arrest warrant for Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashimi,
who has taken shelter in Iraqi Kurdistan. Meanwhile
ordinary Iraqis fear that current violence could
turn into a full blown, sectarian civil war between
Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims.
In terms of political discussions, what commentators
seem to be focusing on is the debate as to which is
better for Iraq now: federalism, which would see
Iraq divided up into different autonomous or
semi-autonomous regions, or centralism, which would
see power held by Baghdad.
A Federal Iraq
Those who argue for federalism say that the model of
centralised power has failed and that it is not
likely to resolve the current political stalemate.
They believe devolution of power is needed.
Partially this is because they believe that the
current political problems are caused not only by
political differences, but by sectarian and ethnic
divisions.
The semi-autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan is
often cited as an example of the federal model can
work. And other provinces in Iraq want to replicate
that model, asking to become similarly
semi-autonomous regions themselves.
They argue that by separating the larger factions –
that is Sunni, Shiite and Kurds, for example – in
the smaller regions, this would make sectarian
differences easier to work with.
It is true that the Kurdish region has been
semi-independent for a longer time. And its success
as a region, when compared to the rest of Iran, is
not due to Baghdad, which has had virtually no
control over it since 1991. The Kurdish model was
fraught with problems at the beginning too but since
2003, when international sanctions on Iraq by the
rest of the world, were lifted, the region has
flourished, both economically and politically.
There is an effective opposition in Iraqi
Kurdistan’s parliament and the economy is
progressing at a fast rate. There are some
constraints as the democracy still needs nurturing –
there are issues such as freedom of speech,www.ekurd.net
press freedom and so forth - but minorities like the
Christian and Turkmen communities enjoy more
freedoms and are included in the political process.
This could eventually lead to building trust within
communities and get the political process on the
right track. And on the whole, the model of Iraqi
Kurdistan has been far more successful than what is
happening in the rest of Iraq.
One of the major flaws in arguments for a federal
system in Iraq can be found in economics – or, in
other words, agreeing on a framework within which
the Iraq’s vast oil revenues can be shared. This
must eventually have political ramifications. After
over three decades of war, Iraq has very little
commerce or industry and depends almost entirely on
the income from oil exports. And due to the
different geographical locations of Iraq’s natural
resources, the current provincial set up – if
converted into federal states – would disadvantage
some regions and benefit others.
Advocates of a centralist model believe the federal
system would create injustices and give some
provinces more power than others. However supporters
of federalism, like the Kurds, believe the federal
system can be made to work. Regions would be given
more autonomy and could develop their own natural
resources with most of their revenue eventually
streamed back to the central government from where
it could eventually benefit the region itself, and
then the country as a whole.
If the federal system was suitably managed in an
equitable way, and politicians agreed on system to
share wealth fairly, then a federal Iraq, made up of
semi-autonomous regions, could work.
Iraq united under a central
power
The other camp, the advocates of a strong,
centralised power over Iraq, argues that Iraq needs
more centralised power - at least for now. Some
centralists believe that only a strong man can save
Iraqi from its woes and unite a country with so many
ethnicities and sectarian divisions. The latter
differences have led to the currently dysfunctional
government, which cannot seem to agree on anything.
Many of those who would rather see Iraq as one do
not believe that the country’s ills are due to the
multi-faceted sectarian and ethnic make up the
inhabitants; they also believe previous conflicts
were not entirely driven by those differences.
The current Iraqi Prime Minister seems to have
chosen this path, believing it is the right way
forward for the country. In reality though, the
centralised model has allowed one sect, the Shiites
to hang onto power and has left other sects feeling
marginalised.
And a strong central government could work if Iraqi
electors were voting for a party’s policies and
their votes were not based on ethnicity or sectarian
allegiances. In the last election, Ayed Allawi, the
former Prime Minister and the head of the Iraqiya
list – the major opposition to al-Maliki’s State of
Law party - did manage to persuade some voters to
choose him based on policy. But he failed to get his
coalition of intricate and complex alliances in time
to rule the country – and that was despite having
one more parliamentary seat than al-Maliki’s bloc.
Over the past years, the Iraqi government has
squabbled and debated endlessly. And in the
meantime, al-Maliki has become more authoritarian
and has been calling for a centralized Iraq. The
Kurdish, with their successful semi-autonomous
state, have very different ideas and seem unlikely
to agree to an Iraq run solely from Baghdad. And the
Sunni Muslims have started to feel more marginalised
and have been drawn closer to the Kurdish position.
The model of a powerful, central controller of the
country has been tried in Iraq. And it went horribly
wrong, as was witnessed during Saddam Hussein’s
regime. But federalism has barely been given a fair
chance yet.
Over the past nine years, what we have witnessed in
Iraq has only been a half hearted attempt at
decentralisation and the result has been a
dysfunctional country. The idea of true federalism
has been regarded with suspicion as the popular
assumption is that a federal Iraq means a weaker
Iraq.
So far the politicians of Iraq have let their people
down because they have not found a way to resolve
their differences. Iraq’s history is filled with
instances of discrimination and violence against
different sections of the community, including
attempts at genocide.
Keeping Iraq from disintegrating requires a new
approach. Whether the country is run by a
centralised power or split into federal states, the
only way to build a consensus and maintain a
functioning country is to build trust - which is not
an easy task.
The starting point needs to be policies of inclusion
or reconciliation. Without this attitude, both
models are doomed to failure at which the country
will have to be forcibly divided, all of which would
doubtless bring more conflict and misery for
ordinary Iraqis who are often forgotten in this
difficult debate.
This article first appeared on niqash.org
Shwan Zulal, is a
political and security analyst. London &
Kurdistan/Iraq. oil and gas sector, specialising in Kurdish PSCs
and Hydrocarbon Law and advising investors in the
Kurdistan Region and Iraq with legal background.
Zulal is a regular contributing writer for ekurd.net.
He also runs a blog on to the same subject
http://kurdishviews.blogspot.com
Copyright © 2012 ekurd.net
Top |
Kurd Net
does not take credit for and is not responsible for the
content of news information on this page
|
®
