The population of ancient Kurdistan, a mountainous land in southeastern Turkey including the northern areas of Iraq, Iran and Syria, has recently been speaking up quite loudly for its own state. Last autumn, a referendum on independence was held in Iraqi Kurdistan. Did the referendum improve or worsen their position in Iraq? And who stood on their side?
The designation Kurdistan is only a geographical name for the territory where Kurds live. This area is almost 400,000 km2 in size (about 5 times larger than the Czech Republic) and more than 30 million Kurds live there. In this article, we will focus on the Iraqi Kurds, who make up one fifth of the Iraqi population and live primarily in the north of the country. Status of an autonomous unit in democratic Iraq
Iraqi Kurds, who despite very turbulent developments at the end of the 20th century, today have a fairly good position in Iraq. This is also shown by the fact that Kurdish northern Iraq was until recently the most developed part of the country, while the southern and central parts faced civil war and economic stagnation. Iraqi Kurdistan has been governed since the elections in 1992 by a self-governing body—the Kurdistan Regional Government. With the adoption of the new Iraqi Constitution in autumn 2005, Kurdistan gained the status of an autonomous unit in a democratic, federal Iraq.
Last autumn an independence referendum was held in Iraqi Kurdistan. Their autonomy in Iraq is a dispute that has lasted since the very beginning of the creation of this entity in the 16th century, then under the rule of the Persian and later the Ottoman Empire. At the beginning of the 20th century, the first realistic possibility for the creation of an independent Kurdistan appeared. A separate state was promised in the peace treaty at the end of the First World War. Unfortunately, this was never fulfilled, mainly because of Turkish policy.
Since the establishment of independent Iraq, relations between Kurds and the central Iraqi government in Baghdad had been gradually deteriorating. Despite disturbances, which at times escalated into civil wars, peace negotiations were continuously underway. Their result was recognition of the binational character of Iraq in 1966. In 1970, Kurdish nationality was formally recognized and Kurds were also promised their language and political rights and Kurdish self-government in their areas.
Even this agreement did not lead to the end of the fighting. The Iraqi government shelled Kurdish villages. The Kurds responded by renewing guerrilla warfare, which the Iraqi army had no chance to win. The northern part of the country therefore never had full control under the central state. So the government resorted to another tactic. It began deliberately changing the population composition of areas where Kurds were in the majority. This began the period of Arabization of Kurdish territories, the resettlement of Kurdish population. All of this culminated under Saddam Hussein, who “sent” his cousin Ali, who became notorious for the use of chemical weapons. Chemical attacks in 1988 caused as many as 200,000 casualties. Several million Kurds were deported and hundreds of thousands fled into emigration. Because of this genocide, this man is known today as “Chemical Ali.”
The end of the century was very dynamic for the Kurds. In 1991, Great Britain and the United States intervened in the Kurdish-Iraqi conflict and helped protect Kurdish territory from Iraqi tyranny. This was followed by the creation of the Kurdistan Regional Government. It is a period of a rising Kurdish nationalism, the beginning of oil trade, but also a time when a fratricidal civil war occurred among the Kurds themselves. Between 1993 and 1998, a clash took place between two rival political parties. Only the UN, together with the USA, helped negotiate a ceasefire. From the turn of the millennium we have observed gradual stabilization in the region. There was free media and oil profits ensured quite a decent life for citizens.
Preparation of Kurds for the referendum, independence and so-called Kexit
It was the Kurds themselves who helped the Anglo-American alliance in 2003 to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s regime and create a democratic Iraqi constitution. In the Kurdish region elections were held. Masoud Barzani, son of the legendary 20th-century independence fighter, became president, and an unofficial independence referendum was also held. In this period, however, the Kurds fully used the “tail benefits.” Because they remained part of Iraq and recognized its sovereignty, they gained international assistance, which helped them gradually build their legitimacy. So the results of this unofficial referendum were not taken into account by the leading elites.
Everything changed in 2014, when even the head of state declared that the Kurds were ready for a referendum. They spoke of their “natural right,” that independence was the right step, since Iraq is disintegrating. Unfortunately, this was exactly the time of the rise of the Islamic State in Syria and the Levant, and Kurdish combat units called Peshmerga were for a long time the only force in Iraq that could withstand attacks by militants. And therefore the referendum was postponed.
It eventually took place on 25.9.2017. The results were completely clear. For independence, so-called Kexit, 92.73% of people voted in favor, with turnout almost 78%. Voting took place not only on the territory of the autonomous area, but also in disputed areas of Iraq controlled by Kurds (for example Kirkuk, which despite massive Arabization Kurds consider theirs and where some of the largest oil deposits in all of Iraq are located).
Economic blockade and blocking of Kurdish oil exports
The neighbors of Iraqi Kurdistan—Iran, Turkey and Syria, where large Kurdish minorities live—feared that the declaration of independence of Iraqi Kurdistan would encourage their Kurds to fight for independence. Even before the referendum itself, Iraq, Turkey and Iran announced a united course of action, such as an economic blockade of the territory and the presence of their troops on the borders.
The Iraqi government demanded immediate cancellation of the referendum results, which they consider unconstitutional. Not only an economic blockade was imposed, but also direct air connections to Kurdistan were canceled, and export of Kurdish oil was blocked.
The international community adopted a fairly unified position on the Kurdish issue. The European Union, the United States and Russia support a unified and territorially intact Iraq. The only supporter of Kurdish secession is Israel.
A multi-year process full of negotiations
Critics claim that the current president Barzani, whose second term had already ended in 2015, tried to consolidate his power with the referendum. His party, due to corruption scandals and the overall economic stagnation of the region, was losing public support. It is also possible that this served as leverage against the Iraqi government.
Despite all negative reports, the Kurds emphasize that the outcome of the referendum will not be a new border nor immediate independence, that it will not be an immediate event but a multi-year process full of negotiations. Even though the Kurds offered to freeze the referendum results, on 13 October the Iraqi army began moving. Baghdad gave Kurds an ultimatum to withdraw their forces from territory the Kurds have controlled since liberation from the radicals and which is not under their self-government. The Kurds called on Iraq for dialogue and rejected the demands. Iraq responded almost immediately. On 15 and 16 October, a “lightning war” took place and the Iraqi army captured Kirkuk and drove Kurdish Peshmerga out.
The Iraqi army then continued into territory controlled by Kurds. The Kurds gave up most disputed territories and all culminated on 1 November with Masoud Barzani’s abdication from the presidency. After five weeks of fighting from the announcement of the referendum results, hopes for improved Kurdish status in Iraq have been frozen for a while.
Dilemma: self-determination of a nation vs. state sovereignty
At present, according to the latest reports, Kurdistan is experiencing an economic collapse. In general, the prevailing view is that Kurds were and are not ready for independence. First, the economy would need to be diversified, as it is fully dependent on the oil industry. Second, internal political disputes between rival Kurdish parties need to be settled and focus placed on a unified Kurdistan. And third, the relationship between the Kurdistan Regional Government and the Iraqi central government should be resolved. Because their inability to reach an agreement has led precisely to this state.
It is important to realize that a major unknown is two rights that exist in our system and complicate the entire situation. Every nation has the right to self-determination. This idea, originating in the 19th century, is still one of the most problematic parts of international relations, since it is the opposite of state sovereignty. That protects the territorial integrity of existing entities and the inviolability of their borders. This difficult question, this dilemma, complicates international relations and its resolution is still out of sight. In conclusion, we include a statement from Barzani, now former president, who recently said: “I call on all sides to return to logic and wisdom and to solve problems through negotiation and to remember who liberated Mosul from the clutches of the Islamic State the year before last.”
Author of the text: Miluše Koštialiková, student of the Department of Development and Environmental Studies PřF UP v Olomouci**