Washington Kurdish Institute
September 24, 2019
On September 25, 2017, Iraq’s Kurds decided to hold an independence referendum in response to nearly a century of persecution from multiple Iraqi governments since Iraq’s independence in 1932. Though the referendum was immediately opposed by most regional and global powers, the Kurds overwhelmingly decided to endorse the referendum, with 92.73% of voters answering yes on the question of independence from Iraq.
In Brief Before and After the Referendum
The referendum was the last outlet for Iraqi Kurds to exercise their rights on a variety of issues including:
- The issue of the “Disputed Territories”, including Kirkuk, since 2003. Iraq failed to implement Article 140 of the Constitution of Iraq to address the demographic changes imposed by Saddam Hussein’s regime on Kurdish cities and towns.
- The Government of Iraq’s continued failure to provide the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) with its allocated budget. The Kurdish Peshmerga forces have also been left out of Baghdad’s budget since 2005 despite their formalization by the constitution as an official state security force.
- Baghdad rejects the Kurdish region’s authority to produce oil granted by Iraq’s laws on natural resources and instead uses these laws against Iraqi Kurdistan.
The Regional Powers
Iran and Turkey were the two regional states most willing to use violence to snuff out Kurdish independence aspirations. As both states fear an independent Kurdistan in Iraq will inspire millions of Kurds within their own borders, they quickly acted to sabotage any prospect of an independent, prosperous Kurdistan following the referendum. Iranian “advisers” led Iran-backed militias in an attack on Kirkuk that resulted in the displacement of tens of thousands of Kurds, while Arab and Turkish-backed Turkmen militias engaged in looting and burned down hundreds of Kurdish homes. Simultaneously, Turkey and Iran closed their borders with Iraqi Kurdistan.
The United States and the Kurds
After 26 years of “partnership” with Iraq’s Kurds, the United States took a position in line with that of the regional powers and rejected the referendum. US policymakers then watched Iran-backed militias attack Kurds with US made weapons, including M1 Abrams tanks, as the US’s strong opposition to the referendum was interpreted by Iran as a green light to begin hostilities against the Kurds. Following the referendum, then US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson (former head of Exxon who won Kurdish oil contracts) harshly criticized the referendum and described the 92.7% yes vote as “lacking legitimacy”. The Iraqi government’s seizure of a sizable portion of Kurdistan was detrimental to US interests, particularly in the oil-rich Kirkuk Province where Iran, through its militias, now exerts significant influence. That said, the US did prevent Iraqi forces and Iranian-backed militias from launching further attacks on the Kurds and carrying out their original plan to seize Iraqi Kurdistan.
Bad Timing
It became commonplace for European states and the United Nations to repeat US talking points regarding the timing of the referendum. The US administration released numerous statements rejecting the referendum’s timing and contradicting the Kurds’ desire including:
- “The referendum is distracting from efforts to defeat ISIS (Da’esh) and stabilize the liberated areas.” This claim was false as the physical Caliphate was defeated in Iraq while Iraqi Kurdistan, alongside Iraq, was still a member of the US-led coalition. Da’esh guerrilla cells are now taking advantage of the deteriorating security situation created by Iranian-backed militias and Iraqi security forces occupation of Kirkuk and the marginalization of the Peshmerga in the region.
- “Holding the referendum in disputed areas is particularly provocative and destabilizing.” The referendum was actually carried out peacefully, utilized the democratic process, and followed 14 years of consistent failure on the part of the Government of Iraq to meet its obligations to Iraqi Kurdistan. Concurrently, Baghdad neglected its responsibility to implement Article 140 of the Constitution of Iraq while the US failed to fulfill promises to mediate between the Government of Iraq and the KRG.
- “We, therefore, call on the Kurdistan Regional Government to call off the referendum and enter into serious and sustained dialogue with Baghdad, which the United States has repeatedly indicated it is prepared to facilitate.” The relationship between Iraq’s Kurds and the US was fully restored in spite of the referendum’s tensions between the two sides. However, not only has the US administration failed to facilitate talks, it is in a much less favorable position to do so due to increased Iranian influence in Iraq.
- The United Nations Security Council echoed White House sentiments in claiming the referendum “could detract from efforts to ensure the safe, voluntary return of over 3 million refugees and internally displaced persons.” In actuality, many individuals displaced by intercommunal violence between Sunnis and Shi’ites during the Iraqi insurgency ended up taking refuge in the Kurdistan region. The displaced included Iraqi Christians fleeing Shi’ite militias in southern Iraq. After Da’esh’s rise, the Kurdish region again received the most internally displaced persons from Iraq’s Sunni regions. Today, most of Iraq’s Sunnis are prevented from returning to their homes not by Kurds, but by the occupation of their territories by Shi’ite militias and the Iraqi government’s failure to provide basic services and rebuild war-damaged areas.
Assuming the Kurds chose the wrong time to hold the referendum, does that justify the atrocities committed against them? The Kurds received no answer when they asked the US when they should hold an independence referendum yet met with immediate opposition from the US and regional powers regarding the question of independence. Many Kurds still ask, “When is a good time to be liberated and free?”
Today Iraq is worse for all Iraqis, not only its Kurds. The Kurds are barely getting a portion of the federal budget while the fate of the “Disputed Territories” remains unresolved. Concurrently, the rise of fascism among the Islamic parties in the Iraqi parliament is alarming for the Kurds and their future existence. Kurds are forced to be part of Iraq yet have to lobby and fight for their constitutional rights and share of its resources.
Much of Iraq’s Sunni population remains displaced, as their provinces are destroyed, without services, and often controlled by Da’esh terrorists or Iran-backed Shi’ite militias.
Likewise, Iraq’s Shi’a population continues to chafe under the poor governance of corrupt politicians and parties who use religion to mask their corruption. Shi’ite provinces like Basrah occasionally rise up but are usually pacified by forces backed by regional powers.
Iraq’s Christian population is decreasing as it faces discrimination from Sunni and Shia Islamists in every part of Iraq except Iraqi Kurdistan.
The world has stopped creating states, but the continued existence of failed states has resulted in a far greater cost in blood and treasure than the creation of new ones. For the Kurds, the struggle continues as President Kennedy once said: “The great revolution in the history of man, past, present, and future, is the revolution of those determined to be free.”