Washington Kurdish Institute
September 24, 2021
The Kurdish nation deserves a state, and Kurds should not give up on this goal. The US and the International Community should learn from the past wrong policies and support Kurdish independence.
On September 25, 2017, the Kurds in Iraq held an Independence Referendum, attempting to win liberty after a century of being forced to be a part of the failed and made-up country of Iraq. 92.7% of voters voted yes for independence in a democratic process whereas the anti-referendum campaign gained only 7% of the votes. Devastated by former Iraqi regimes, the Kurds played a leading role in establishing a democratic federal Iraq in the aftermath of Saddam Hussein’s rule. By 2005, the Kurds united their efforts and agreed with Iraqi parties and leaders on a new constitution. Though this constitution was far from comprehensive in its ability to solve all the issues at hand, it was, nonetheless, a reasonable step toward restoring the Kurds’ fundamental rights, which had been stripped away for several decades.
Since 2005, the articles addressing Kurdish constitutional rights have been ignored by consecutive Iraqi cabinets. For example, the normalization of extensive demographic changes known as “Arabization” in Kurdish cities, towns, and villages has remained unresolved despite having a constitutional article for its settlement. Furthermore, the Iraqi government has continued discriminatory policies against the constitutionally recognized entity of the Kurdistan Region, including cutting the salaries of Kurdish public employees and the Kurdish Peshmerga forces as well as blocking Kurdistan’s budget. The economic war on the Kurds peaked in 2014 when the former Iraqi Prime Minister Noori al Maliki cut Kurdistan’s federal budget allocations. Al Maliki and his successors used various pretexts for their stance and anti-Kurdish rhetoric. For example, the federal government in Baghdad would often accuse the Kurds of producing Kurdistan’s oil and gas independently, ignoring Kurds’ constitutional rights and refusing to pass new laws in the parliament to overcome the loopholes and vagueness of the relevant constitution articles. Moreover, when ISIS took over a third of Iraq, the Kurdish Peshmerga forces remained the only active force fighting the terror group as the entire Iraqi defense forces were dismantled in days. The Kurds, despite Baghdad’s economic embargo, defeated most of the various terror groups.
The Independence Referendum was the last Kurdish move to pressure Baghdad to either commit to its own federal laws or for Kurds to finally be granted independence like 195 other self-determined nations worldwide. Self-determination is a natural right recognized by the United Nations Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, the movement for Kurdish independence has faced an unjustified and unfair international reaction led by states purported to be the Kurds’ closest “friends,” namely the United States. Simultaneously, the Kurds faced brutal attacks by regional powers like Iran and Turkey as well as Iraqi radical Shia militias, supported by Iran.
The “one Iraq” policy, which has worked against US national interests and empowered America’s enemies since 2003, has led US policymakers to rally international support against the Kurdish referendum. For example, under the pretext of “bad timing” to hold the referendum, the US, United Nations (UN), UK, and European Union (EU) all stood against Kurdish rights and sided with Baghdad despite the long-term and profound partnership between the Kurds and the West, primarily the US, since 1991. Furthermore, many countries like China, Russia, France, Germany, and even Sweden also took an anti-democratic stance against the Kurdish referendum. Since the Kurds are the US’s closest allies and America has moral obligations toward them, the US stance, which included harsh statements delegitimizing the independence movement, hurt the Kurds the most. For example, US State Secretary Rex Tillerson called the Independence Referendum “illegitimate.” Following former US presidential administrations’ stances against the Kurds, the Trump administration doubled down on this position. It sided with Baghdad once more when the latter used Iranian proxies to attack the Kurds. As a result, Kurds were displaced, Kurdish homes were burned, the elected Kurdish administration in Kirkuk was sacked, and the Kurds in the “disputed territories” returned to pre-2003 era Arabization policies. These misguided US policies also resulted in immense US national interest loss, including a decrease in American influence in Iraq since the October 16th events, which has allowed Iran and their radical proxies to gain more land in Iraq, further resulting in increased attacks on US troops.
The wrong points to be against the Kurdish rights
On many occasions, policymakers have used false points to justify their anti-Kurdish pro-Baghdad stance. For example, policymakers repeatedly told Kurdish leaders that the timing of the movement was not right. However, when Kurds asked when the right time was to hold a referendum, the policymakers never committed to a response. The Kurds would have overtly accepted a US postponement suggestion had they been given a timeline, not necessarily an exact date, or a guarantee that the US would be open to recognizing the referendum. Furthermore, US policymakers attempted to justify their lack of support by claiming that the referendum would “distract” from the fight against ISIS terrorists. On the contrary, Kurdish independence would have brought more security and stability to the region as Kurdish forces have continued to fight the terror group and provide better security in the disputed territories, contrary to the situation seen today under Baghdad’s rule. Moreover, the independence referendum did not shift the focus. Even Iranian-backed militias would not have attacked Kurds if they did not see America’s constant anti-referendum statements as emboldening Iran and Turkey.
In addition, others would question the “readiness” of the Kurdistan Region as justification for delaying independence, particularly criticizing the Kurdistan Region for lacking institutions and suffering political division. Yet, every single state in the world was established in chaos and amidst worse scenarios than that of the Kurdistan Region. On the contrary, self-determination is irrelevant to internal issues that even a country like America is facing today.
Many also blame the referendum for sparking Iraq’s October 16, 2017 attacks on Kurds. However, this is nothing more than a false excuse since Baghdad wanted to take over the disputed territories by force for years. For example, in 2012, Iraq’s Prime Minister al Maliki formed the so-called “Tigris Command,” which imposed martial law on the Kirkuk province. However, thanks to its governor at the time, Dr. Najmaldin Karim, al Maliki’s plan failed, and later the “Tigris Command” was the first to run when ISIS took over the Hawija District, resulting in the death of hundreds of civilians and security personnel. The events of October 16th show that Iraq is still operating on the same old mentality of Saddam Hussein’s regime. If the Kurds were “guilty” for seeking independence, how is Baghdad justified in its attacks on the Kurds if they are the “good” side in this?
Lessons for Kurds and the US
The Kurds have learned the game of politics the hard way after the international community sold them out, simply because they are non-state actors and lack a self-determined state. The international community could not approach any recognized country the way they did to the Kurds. This fact should be a lesson for the Kurds to not only not give up on their journey for independence, but also to work even more toward liberty by strengthening institutions and democratic values under a unified defense force. As long as the Kurds remain non-state actors, there will be no prospects for their future.
The US must not repeat such anti-Kurdish stances in the future, not only for their ethical obligations, but also for their national security interests. The US had no alternative plans but to stand with Baghdad and turn a blind eye to the attack on Kurds by Iranians and their proxies. In contrast, the Iranian regime cooperated with Iraq and Turkey on multilayer plans against the Kurds and the US at the same time. Since 2019, the US has been under constant attack by the Iranian regime and its proxies inside Iraq, including the Kurdistan Region, and simultaneously faced threats to leave Iraq. At the same time, the US has lost much of its leverage in Iraq in recent years, and if, after the upcoming election, a pro-Iranian prime minister wins, then the American presence in Iraq and the Kurdistan Region will face even more issues.
For the US and the international community, supporting Kurdistan is the right direction to go, and for the Kurds, independence is the only path to be treated with the dignity and respect afforded to other self-determined nations.
Sierwan Najmaldin Karim is the President of the Washington Kurdish Institute (WKI)