A detailed opinion poll in December 2010 revealed other significant snapshots. About two-thirds thought the economic situation to be somewhat good or good and most thought the region was going in the right direction. The top three problems were unemployment, corruption and poor services, though few said they had personal experience of corruption. Security was well down the list. The poll revealed a society which respects the authority of the household and religion.
The overall picture vindicates successive reports by the all-party parliamentary group which has recorded political and economic progress as well as serious deficiencies in women’s rights, media freedoms and corruption.
Success in Kurdistan could help stabilise the rest of Iraq whose fledgling democracy could bolster reform in the wider Middle East.
However, the release of our most recent report was overshadowed by these deaths in Suleimani, which has been neglected for many years. A critic recently told me about what he dubbed ‘the 400 year hospital’ whose finalisation is regularly delayed – presumably because too many are taking cuts.
Outsiders can highlight overall progress for the Kurdish liberation movement since they rose up twenty years ago and threw Saddam out. They can mark the genocide conducted by Saddam which murdered nearly 200,000 people and destroyed 4,500 villages. They can also note, compared to the rest of Iraq, a major increase in living standards, more electricity and visible economic growth. Relations with Baghdad and Turkey have improved considerably too.
But Iraqi Kurds don’t live elsewhere and most don’t remember the great battles of the past because they are under 25. They cannot live today on such comparisons and rightly demand progress.
The deaths in February are tragic. The government has instituted an inquiry which must be candid. The President has said that those with a hand in the violence will be put on trial. I am pleased that most parties have recently agreed a peace and stability pact.
Some detect the manipulative hand of Iran in the disturbances to destabilise Iraq. But David Romano, an American Professor of Middle East Politics, says: ‘Show me a government that doesn’t blame domestic unrest on outsiders and I’ll show you a state that’s ready to solve its problems.’
The Iranian dictatorship prefers failure in Iraq but there are clearly genuine grievances and it’s best to address the underlying causes. Iraqi Kurdistan is in transition from a politics dominated by two parties which faced severe external threats and their own civil war as well as a command style economy. Both parties drew on Soviet models which don’t suit an open economy and a vibrant democracy.
Reform bumps up against vested interests and all while seeking to protect their real security against efforts by Al Qaeda and others to destroy a growing pluralist and peaceful Muslim democracy. There will be a struggle within the ruling parties and wider society to squeeze out the rot and it won’t be easy but it has to be done.
Democracy is about much more than voting and requires attributes such as the rule of law, transparency, accountability, information, a thriving press and independent civil society organisations. All these are present but in an immature form and have to be nurtured. The Kurdish leadership positively seek external expertise in developing them. They want MPs and others to help train them in how to do politics. The opposition needs to know how oppositions operate. Trade unions, whose leaders share common cause with political leaders, need to understand how to be independent. Business groups need to know how to be better entrepreneurs and call upon British and other companies to trade with them and to invest.
Kurdish leaders deserve credit for wanting to use their potentially enormous wealth to create a socially just society and not another oil rich state with the resources to build a security apparatus which bypasses the people whilst importing vast armies of foreign labour.
The Kurdistan Region in Iraq has endured gross suffering for many decades. The path of reform will be hard but could demonstrate their resilience. It is their struggle but democrats elsewhere can do much to help.
This article fails to see the root of the problems in the Kurdistan Region. The ruling political parties are way too powerful and constantly interfere in every aspect of life, from the recruitment of a cleaner in a village school to the appointment of each and every judge. There is no democracy, including the hand over of power, inside the parties. Look at the ruling parties: Masoud Barzani has been leading Kurdistan Democratic Party since 1979, while Jalal Talabani has been at the helm of the PUK since its inception in 1975. Both, especially the KDP, is a tribal structure: It has only ever been led by a Barzani family member, and now Nechirvan Barzani and Masroor Barzani (Masoud Barzani’s nephew and son respectively) are being groomed as future leaders. There is absolutely no respect for institutions; when Barzani senior met Obama in Washington in his capacity as regional president, he chose to take Nechirvan and Masroor Barzani, none of whom had any government post at the time! Corruption has been rife in the region for years. You only need to speak to a cab driver to know how everyone knows about it. All the leaders, including Barzani, speak about it, but today not a single step has been taken and not a single person has ever been charged over corruption. And finally, when it comes to the Kurdistan Region, speaking about outside interferences, Iran or whoever, is a joke. Both Talabani and Barzani have very close ties with senior Iranian officials, going back to the 1980s. They have offices across Iran. No other Kurdish group has better ties with them.
This article fails to see the root of the problems in the Kurdistan Region. The ruling political parties are way too powerful and constantly interfere in every aspect of life, from the recruitment of a cleaner in a village school to the appointment of each and every judge. There is no democracy, including the hand over of power, inside the parties. Look at the ruling parties: Masoud Barzani has been leading Kurdistan Democratic Party since 1979, while Jalal Talabani has been at the helm of the PUK since its inception in 1975. Both, especially the KDP, is a tribal structure: It has only ever been led by a Barzani family member, and now Nechirvan Barzani and Masroor Barzani (Masoud Barzani’s nephew and son respectively) are being groomed as future leaders. There is absolutely no respect for institutions; when Barzani senior met Obama in Washington in his capacity as regional president, he chose to take Nechirvan and Masroor Barzani, none of whom had any government post at the time! Corruption has been rife in the region for years. You only need to speak to a cab driver to know how everyone knows about it. All the leaders, including Barzani, speak about it, but today not a single step has been taken and not a single person has ever been charged over corruption. And finally, when it comes to the Kurdistan Region, speaking about outside interferences, Iran or whoever, is a joke. Both Talabani and Barzani have very close ties with senior Iranian officials, going back to the 1980s. They have offices across Iran. No other Kurdish group has better ties with them.
Alan, whoever that may be, may have been reading a different article from the one I wrote since it argued that “Iraqi Kurdistan is in transition from a politics dominated by two parties which faced severe external threats and their own civil war as well as a command style economy. Both parties drew on Soviet models which don’t suit an open economy and a vibrant democracy. Reform bumps up against vested interests and all while seeking to protect their real security against efforts by Al Qaeda and others to destroy a growing pluralist and peaceful Muslim democracy. There will be a struggle within the ruling parties and wider society to squeeze out the rot and it won’t be easy but it has to be done.” He ignores the results of the poll I outlined and which bear re-examination. He makes a lot of the fact that the two main parties have what he calls ties with senior Iranian officials. Given that many Iraqi Kurds were in exile in Iran, some remain there and the two share a very long border, this is hardly new or surprising. Iraqi Kurdistan didn’t choose its neighbours.
The article fails to correctly show the economic situation. Kurdistan economy is not a command economy modelled on a Soviet socialist style economy. Its supposed to be a free market one, but its a poor semblance of that. The main problem the economy is suffering from, is the lack of a vibrant private sector. There needs to be more legislation and encouragement of the fledgeling private sector in Kurdistan. At the moment big and medium business is dominated by the political big dogs leaving little room for the genuine entrepreneurs.
Swara Kadiri makes some fair points. Actually I said that Kurdistan is in transition from a command politics and economics. I am well aware of government policy to grow the private sector and take part in open markets. I have met the Chambers of Commerce in the three main cities several times and they are keen on this. The APPG is seeking to respond to their calls for British trade and investment and to overcome obstacles to this. There is a recognition that exchange programmes can also increase the capacity of politicians and entrepreneurs.