Iraq: unity first, federation second

Subscribe
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti commentator Dina Lyakhovich) - The U.S. Senate's recent amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill supporting a federal system in Iraq has caused quite an uproar, both in Iraq itself and beyond.

This recommendation was perceived as an appeal to carve up Iraq along religious and ethnic lines, though the Senators took care to emphasize the importance of preserving of Iraq's territorial integrity. This is a typical approach - attempting to apply Western logic to the Middle East without thinking about the consequences.

Let's recall the gist of the Senate's resolution: "The United States should actively support a political settlement among Iraq's major factions based upon the provisions of the Constitution of Iraq that create a federal system of government and allow for the creation of federal regions."

Sen. Joe Biden, a Democrat and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, emphasized that support for federalism in Iraq did not mean its partition and that the United States supports Iraq's sovereignty and territorial integrity. He recalled that the Iraqi Constitution had a provision on federalism and already applied it to the Kurds. So, it only remains to seal it legally and spread it to two other regions, populated by Sunnis and Shiites.

It is true that the Constitution proclaims Iraq a federal state. It is also true that debates on how to turn Iraq into a federation and distribute oil revenues have been going on in Iraq for more than a year. Yet the Iraqi political elite has not come to terms on these issues and has not accepted any amendments to the Constitution on this score. Such important documents cannot be adopted when the country's parliament and government are for the most part paralyzed by disputes. Outside pressure will only make a bad situation worse.

The American Senators have not contradicted the Iraqi Constitution in any way. Moreover, they have every right to recommend a political course to its government and the presidential administration. But is it worth doing this in the sensitive political situation that Iraq and the rest of the Middle East now find themselves, especially considering America's contribution to this predicament?

The Iraqis will have to decide how to implement the principle of federalism anyway. Kurdistan has been effectively isolated from the rest of the country for 15 years and has amassed experience of self-government - experience that other regions lack. Baghdad will also have to decide on the distribution of oil revenues. Oil is mostly located in and around the Kurdish-inhabited north and the Shiite south. What is the center supposed to do? If the partition is based on religious and ethnic principles (Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites), won't other minorities demand autonomy within the three federal regions? And what will residents do in areas with a mixed population, especially in Baghdad?

The experience of other countries shows that it is possible to settle such problems - the Russian Federation is a case in point. But this requires peace and accord amongst the national political elite. If policymakers cannot find a common language inside the government or parliament, a federal structure will only further aggravate the problems.

Only national reconciliation can pave the way for stabilization and the settlement of all administrative and political issues. The recent experience of the Middle East demonstrates that any attempts to turn ethnic and religious compromise into a steadily functioning mechanism are doomed to failure.

The Iraqis should again feel a single nation. Any outside aid should be aimed at facilitating this process. Moscow insisted on the need for national consensus in Iraq immediately after the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime, whereas Washington preferred the principle of divide-and-rule. Now the Americans are trying to redress their mistakes but the Senators' attempt looks rather awkward. It only pours more oil on the Iraqi flames - instead of helping the Iraqis unite, it encourages them to fight for a bigger piece of a pie called sovereignty. This will not facilitate the restoration of statehood in Iraq.

As for other countries in the region, they are not likely to pay much heed to what Senator Biden said about the U.S. intention to support Iraq's integrity or the amendment's conformity with Iraqi law. Different forces will interpret his words as they see fit.

Every kid between the Nile and the Indus mistrusts the Americans. Words that have a beautiful and correct ring in Washington, can turn into explosions and acts of terror in the cities of the Middle East. Thus Iraq and the rest of the Middle East have perceived the Senate's amendment not as a well-meaning statement of support, but as an attempt to interfere in the domestic affairs of a sovereign country.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

Newsfeed
0
To participate in the discussion
log in or register
loader
Chats
Заголовок открываемого материала