Tag

Kurdistan

Browsing
Get started on your Homeland Security Degree at American Military University.

By Stephen Schwalbe
Faculty Member, Public Administration at American Public University

In 2006, Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) and Leslie Gelb, President of the Council of Foreign Relations, co-authored an op ed article in the New York Times strongly recommending the creation of an Iraqi confederation.

That would entail splitting the country into three autonomous regions. One part, perhaps named Shiastan, would be for the majority Shia Muslims, and would include Baghdad. A second region, the largest territorial section of Iraq, would be for the Sunnis, perhaps named Sunnistan. The third region would be for the ethnic Kurds in northern Iraq, which is already known as Kurdistan.

These three regions would essentially govern themselves. National duties, involving common interests such as defense and foreign policy, would be conducted from Baghdad.

The Iraqi Constitution Allows for Such a Confederation of Regional Governments

The Iraqi Constitution already allows for such a confederation of regional governments. However, when the Biden-Gelb article was published, the Iraqi War had just ended and most international leaders wanted newly elected Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, to have a chance to rebuild the country.

Iraq confederation
Is this possibly a future map of the region?

Instead, al-Maliki played favorites with the Shiites and persecuted the Sunnis in the country. He also moved Iraq into a close relationship with Iran, Iraq’s former mortal enemy. One could make the case that these actions were the seeds of the new Sunni Islamic State that formed within Syria and Iraq in the summer of 2014.

Over the past several months, the Islamic State has been defeated in Mosel, Iraq’s third largest city with over 2 million people, and in Raqqa, Syria, the Islamic State’s self-proclaimed capital.

The International Focus Has Turned Again to the Future of Iraq

So, once again, the international focus has turned to the future of Iraq. The issue came to the forefront of world attention with the recent referendum in Kurdistan. That referendum resulted in over 90% of Kurds strongly supporting independence from Iraq.

That being said, it is now time to seriously consider a different approach regarding the future of Iraq.

Looking back in history, after World War I, the Ottoman Empire was split among the victors of the war. The League of Nations awarded Great Britain the Mandate of Mesopotamia. Britain then set the borders of Iraq and intentionally separated the ethnicities and Muslim sects to make it easier to control. London also installed a Hashemite monarchy to rule the new country  with its Sunni Muslim minority.

The foundation of this 20th century nation was tenuous at best in the long run.

[Also By Stephen Schwalbe: The US Dilemma: Shoot Down North Korean Missiles or Negotiate an End to Them?]

In the mid-1990s, a similar situation occurred in Eastern Europe.  Yugoslavia broke up into separate states soon after the death of its long-time communist leader Josip Broz Tito in 1980. Following the end of the Cold War in 1991, Bosnia declared its independence and was soon torn apart by ethnic strife among the Bosnian Serbs, Muslims and Croats. The situation became so bad that the United States finally stepped in and brokered a peace agreement in November 1995 known as the Dayton Accords.

The presidents of Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia agreed that Bosnia would be split into ethnic regions, with each autonomous region maintaining its own army. Perhaps there are some aspects of the Dayton Accords that would apply to Iraq today?

The central government of Iraq is currently dominated by Shia, who continue to oppress the minority Sunnis and Kurds. The Sunnis are unlikely to remain subjugated by the Shia in the future, as evidenced by the sudden rise of the Islamic State.  The Kurds have experienced 15 years of autonomy in Kurdistan and are looking for greater independence than they had before. The Kurdish Peshmerga was the most effective military ally the U.S. had on the ground during the fight against the Islamic State.

With the Bosnian experience in mind, now might be best time to split Iraq into a confederation of three autonomous regions under a central government in Baghdad.

While this proposal sounds reasonable to outsiders, there might be little motivation by internal Iraqi factions to agree to such an arrangement.

Biden and Gelb recommended that each faction receive a share of the annual government budget based on its population. As such, the Sunnis, who make up 20 percent of the Iraqi population, would be eligible for 20 percent of the budget. However, populations change, albeit slowly, and a population census can be manipulated.

To gain agreement from all sides, it might be better if each of the three factions received 25 percent of the annual budget with the last 25 percent going to administer Baghdad and the central government.

Finally, the central government should be led by a triumvirate of the leaders of each of the three autonomous regions, each with an equal vote.  This could motivate all sides to come to an agreement towards confederation that would allow Iraq to function as a nation for the foreseeable future.

About the Author

Dr. Stephen Schwalbe is an associate professor at American Military University. He is also an adjunct professor at Columbia College and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.  Stephen served as a Defense Attache in Jordan from 2000-2002.