Kurdistan Independence Referendum

[Admiral Piett]

A binding independence referendum for Iraqi Kurdistan is to be held on 25 September 2017 as the parliament voted against a delay.

The Iraqi government in Baghdad in response has authorized PM Hader Al-Abadi to take all measures to maintain unity. All of Iraq's neighbors were quick to condemn the resolution and will refuse to recognize the referendum. Strong language in particular has come from Turkey and Iraq's chief partner Iran. US diplomats and the UN have urged a delay on the referendum, fearing it may further destabilize the cohesion of the anti-ISIS coalition and throw a wrench into the efforts to rebuild a working relationship with Turkey.

One lone national leader that has offered its support to the Kurdish parliament's referendum is Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel.

This has undoubtedly led to embarrassing anxiety in US leadership. They may be forced to sit on the sidelines and watch as their foremost ally in the fight against ISIS be plunged into conflict with the government it has helped build.

The Kurdish government however insists that it has already delayed a referendum since September of 2014 when it had in effect already become separate from Iraq's control. Further delay they say would not help the ailing Kurdish economy as it needs to have official recognition to find better customers for oil exports which have been low since the collapse of Baghdad's authority. There is no doubt that the Peshmerga forces have been critical to the fighting in key major offensives against ISIS while the Iraqi Army has mostly been ineffective.

What is the key end game here? The west seems to have too much to lose by outright supporting Kurdistan publicly, but can it really afford to watch as their longtime allies be devastated by its neighbors and watch Iraq fall further into Iran's dominance?

Kurdish President Masoud Barzani has inferred that a clash with Baghdad at this point was likely regardless of when the referendum takes place as Kurdish forces maintain possession of retaken ISIS territory claimed by Baghdad. He rebuffed calls for further talks on a federal solution as Baghdad has given them "no better alternative". Likely he sees that the Iraqi Army is in too weak a position to react effectively to prevent a formal separation though the threat from Turkey and possibly Iran is more serious.

In the meantime the Kurdish people who support the referendum feel this is their best opportunity for finally achieving nationhood in a century.

This important event warrants its own topic separate from the toxic "ISIL War in Syria and Iraq" thread I feel.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41279682





https://www.reuters.com/article/us-m...-idUSKCN1BO0QZ

http://www.france24.com/en/20170917-...up-middle-east

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/0...042312324.html

[Telamon]

The Kurds have certainly earned their independence and it would be a great shame for conflict to break out between Kurds and Iraqis. This seems to be another good article on the topic:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-41239673

Unfortunately it does seem that realpolitik will overrule the Kurds' right to self-determination in this case as there seem to be too many parties against Kurdish independence that the US and its allies can't afford to upset by supporting an independent Kurdistan. That said, an independent Kurdistan would probably be a more reliable ally to the US in the long run than Iraq and Turkey.

[Yayattasa]

Kurds want their own country? So be it. That's the only acceptable stance.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

The borders designed by the Great Powers 100 years ago have proven time and again to be a problem. I believe we need to let the middle east sort it self out. Kurds getting their own borders is a good start in my opinion. And the fact that they choose to have a referendum instead of a rebellion and also Iraq finally allowing said referendum is promising. The Kurds fought alongside Iraqi forces to liberate Mosul from ISIS, they were not sitting on their ass and suddenly decided to carve a piece out of Iraq, they fought for this piece.

[Nebaki]

Anything that actually just happens is against the Treaty of Ankara from 1926 - Turkey has an Agreement with Iraq and not with the upcoming thing that should happen on 25 September.



Turkey is already preparing themselve on the Iraq Border:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Post moved from the Syrian Civil War/ISIL insurgency thread. ~Abdülmecid I

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

Anything that actually just happens is against the Treaty of Ankara from 1926 - Turkey has an Agreement with Iraq and not with the upcoming thing that should happen on 25 September.



Turkey is already preparing themselve on the Iraq Border:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Post moved from the Syrian Civil War/ISIL insurgency thread. ~Abdülmecid I

So, if Iraq decides to grant part of it's territory to the Kurds, Turkey will invade Iraq to stop it?

[kyrtgr]

Anything that actually just happens is against the Treaty of Ankara from 1926 - Turkey has an Agreement with Iraq and not with the upcoming thing that should happen on 25 September.
...

Exactly against what part of the Angora 1926 treaty is what is happening today?
http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1927/120.pdf

[Vanoi]

Kurds want their own country? So be it. That's the only acceptable stance.

Good luck. Turkey will make sure that doesn't happen.

From Syria to Iraq, the Kurds have helped make great strides against the IS and now they want something for it since their respective governments failed them utterly. And yet, the Kurds of the Middle East are the new boogeyman. No one wants them to have their own state. Iraq, Assad, and Turkey are all very opposed to any kind of Kurdish state.

Unless a major country like Russia or the US decides to give their full support, there will be no Kurdish state, in Iraq or Syria.

[Nebaki]

Exactly against what part of the Angora 1926 treaty is what is happening today?
http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1927/120.pdf

Article 5

"Each of High Contracting Parties accepts as definitive and inviolable the frontier line fixed by article 1 and undertakes to make no attempt to alter it"

[PointOfViewGun]

Self-determination is a tricky issue. As a simple principle it sounds straight forward, but not so simple in practice. Kurdistan is perhaps one of the trickiest. Hostile neighbors, limited resources, lack of real unity, so on and on. What if Turkmen people want their own little state? Same with Arabs and people of other ethnic groups... Basically, where do you draw the line? The referendum's efforts to especially include regions of controversial status at the moment. If the referendum was limited to KRG lands it would likely be less controversial. Then there is the issue of it turning into a safe haven for groups like PKK to recruit from and train in. It's notable that at one point in the past, when Saddam was in his power in Iraq, more than half of PKK members operating in Turkey were of Syrian origin. Then of course, there is the issue of the whole issue being exasperated by the cold war between the Sunni and Shia block. This whole ordeal seems a little bit too opportunistic for me. Everyone would agree that its a big mess. My guess is that both sides are counting on violence to risk gaining more than they could normally get.

[Nebaki]

Self-determination is a tricky issue. As a simple principle it sounds straight forward, but not so simple in practice. Kurdistan is perhaps one of the trickiest. Hostile neighbors, limited resources, lack of real unity, so on and on. What if Turkmen people want their own little state? Same with Arabs and people of other ethnic groups...

1+

If Kurdistan happen then People will ask themselve why not an Catalonia or even an an State for the Basques? Another Independence Referendum for Scotland? Bavaria ?

[Abdülmecid I]

@Emperor Artcurus Mengsk,

The Iraqi government has not allowed or recognized the upcoming referendum. Barzani's initiative was unilateral.

And yet, the Kurds of the Middle East are the new boogeyman. No one wants them to have their own state. Iraq, Assad, and Turkey are all very opposed to any kind of Kurdish state.

Pretty sure that the country is actually called Syria. I doubt anyone calls Iraqi Kurdistan as Barzani, despite him remaining the president of the region since its unification, for 12 years, after his term has been extended very controversially twice already. Basically, this is why he insists on refusing to delay the referendum, despite the overwhelmingly negative feedback from the international community. He hopes that being the leader of an independent Kurdistan will boost his popularity, after the great hits it received, due to corruption, low oil prices, the collapse of Peshmerga during ISIL's Mosul offensive and the increasing dominance of leftist Kurdish groups, which undermine his regime by posing as a viable alternative. Barzani, by ignoring the way of negotiation and compromise, is threatening Iraqi Kurdistan with economic recession and harsh reprisals from Baghdad, while he's also distracting the coalition from focusing on the elimination of ISIL. I wouldn't even surprised if a fragile independent Iraqi Kurdistan fragments into the fiefs of Erbil and Sulaymaniyah, controlled by KDP and PUK respectively, in a moderate repetition of the 1994-1997 Civil War.

From Syria to Iraq, the Kurds have helped make great strides against the IS and now they want something for it since their respective governments failed them utterly.

Iraqi Kurdistan also failed greatly the people living inside its claimed territory, in an act of betrayal that led to the latest case of genocide, but I suppose that recognizing this fact would harm the nationalist narrative of presenting U.S. allies as a beacon of morality. Apart from Peshmerga fleeing Sinjar without a fight and discouraging the Yazidis from abandoning their homes, in order not to interrupt the retreat of the armed forces, the Iraqi Kurdish government has often been accused of ethnic cleansing and violence, including Arabs, Assyrians and Yazidis, so there is no easy answer on this issue, neither from an ethical nor from a diplomatic perspective. Barzani appealing to an homogeneous society clearly puts minorities at danger and demonstrates how catastrophic a rushed, for domestic reasons, and inflexible decision like that can be. The widespread hostility from both sides guarantees that the situation will probably not improve, because good will is lacking.

[Nebaki]

An Statement from UN:

"Statement Attributable to the Spokesman of the Secretary-General on the recent vote in the North Iraq Region of Iraq Parliament

The Secretary-General believes that any unilateral decision to hold a referendum at this time would detract from the need to defeat Da'esh, as well as the much-needed reconstruction of the regained territories and the facilitation of a safe, voluntary and dignified return of the more than three million refugees and internally displaced people.

The Secretary-General respects the sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity of Iraq and considers that all outstanding issues between the federal Government and the North Iraq Regional Government should be resolved through structured dialogue and constructive compromise.

The Secretary-General calls upon the leaders across Iraq to approach this matter with patience and restraint. The United Nations stands ready to support such efforts.

Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesman for the Secretary-General"

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/...al-recent-vote

I don´t think that Barzani will able to hold that Referendum but after all Israel already confirmed their Support in this Case, i guess things will be move on the next Stage on this Theatre of Middle East.

[Vanoi]

Pretty sure that the country is actually called Syria. I doubt anyone calls Iraqi Kurdistan as Barzani, despite him remaining the president of the region since its unification, for 12 years, after his term has been extended very controversially twice already.

Barzani's country isn't in the midst of a civil war. I mentioned Assad because i was referring specifically to the Syrian government forces.

Iraqi Kurdistan also failed greatly the people living inside its claimed territory, in an act of betrayal that led to the latest case of genocide, but I suppose that recognizing this fact would harm the nationalist narrative of presenting U.S. allies as a beacon of morality.

Are you talking about the Kurds retreating? Because your little article doesn't blame the Kurds for the genocide. I don't even understand why you mention this since it doesn't have any bearing on to what i said. The Kurds believe the corrupt government of Iraq helped lead to this situation.

Apart from Peshmerga fleeing Sinjar without a fight and discouraging the Yazidis from abandoning their homes, in order not to interrupt the retreat of the armed forces, the Iraqi Kurdish government has often been accused of ethnic cleansing and violence, including Arabs, Assyrians and Yazidis, so there is no easy answer on this issue, neither from an ethical nor from a diplomatic perspective. Barzani appealing to an homogeneous society clearly puts minorities at danger and demonstrates how catastrophic a rushed, for domestic reasons, and inflexible decision like that can be. The widespread hostility from both sides guarantees that the situation will probably not improve, because good will is lacking.

There has to be a concession on behalf of Iraq to calm the Kurds down. Only way i see the Kurds abandoning the referendum.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

The problem here is that there is precedent, and quite modern in the form of Kosovo. It's not ancient history.

Some of the countries that want to block the referendum have already recognized Kosovo.

US and Turkey recognize Kosovo.

Turkey not only recognize Kosovo but are also the masters of the Northern Cypriot puppet state.

Ideologically, I think the Kurds deserve their own country.

Practically, the Kurds have bad relations with a lot of people in the areas they live in, which means that separating themselves from those people could help solve problems in the area.

Geopolitically, it's understandable that none of the affected countries wants to part with their land, but how exactly do you stop them if they vote YES? What is the international community going to do? Kill them?

[NorseThing]

Iraq central government does not support this. It is not binding no matter what the party supporting this states since it is not a national referendum.

For those interested in a less impassioned article, I would suggest a quick read of wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_...ferendum,_2017

My personal belief is that the referendum will not be held since holding it is tantamount to declaring civil war. The Kurds are not stupid, but sometimes I wonder about their populist leadership.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

1+

If Kurdistan happen then People will ask themselve why not an Catalonia or even an an State for the Basques? Another Independence Referendum for Scotland? Bavaria ?

I fail to see how any of these states would be unreasonable and funny to imagine.
There already is a Catalonia independence referendum planned, and there's a thread for it here on the forums. The Basques have had a separatist (terrorist) movement for a long time, and there have been talks of a second Scotland referendum ever since Brexit. There is even a political party in Bavaria calling for independence, though it doesn't have any real support.

[Cyclops]

I support the idea of national sovereignty, but pragmatically an independent Kurdistan is a political land mine that could precipitate a war across the region. Its conceivable Iran and Turkey could actually combine to destroy Kurdistan. If Syria wasn't in fragments it would join the party too.

I just hope the Orange Idiot doesn't hear about this, he'll make six contradictory statements on Twitter and push everyone in the Middle East into the pockets of the Chinese.

[hellheaven1987]

Great, now there is finally a destination point for deposing Kurds.

[Gäiten]

Great, now there is finally a destination point for deposing Kurds.

Exactly this might happen. Ethnical cleansing.