Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

War on Iraq

Pressure Building in Kirkuk: Will It Be the Next to Explode?

By Caroline Tosh and Zaineb Ahmed, Institute for War and Peace Reporting. Posted April 1, 2008.


The US needs to persuade the political winners of recent years to cede some of their power, but that might be easier said than done.
Advertisement

Last month, a United Nations envoy likened the struggle between Kurds and Arabs for control of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk in northern Iraq to a "ticking time bomb.''

Staffan de Mistura, who is helping broker a settlement between Baghdad and Erbil on future arrangements for Kirkuk, said in an interview for the Bloomberg news agency that he had just a few months left to solve what he termed "the mother of all crises'' in Iraq.

"If that takes place, we will have contributed substantially to avoiding a new conflict at the worst possible time,'' said the Swedish diplomat in the report.

The autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government, KRG, would like to see the return of Kurds who were expelled from Kirkuk as part of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's "Arabization" policy, under which the Kurds -- whom he viewed as politically suspect -- were driven out of oil-rich areas of the north and replaced by a smaller number of Arabs.

The Kurds say they have a historical claim to Kirkuk city, and that they lost a great deal of property and land there under Saddam.

The KRG is calling for a referendum to decide the future of the city and its surrounding oil fields, which lie outside Kurdistan's three provinces of Erbil, Sulaimaniyah and Dohuk.

Article 140 of the 2005 Iraqi constitution contains a provision for just such a referendum to decide the fate of the city and its environs.

Under this article, the authorities must first achieve "normalization" -- taken to mean the reversal or mitigation of "Arabization" policy -- and hold a census in Kirkuk. The government must complete a series of steps set out in the Transitional Administrative Law - an interim constitution dating from 2004. These include restitution for people who were forced out; resettling or otherwise accommodating people who were moved into the area by Saddam; and remedying unjust boundary changes carried out by his regime.

While no up-to-date statistics exist on the ethnic and religious make-up of the province of Kirkuk (also known as Tamim), Kurds are thought to be the largest ethnic group, and they hold the most seats on the provincial council.

But the idea that the city could be incorporated into an expanded Kurdish region is bitterly opposed by Iraqi Arabs, who do not want to cede control of the city and its oil to an autonomous Kurdish entity. The area is thought to hold some 12 per cent of Iraq's confirmed oil reserves.

Kirkuk's significant Turkoman population, which has its own historical claims on the city, is also against absorption into the KRG and would rather see the city granted some kind of special status.

A decision was made in December to delay the referendum until June this year, partly because of growing violence in Kirkuk.

As the Kirkuk crisis simmers, relations between the KRG capital Erbil and Baghdad have been further strained by disagreements over the funding of the Peshmerga or Kurdish military, and over oil deals signed by the Kurds without reference to Baghdad. The Iraqi oil ministry claims these arrangements are unconstitutional and is reportedly threatening to blacklist the foreign companies involved, preventing them pursuing oil contracts with Baghdad.

The UN has now been drafted in to help settle disagreements over Kirkuk and other matters ahead of a plebiscite designed to "determine the will of... citizens" with regard to the city and other disputed territories.

Meanwhile, Iraq's neighbors look on with keen interest. If the KRG were to absorb Kirkuk, the consolidation this would mean for the entity could have implications for Kurdish minorities in Turkey, Syria and Iran.

Ankara is fiercely protective of Kirkuk's Turkomans, and also fearful that Kurdistan could use the added oil wealth to make a future bid for independence - something it would oppose given the implications for its home-grown Kurdish separatist movement.

Were there to be an actual conflict over Kirkuk, it now seems less and less certain whether Kurdistan could count on the backing of Washington, formerly a close ally. The United States was notably slow to react when Turkey breached Iraqi sovereignty by launching incursions into the north of the country last month, in pursuit of rebels of the Kurdistan Workers' Party or PKK.

Kurds Accused of "Overreaching"

While there is some sympathy for the Kurds' ambition to secure greater control of resources so as to help prevent a repeat of their past suffering, a recent wave of articles abroad has accused Kurdistan of overplaying its hand.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, turkey, kirkuk, turkomen, puk, kdp

Caroline Tosh is an IWPR editor in London. Zaineb Ahmed is an IWPR-trained journalist in Baghdad.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Kirkuk Referendum is Constitutionally Mandated
Posted by: waterislifeaguaesvida on Apr 2, 2008 7:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No matter what differences exist between Iraqi Kurds and Iraqi Arabs the issue of the Kirkuk Referendum is constituionally mandated in the existing Iraqi Constitution. Kurds are a nation and their legal protections that were included in the Constitution have been the result of the gassing at Halabja, the genocide in the Anfal campaign and the forced relocations of Kurds under Saddam Hussein. There is NO dispute concerning the attacks on the Kurdish population. To address these injustices requires implementation of the Kirkuk Referendum and the resettlement of displaced populations. Justice requires action to address past grievances.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Even if constitutional the other countries involved could negate it
Posted by: nightgaunt on Apr 4, 2008 12:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Turkey certainly has made it known they don't want or like Kurdish nationhood. So far the Iraqi gov't (as it is) under USA occupation have left them alone. Then there is the USA itself who has twice turned on the Kurds when it served their larger purpose. So far the tenative support by our gov't may be giving them a certain misplaced boldness. There are also Kurdish populations in neighboring Turkey and Iran that could stir up fears of nationalism for and against the Kurds by their host countries.
It will be a dangerous time in that region as long as there are fears of cross nationalism and social unrest over oil,a massive unwanted foreign presence of (mainly) US foces stiring violence and strife in the region.
I suspect this will be a dangerous time in one of many flash points in the area for some time to come.
If only a piece of paper would be enough to settle things. We have a Constitution too but it has been ignored promoting a war and violated warcrime laws too. The paper is only as good as those who are tasked with enforcing it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Cheney/Bush Megablunders
Posted by: hadashito on Apr 4, 2008 1:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So now we are informed of the probability of yet another crisis blooming in Iraq; this time involving another country and the Kurds, both of them presumably our allies.
Moron Bush and Delusional Cheney just had to insert their noses (and trillions of our tax money) into a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and now, upon disaster after disaster wrought by their incalculable incompetence and wrongheaded neocon arrogance, these two idiots and our troops are being slammed from all sides by a series of crises. The money hungry, fire breathing bozos in the White House, the Pentagon, and the top military ranks are now about to be caught in a disaster far above their ability to slither out of. This time, White House triumphal rhetoric will be lost in the noise of a far larger conflict than bombing a few hundred "insurgents".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]