Error occured during this request! Please try again later.
Calls for Erbil and Baghdad to resolve their differences “in accordance with the Iraq Constitution” are often platitudes while the media seems largely ignorant of what the constitution actually provides. This is according to a British legal expert whose detailed evidence has been published by the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee as part of its inquiry into Kurdish aspirations and British interests.
The analysis is authored by Nick Hills, a solicitor who has lived in Kurdistan and Iraq and was involved in the development of the KRG's energy sector since 2006. It details the constitution's articles on key issues including oil and gas, revenue sharing, tax and courts, borders, customs duties, and the Peshmerga.
The paper points out that the 2005 Iraqi constitution may have been a compromise reached primarily between the Shia majority parties in Iraq and the Kurds, and that none was entirely happy with its less than definitive compromises but that the constitution includes certain fundamental rights and protections for the Kurdistan Region.
Hills' paper concludes that this "demonstrates that merely encouraging the Federal Government and the KRG to settle their differences 'in accordance with the Iraq Constitution' will, in present circumstances, achieve no more than exacerbate what is and has almost since the Iraq Constitution was adopted in 2005 been an impasse."
Hills rules out the use of force and conflict and suggests, in the absence of access to an impartial tribunal, "some form of educated formal or informal mediation or external direction, therefore, is essential; and it is essential that any 'educated mediators' understand what is contained in the Iraq Constitution and the difficulties inherent in resolving the impasse “in accordance with the Iraq Constitution.”
He says this means that Baghdad and Erbil accept and perform the letter of the constitution or agree compromises that would require amendment to the constitution, which will be difficult to obtain if they detract from the Kurdistan Region’s rights and protections.
So far, British mediation has been ruled out by Alistair Burt, the British minister for the Middle East, given that it is a sovereign matter and Baghdad is not open to it. But other countries have offered to mediate on the basis of the constitution. Calls and offers to mediate are useful in themselves in putting pressure on Baghdad to relax its high-handed attitude and for agreements to be based on the constitution.
Bill Clinton's political strategist James Carville coined the phrase, "It's the economy, stupid" to put at the core of Clinton's successful 1992 presidential bid. The Hills dossier reminds us that the Iraqi constitution should be front and centre of a sustainable deal between Erbil and Baghdad.
My hope is that having published this valuable evidence the Foreign Affairs Committee will refer to the need to abide by the constitution in its forthcoming report, maybe as early as next month.
APPG Chairman Jack Lopresti MP recently tabled a written question to the UK Foreign Secretary asking him to release copies of letters to then-President Barzani on the alternatives to the Kurdistani independence referendum that were endorsed by UK representatives in August and September 2017.
Minister Burt replied: "I am unable to place their confidential diplomatic correspondence in the House of Commons Library. The UK’s role in negotiations ahead of the Referendum was covered during my evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 9 January. Our Ambassador to Iraq, together with the US Ambassador and UN Special Representative, made strenuous efforts in the weeks before the Referendum on 25 September to persuade the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to postpone the Referendum in return for talks on all areas of dispute between the KRG and the Government of Iraq, supported by the international community and with no pre-conditions."
The answer is expected given diplomatic norms but I note that it omits reference to the promise in, I think, the final draft letter of September 23, 2017 between US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and the then-President Barzani of American support, or to be precise, its willingness to "recognise the need," for a referendum at a later stage.
British support or otherwise for a referendum in similar circumstances may be academic for now but become a more pressing matter if agreement on the basis of the Iraqi constitution proves impossible and Kurdistan returns one day to its quest for statehood, with international support.
Gary Kent is the Secretary of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG). He writes this column for Rudaw in a personal capacity. The address for the all-party group is appgkurdistan@gmail.com.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rudaw.
The analysis is authored by Nick Hills, a solicitor who has lived in Kurdistan and Iraq and was involved in the development of the KRG's energy sector since 2006. It details the constitution's articles on key issues including oil and gas, revenue sharing, tax and courts, borders, customs duties, and the Peshmerga.
The paper points out that the 2005 Iraqi constitution may have been a compromise reached primarily between the Shia majority parties in Iraq and the Kurds, and that none was entirely happy with its less than definitive compromises but that the constitution includes certain fundamental rights and protections for the Kurdistan Region.
Hills' paper concludes that this "demonstrates that merely encouraging the Federal Government and the KRG to settle their differences 'in accordance with the Iraq Constitution' will, in present circumstances, achieve no more than exacerbate what is and has almost since the Iraq Constitution was adopted in 2005 been an impasse."
Hills rules out the use of force and conflict and suggests, in the absence of access to an impartial tribunal, "some form of educated formal or informal mediation or external direction, therefore, is essential; and it is essential that any 'educated mediators' understand what is contained in the Iraq Constitution and the difficulties inherent in resolving the impasse “in accordance with the Iraq Constitution.”
He says this means that Baghdad and Erbil accept and perform the letter of the constitution or agree compromises that would require amendment to the constitution, which will be difficult to obtain if they detract from the Kurdistan Region’s rights and protections.
So far, British mediation has been ruled out by Alistair Burt, the British minister for the Middle East, given that it is a sovereign matter and Baghdad is not open to it. But other countries have offered to mediate on the basis of the constitution. Calls and offers to mediate are useful in themselves in putting pressure on Baghdad to relax its high-handed attitude and for agreements to be based on the constitution.
Bill Clinton's political strategist James Carville coined the phrase, "It's the economy, stupid" to put at the core of Clinton's successful 1992 presidential bid. The Hills dossier reminds us that the Iraqi constitution should be front and centre of a sustainable deal between Erbil and Baghdad.
My hope is that having published this valuable evidence the Foreign Affairs Committee will refer to the need to abide by the constitution in its forthcoming report, maybe as early as next month.
APPG Chairman Jack Lopresti MP recently tabled a written question to the UK Foreign Secretary asking him to release copies of letters to then-President Barzani on the alternatives to the Kurdistani independence referendum that were endorsed by UK representatives in August and September 2017.
Minister Burt replied: "I am unable to place their confidential diplomatic correspondence in the House of Commons Library. The UK’s role in negotiations ahead of the Referendum was covered during my evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 9 January. Our Ambassador to Iraq, together with the US Ambassador and UN Special Representative, made strenuous efforts in the weeks before the Referendum on 25 September to persuade the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to postpone the Referendum in return for talks on all areas of dispute between the KRG and the Government of Iraq, supported by the international community and with no pre-conditions."
The answer is expected given diplomatic norms but I note that it omits reference to the promise in, I think, the final draft letter of September 23, 2017 between US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and the then-President Barzani of American support, or to be precise, its willingness to "recognise the need," for a referendum at a later stage.
British support or otherwise for a referendum in similar circumstances may be academic for now but become a more pressing matter if agreement on the basis of the Iraqi constitution proves impossible and Kurdistan returns one day to its quest for statehood, with international support.
Gary Kent is the Secretary of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG). He writes this column for Rudaw in a personal capacity. The address for the all-party group is appgkurdistan@gmail.com.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rudaw.
Comments
Rudaw moderates all comments submitted on our website. We welcome comments which are relevant to the article and encourage further discussion about the issues that matter to you. We also welcome constructive criticism about Rudaw.
To be approved for publication, however, your comments must meet our community guidelines.
We will not tolerate the following: profanity, threats, personal attacks, vulgarity, abuse (such as sexism, racism, homophobia or xenophobia), or commercial or personal promotion.
Comments that do not meet our guidelines will be rejected. Comments are not edited – they are either approved or rejected.
Post a comment