Assessing Iraq's Future: President Barzani's interview with Brookings Institute (Kurdish Globe)

http://www.kurdishglobe.net/displayArticle.jsp?id=354C8E8790DD2D27FF990D578D865DC7
31 January 2010

Saban Center for Middle East Policy director Kenneth Pollack interviews Kurdistan Region President Masoud Barzani in Washington, D.C., during the President's recent visit to the United States.

Q: Welcome to the Brookings Institute. I must ask a question on many Americans' minds, because it has been an issue concerning Iraq that has been in the newspapers. We've all read about the recent moves to attempt to ban about 500 Iraqi politicians because of their association with the Baath Party. It is something that got a great deal of ink here in the United States, and I would like you to explain what is going and how concerned we should be about it.

A: I thank you very much for providing me with this opportunity to be at the Brookings Institute with you. I would like to thank the audience here. I believe there has been a little bit exaggeration with this issue. In Article 7 of the Iraqi Constitution, all those who have committed crimes, promoted principles of the Baath Party, and cooperated with terrorists are not to be given the opportunity to participate in the political process in Iraq. In fact, issues have been mixed and people have been mixed together concerning those who are to be covered by this Article and those who do not deserve to be covered by it. Before departing Iraq, I also had a phone conversation with Mr. al-Maliki. Our view is that those who have not committed crimes against the Iraqi people, those who have not participated in the Anfal operations or other operations against innocent Iraqi people, and those who show commitment to the Iraqi Constitution should be given an opportunity to participate in the political process and the upcoming elections. In fact, it does not include only the Sunni Arabs--there are Shiites and Kurds among them.

Q: Mr. President, thank you for that answer. Let me expand on that, as obviously there are other concerns about the elections. It would be very helpful if you could give us a sense of what you are looking for from the election coming up in March. What hopes will they produce, and what do you fear could be the result if things go badly?

A: There is no doubt that the forthcoming election is an important one for the people of Iraqi and of Kurdistan Region in particular. We expect the current Iraqi political map to change. The most important is to attempt to have the largest number of Iraqis to take part in it, and also ensure that it is a fair and transparent election. On another hand, we believe coalitions will be made after the elections. We--in the Kurdistan Region--have decided to enter alliances after the election on the basis of commitment to the Constitution; that will be our criteria for entering alliances. I don't expect any list alone can win enough seats to form a government, but it has to ally with other blocs.

Q: Mr. President, obviously the world has been much concerned about the potential of this election to go badly. What are your nightmare scenarios? What keeps you up at night? What is it about the election you most fear? Is there some sort of scenario out there you are most afraid of?

A: The biggest fear is that the closer we get to the election and during the election, there will be attempts by terrorist groups to carry out their actions. The other thing is that we have asked our friends to help us and support us in the election to ensure there will be no forgery or double-voting, which is a main fear. If we have a transparent election, we will accept and respect whatever the election results are. For that, we depend on reliable, neutral, international observers to be part of that process. Technically and logistically, the United Nations and other friends of the Iraqi people have to help us in that process.

Q: Mr. President, you of all people are well aware that your friends beyond Iraq's borders-- your neighbors--have often had great interest in Iraq's internal affairs. Are you concerned about the possibility that any of the Iraq's neighbors will try to get involved in the elections?

A: Unfortunately, the interference of neighboring countries continues.

Q: Is there a way that the U.S. or other countries can help to push back on that interference in a way that it would be more effective than we have done so far?

A: In fact, Iraqis can put an end to this interference. I don't believe there is much that the U.S. or friends of Iraq can do. The Iraqi political parties and the Iraqi federal government have to move on in order to prevent interferences. We agree to have friendly and neighborly relations based on mutual respect and interest, and that should be the criteria for a good relationship. Iraqis should not create any opportunity for such interferences in the internal affairs of Iraq. The more they have that opportunity, the more it is difficult for the U.S. to be able to play an effective role in preventing such interferences.

Q: Mr. President, if I could pick up another point you raised that I think is very important, it is your expectation--which I think is shared by many other experts--that it is unlikely that one party in the election is going to secure an outright majority. What this suggests to many observers in Iraq is that we may have a long and difficult process of government formation, and I'd like to pick up on this theme of the American role and ask how you think the United States can be helpful in helping the Iraqis to overcome those obstacles, those hurdles.

A: In fact, there is always a role for the United States to play using its weight, its effectiveness, its influence to help the Iraqi people overcome the difficulties and problems that we face. Once again, I would like to reiterate that the Iraqi political forces can help the United States so that the United States will be able to help them succeed in the process. If the political forces in Iraq seek a solution, then I think there would be a role for the United States to play to help them.

Q: Why don't we look now beyond the election, because obviously the election is an important milestone but it's only another step in the path; it is not the end of the path. After the election we are going to need to have some very difficult negotiations regarding the real bedrock future of Iraq, and I think it would be helpful for us, Mr. President, if you laid out very clearly going into these negotiations what you believe the wide answers on the issue of greatest importance to you, Kirkuk, the other disputed internal territories, the hydrocarbon law--where you believe that these issues need to come out as we move forward with these negotiations?

A: Of course, the problems are twofold. One side are the problems that are relevant to Iraq and the federal government in Baghdad, and the other one is relevant to the issues between the KRG and the federal government. In fact, issues related to Iraq as a whole are commitment to the Constitution, participation in power-sharing arrangements, governance system in Iraq, the culture of self-imposition, and the culture of unilateral decision and ruling in the country. The other, related to the relation between KRG and Baghdad, includes Article 140 of the Constitution, which is relevant to Kirkuk and other disputed territories. In fact, Article 140 is not only relevant to Kurdistan Region, Kirkuk, and other disputed areas. There are other areas in Iraq that have been affected by that because of the manipulation of the gerrymandering of the internal boundaries in Iraq as well. But, as far as we are concerned for going down the road to solve the issues of Kirkuk and other disputed territories, until now we do not find any other alternative better than Article 140 of the Constitution, since it is eventually going back to the vote of the people to determine the future. In fact, the most important thing for us is determining the identity of Kirkuk, and we believe that all the historical, geographical, and demographic facts prove that Kirkuk has been part of Kurdistan. Having said that, we have agreed and we have shown flexibility to go back to the vote of the people to determine their own status. The moment this is implemented on the ground, we pledge that we will ready and willing, and we show flexibility to make sure that there will be genuine power sharing in the administration in Kirkuk. The other point, regarding of the issue of oil and gas--according to the Constitution, we agree that oil and gas belong to all the people of Iraq. To that we don't have a problem. The difference is on revenue sharing. Based on a political agreement, we agreed our share to be 17 percent for the Kurdistan Region. We deserve more than that, but this was what was agreed upon until a census can be held. The right thing we think is to allocate the share of the Kurdistan Region in order to go into a separate account relevant to the KRG to be monitored and transparent, but not to be at the control and for us to be at the mercy of Baghdad and then to use it as a political pressure card to influence the region to cut in whenever they like. According to the Constitution, the Peshmarga forces are legal and constitutional forces. We believe that their funding should come from the federal government based on the fact that the Peshmarga are a part of the defense structure and defense system of Iraq. The other issue we have is regarding restructure and rebuilding of the Iraqi army. After 2003, we were hoping for and were working toward rebuilding the new Iraqi army based on a new system with a new culture and education. But right now, if you look out of the total makeup of the Iraqi army, 8% of them are Kurds, 48% are Shiites, and 44% Sunni Arabs. We do not see any justice in that? It has to be adjusted and a true representation of Iraqi society.

Q: Mr. President, thank you very much for your explanations; they were very helpful. I would like to bring you back if I could to Kirkuk. As you are aware, the United Nations has suggested a variety of different compromise solutions, including some that might put Kirkuk in a special status. It is on its own province or a province that has dual representation in between both the KRG and the central government. What is your reaction to these different proposals? Is that something that you might envision as potential solution to the dispute of Kirkuk at some point?

A: The issue of Kirkuk is a very important and sensitive for us, the Kurds, and also for Iraq. This has been one of the main reasons behind the Kurdish movements and struggles with the successive Iraqi governments in the past. We want this problem to be solved and not have it remain as it is. During the time the Constitution was drafted, that was the main provision for us to continue participating in the political process--for a solution to be found for Kirkuk on the basis of Article 140. Even then we have left the final decision for the people of those areas to determine. Therefore, there is no alternative to this article. This is running away from constitutional text that is very clear. We regard other alternatives as unsuitable solutions that won't solve the problem, but complicate it more.

Q: Mr. President, I'd like to turn your attention a little bit farther abroad now. You have--because of a difficult geographic position--a great deal of experiences, as I mentioned earlier, with some of Iraq's neighbors; and with one of Iraq's neighbors we have particularly problematic relations--the United States, that is. And that is Iran. And today the United States once against is confronting Iran and trying to figure what policy we should adapt. I was wondering if you had any wise advice for us on how to think about Iran, and what you think the United States should be thinking in terms of the new policies toward Iran.

A: This is a difficult question. I don't see myself in a position to be able to give advice to the United States because everybody is watching the situation the same way as we do. But certainly Iran is an important country in the area. Iran seeks a great role. Then, that depends on the United States, Europe, and the international community whether they would be willing to give that role to Iran to play. Any violence that happens there normally will have an impact on our situation as well. Therefore, we hope to utilize peaceful means and dialogue to reach a solution rather than using violence and force. We in the Kurdistan Region are not in a position to be a part of this struggle.

Q: Mr. President, I started out with very specific questions; I'd like to end my questions with a much wider one. You've led your people for 30 years; you fought for people for even longer. I think it will be very helpful for us to hear straight from your lips your vision for Iraqi Kurdistan. What is it that you would like to see? What role would you like to see it play within Iraq--within the region? Where would like your people to be in five years--in 10 years?

A: Fortunately, we proudly can say that the security situation in Kurdistan Region is very good. That is attributed to the culture and awareness of our people, who have been cooperating with the region's security apparatus. We are working on building institutions in the region. On tragic sufferings our people have had, from now on we will try for them to live in peace and also to compensate them for some of their sufferings. I can admit and say that we have such started. We are still learning, just as a student in the early stages. We have shortcomings, but we have serious desire. So long as Iraq is governed by this Constitution, we will--based on the decision made by the Kurdistan Parliament--remain and move within the boundaries of Iraq. Also, we will work and cooperate with Baghdad and the political forces to build a federal democratic Iraq. And Kurdistan Region can play the role of bridge between Iraq and Turkey and Europe. Kurdistan also could be a business gate for the country until security and stability is accomplished in the rest of Iraq. It can be a gate to welcome companies and investors through the region into the country. This is our desire, and it is what we work for. But there is also the fact, I have stated and I would to reiterate--God forbid, if Iraq goes back to dictatorship, we will not be able to live under a dictatorial regime.

Questions from floor:

Q: Turkish "Newsweek" magazine: If the PKK refuses to drop its weapon and Turkey continues its military operations, will you consider cooperating with Turkey?

A: Barzani: Right now there is an opening process in Turkey, and these efforts are to find peaceful solutions. Let's focus on that. So, we strongly support this peaceful process we support the Turkish government's ending this problem. But all of us are convinced that wars or military ways or political pressures will never bring any solutions. God forbid if that is chosen. We will not be part of that solution.

Q: Hussein Abdul Hussein, "Al-ra'y" newspaper: Head of opposition, Nawsherwan Mustafa, said he will not join the KDP and PUK list in the upcoming election. Will it affect the Kurdish interest in Baghdad?

A: There is a difference between same stand and same list. In the last election we did not run on one list. Kurdistan Islamic Union had run for the election on a different list. But in Baghdad we had one voice regarding the strategic issues and national interests. Recently, we had a meeting with all political parties in Kurdistan, and we agreed to have one voice regarding the strategic issues and national interests.

Q: "The Nation" magazine: Did you condemn the decision of Saleh Motlaq's disqualification for the upcoming election, or did you support it? Do you see any role by Iran in this case?

A: My answer is that we in Kurdistan don't have the culture of retaliation and revenge. At the same time we don't have sectarian problems in Kurdistan. Just like you, I read in the newspaper that he was disqualified; I have not been consulted regarding this decision. I haven't heard that Motlaq has participated in killing Iraqi people. If he shows a commitment to Iraq's Constitution, I have no objection if he runs in the upcoming elections. Generally speaking, all Iraqi neighbors have an agenda in Iraq. Maybe Iran's agenda is wider. Certainly each of the countries would like to have some to be part of the election process, and some would like to be out of the process.

Q: Brookings Foreign Policy Program: We Americans see Iraq's biggest problem as terrorism. If you could explain two things: number one, where is it coming from? What are the sources of terrorism? Number two, as the United States army withdraws, do you expect it will erase all the developments?

A: The terrorism phenomenon has become very dangerous in the whole world, and day after day it is growing. I believe there are many sources. Certainly it comes from outside Iraq, but to identify it is difficult. If fact the political situation in Iraq must be remedied since it paves the way for Iraq to become stable. Otherwise, it will be difficult to stabilize Iraq through the military; there must be a true national reconciliation. Regarding the withdrawal of the U.S. army, I want to thank the American people and government for their contribution, and we appreciate the sacrifices they made in freeing the Kurdish and Iraqi people. But we have to expect that one day these forces have to come back. The most important question I asked President Obama was, as the U.S. Army withdraws, will American commitment end in Iraq? He responded that "U.S. engagement will remain in Iraq."

Q: Kani Ghulam: There was a constitutional court in Turkey that banned a Kurdish party there. What is your position regarding that decision, and what is your advice for the Kurds in Turkey? Ankara always seeks advice from Brussels and Washington in regards to the Kurdish question. Have they approached you regarding that issue?

A: We didn't view the constitutional court's decision as a right decision because we didn't believe that would serve the peace process that is underway; it was against democracy. And also my advice to our Kurdish brothers in Turkey is to have a good and positive response, and be cooperative with the Turkish government so that we do not lose this opportunity--so that we continue pursuing the peaceful process. We have a continued dialogue with Turkey.

Q: McQuire: In wide and recent efforts by the PUK to reform, particularly since the July regional elections, are there parallel and similar efforts by the KDP to undertake internal reforms?

A: We are heading towards holding the KDP Congress this year. Whatever reform is needed will be conducted there.

The interview is published by Brookings Institute, edited by the Kurdish Globe.

Print this post