"The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them." --Thomas Jefferson
"No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions." --Thomas Jefferson
The Kurdish experiment in democracy is at a cross roads that can lead to full participatory government or dictatorship. I have long been an advocate of the Kurdish desire for independence and a supporter of the Kurds’ wants, needs and desires. I am however not a Kurd and cannot speak with the passion of one. I can speak dispassionately and through that dispassion hope to show a way forward.
The genesis of this article is not just the violent protests that gripped some areas of the Kurdistan Region last week but the official reaction to it. Shutting down news outlets and social media sites is not an effective tool for a democracy. Basing official action on party dogma is not useful either. Violence in the streets is effective only if you intend to overthrow the government completely and this is usually counterproductive to democratic reform. While I have not often agreed with the editorials and reporting in some of the outlets that were targeted I agree with one of our founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson, as quoted above as to the need to of a free press. The press can be manipulated and manipulative but is necessary for a free society.
While I am not a Kurd I am an American with a strong background in history and the analytic process. I have degrees in politics, government and business. I have successfully maneuvered through the trials of business and the halls of the US government and spent nearly 30 years in uniform, both active duty and reserves. In the 1960’s I watched my country wracked by protest and violence. What all this means is that I see many parallels between where the Kurds are today and where American was in the past. I know there is a way forward. No analogy is perfect and I don’t intend to suggest that Kurdistan will end up as America did, nor that it should. I just want to see if the analogies can help protect a people I love.
To begin, the United States was born of violence, after all other avenues to change were exhausted. The US, it must be pointed out, did not actually have a revolution but a war of independence. No government was overthrown. The English King sat on the throne and the British parliament continued to exist unchanged. The colonies became independent of the mother country and became their own country. The first attempt to form a government lasted just a few years before it failed and was replaced by the current system.
Kurdistan is also being tested in violence and may move toward independence. The current form of existence, part of a federated Iraq is not likely to stand and a new form must be found. The current crisis over the presidency and the power of the political parties over governmental power must be worked out. The first major test will be to bring the Peshmerga and the police under government control and completely independent of parties. The continued existence of what amounts to private armies is anathema to democracy. Prior to the establishment of a federal army in the US, the only force available were militias under control of the states (colonies), as well as in many cases the individuals who raised and paid them. Much the same system existed during the American Civil War and caused a lot of problems for both sides. In order to begin to control a government it is imperative that a central “law of the land” be enacted. The Kurdistan region has a draft constitution ready to go which only has to be put to a referendum of the people.
Why is it important to have a supreme law? It removes ambiguity and establishes order. Is it perfect and beyond the reach of politics? No. It does however, overtime, allow for the peaceful redress of grievances. That is of course provided that an entity of society does not decide they have a better Idea and starts a civil war. Both the United States and the Iraqi Kurds have had their Civil War. Both have had and continue to have repercussions from those wars. Both have since gone through violent civil unrest because of government actions or inactions.
The most important aspect here is, time. When the first attempt at a Kurdish homeland occurred the current parties did not exist. At the Treaty of Sevres the Kurdish representatives could not agree on the boundaries of Kurdistan until it was too late, then some joined the Turks in the Turkish War of Independence, following which Kurdish desires were no longer discussed. Time is the enemy and the friend. Over time disagreements become hatreds and negotiating positions become hard lines. But time can also heal wounds.
One of the most famous generals of the American Civil War, Robert E. Lee, was the main cause of keeping the souths hopes alive, but in the end he was the main reason the south reunited as well as it did.
Kurdistan needs to be a united country. It needs to declare independence and form a government under a supreme law. Kurdistan needs a unifying force that can heal the wounds. Kurdish elites must come together for the good of the whole, and if they cannot they must get out of the way. The alternative is too continue to kill each other and remain under the domination of non-Kurdish rulers.
I have written before about Iraq and Syria being failed states that are doomed to split apart. I do not wish to write a history of the great dream of Kurdistan coming apart over old hatreds and political greed.
I can also hear the response to this article, it is this one’s fault or that party or greed, nepotism, corruption. All of that may be true but the answer lies in all Kurds overcoming the past and moving together into the future. Before it is all over there will be blood, stop making it Kurdish blood.
Paul Davis is a retired US Army military intelligence and former Soviet analyst. He is a consultant to the American intelligence community specializing in the Middle East with a concentration on Kurdish affairs. Currently he is the President of the consulting firm JANUS Think in Washington D.C.
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