|
Failing Federalism in Iraq and the Kurdish
Quest for Independence
31.8.2012
By Rauf Naqishbendi —
Ekurd.net |
|
|
|
August 31, 2012
As a legal term, “sovereign state” is defined as:
The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by
which an independent state is governed and from
which all specific political powers are derived; the
intentional independence of a state, combined with
the right and power of regulating its internal
affairs without foreign interference.
Sovereignty is the power of a state to do everything
necessary to govern itself, such as making,
executing, and applying laws; imposing and
collecting taxes; making war and peace; and forming
treaties or engaging in commerce with foreign
nations.
National security and civil society can be furnished
only through a strong central government that has
monopoly of the power. Power that is divided between
a federal government and any of its subordinated
regions is an open invitation to civil disturbances
threatening the fabric of civil society and national
security.
Matters essential to the life of the nation such as
defense, foreign policy issues, controlling natural
resources, printing money, declaring war, post
office, establishing army and navy, and commerce
with other nations are powers exclusively reserved
to the federal government. Should the control of
these matters be shared with any other groups within
the country, it assuredly will weaken the central
government, disfiguring economic, social, and
political conditions.
In a federalist system, federated states are bound
by the national constitution where deviation from
federal constitution is disallowed within the
individual states, yet they are empowered to
institute their own constitution in matters deemed
appropriate to their local jurisdiction, such as
budgeting, taxation, education, minimum wage,
occupational health and safety, managing state
properties, and law enforcement institution.
From what has preceded, the Iraqi government will be
brought to light, and the workability of power
sharing between central Iraqi government and
Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG).
Since its independence from Great Britain in 1932,
Iraq has been ruled by the Hāshimite monarchy and
thereafter by dictators who seized power through
military coups. Since the onset of its formation as
a country, minority Sunni Muslims have been the
dominant power, until the American invasion of Iraq,
after which the majority Shiites held the power.
Iraq’s government, throughout its history, has
adhered to the principle of the central government’s
authority to disallow power sharing amongst the
threads, making the fabric of Iraq’s homogenous
population. America’s invasion of Iraq introduced
federalism,www.ekurd.net
under which the Kurds were granted unprecedented
power to govern their region economically,
militarily, and legislatively. This arrangement
imposed by America wasn’t designed to appease the
Kurds or alienate Arab nationalists, but rather it
was because of the lack of a strong Iraqi central
government and the tumultuous Iraqi situation with
the torrent of terrorist violence pouring into south
and central Iraq, which left Kurds in charge of the
situation.
Then the American troops departed Iraq. The
Arab-fashioned leadership is now at work to
consolidate its power and solidify its armed forces,
targeting restoration of a strong sovereign
government, which means an authoritarian government
that will reveal its ugly smite upon Kurdish
leaders, implying that, as a minority in Iraq, they
wouldn’t be trusted to act or behave in any manner
like the sovereign state, thereby defying Baghdad’s
authority.
The Kurdish leadership miscalculated federalism,
first on the onset of American invasion of Iraq.
They were duped to trust America, not knowing the
arrangement America imposed to empower Kurds was
transitory and would last only for the duration of
American presence in Iraq. Second, they thought that
while the chaotic situation in Iraq persists,
thereby the Iraqi government would remain weak. But
the current waves of reality have proved against
them: America left Iraq, and then the Iraqi
government got stronger as terrorist activities
subsided.
Kurdish leaders engaged in signing contracts with
foreign companies regarding oil drilling in
Kurdistan, in consternation and defiance of the
Iraqi government. Furthermore, they engaged in
foreign policy arrangements as if the KRG was a
sovereign state. These actions are all contradictory
to the common definition of sovereign governments.
The idea of one government with mighty power to rule
the entire country, rather than a government within
the government is Al-Maliki’s aim.
The current federalism is not workable because the
federal government is malfunctioning in a divided
country. Moreover, it is impossible to teach Arabs
power sharing, which has no precedent in their
history. Sure, the Kurds deserve their God-given
right to be nationally recognized through their
independent homeland. However, that right is not
bestowed but to be earned. Kurdish leaders
miscalculated America’s intention, assuming that
America would perpetuate its protection of the
Kurds, but America has not made such a commitment.
If the Kurdish leadership were wise, they would have
turned to the American invasion of Iraq to
accomplish the Kurdish dream for independence.
Instead, they let themselves be used by America.
Suffice to say Kurdish leaders did more for the
Arabs than the Kurds.
Power sharing is workable when participating powers
are genuine and harmonious with one another and when
there is a binding agreement that serves as a
guiding principle, guarding the balance of power.
Unfortunately, the federalism will fall apart for
lack of a binding principle between Kurdish leaders
and the Iraqi government, the Arabs’ unwillingness
to share power, and the Kurdish leaders’ desire to
act as leaders of the sovereign nations. Eventually,
Kurdish leaders will be pressured to ease their
demand, and their refusal may lead to an armed
conflict. This will be the worst for the Kurds, for
they will not be able to defend themselves in the
face of Iraq’s military armed with sophisticated
American war machinery.
It must be realized that the Arabs are not only
rebuking the Kurdish independent state but, as well,
an autonomous Kurdistan region within federated
Iraq. It’s not only the Iraqi Arabs that the Kurds
have become content with, but rather the entire Arab
world that is united and has agreed upon the Kurds’
subjugation to Arab power.
In the final analysis the ultimate solution for the
Kurds to live free, breathe free, and feel free is
to be free from Arab domination. That simply means
an independent Kurdistan, Kurds’ national right, and
Kurds must pursue.
Rauf Naqishbendi is a contributing columnist for
Kurdishaspect.com, American Chronicle,
Kurdishmedia.com and
Ekurd.net,
and has written Op/Ed pages for the Los Angeles
Times. His memoirs entitled "The Garden Of The
Poets", recently published. It reads as a novel
depicting his experience and the subsequent 1988
bombing of his hometown with chemical and biological
weapons by Saddam Hussein. It is the story of his
people´s suffering, and a sneak preview of their
culture and history. Rauf Naqishbendi is a software
engineer in the San Francisco Bay Area.
ISBN: 978-1-4626-0187-5 ( get The (Zoftcover)
($7.95)
Link:
http://www.publishamerica.net/product41368.html
Your comments welcome at
rxa12@yahoo.com
Copyright © 2012 ekurd.net
Top |
The opinions
expressed in this commentary are solely those of the
author
|
®
