Erbil, Iraq
Iraq has improved immeasurably since the dark
days of 2006 when hundreds were being killed every day by al Qaeda bombs and
Sadrist death squads in Baghdad. But terrorist bombs continue to go off
intermittently, and lingering instability and ineptitude still block economic
development. Indeed, the political situation has recently taken a turn for the
worse, with Iraq’s political parties at a stalemate in their quest to form a new
government more than two months after parliamentary elections were held.
Driving down Baghdad’s dingy streets, as I did recently as part of a
delegation from the Council on Foreign Relations, one is sometimes tempted to
despair. What chance is there, the visitor may reasonably wonder, that the
capital of this oil-rich country will ever be truly peaceful, not to mention as
luxurious as Doha, Dubai, or other boomtowns to the south on the Persian Gulf?
A short trip north to the Kurdish region, where 4.5 million of Iraq’s 30
million people live, offers a different, more hopeful perspective. Known as the
Kurdish Regional Government, or KRG, this area feels as safe as it gets in the
Middle East. Terrorist attacks aren’t a concern. Americans can wander around
without body armor or bodyguards-even if they’re in uniform. Don’t try it in
Baghdad. That’s a tribute to the effectiveness of the Kurdish intelligence
service, the Asayesh, and to their peshmerga troops (“those who face death”). It
also has something to do with Kurdish attitudes toward the United States. There
is none of the lingering resentment that is still prevalent in the rest of Iraq;
Kurds are among the most pro-American people on the planet. They regularly and
profusely thank American visitors for liberating them from Saddam Hussein’s
murderous regime-not something one often hears from Iraqi Arabs.
There
are also many sights in Erbil that you don’t see in the rest of Iraq. They
include a spanking new airport that puts dinosaurs like New York’s Kennedy
Airport to shame, and new shopping malls, banks, stores, homes, and hotels that
would not be out of place in Europe. Erbil, the capital of the KRG, seems a
world away from the rest of Iraq even though it is located only 50 miles from
Mosul, the most violent city in the entire country and the only one where Al
Qaeda in Iraq remains a major threat. Almost all of the development has occurred
in the last few years, filling once-empty fields with modern buildings.
The Kurdish region’s prosperity is fueled by oil. The KRG actually has
considerably less oil than the rest of Iraq. It is entitled to just 17 percent
of Iraqi oil revenues. So why is the KRG so much richer today? The difference is
that the KRG government has gotten its act together and is much further along in
attracting foreign investment, exploiting its natural wealth, and spending the
proceeds.
There was nothing inevitable about this. Kurdish politics in
the past have been as violent and divisive and dysfunctional as in the rest of
Iraq. As recently as the 1990s, the two major Kurdish factions-Massoud Barzani’s
Democratic Party of Kurdistan and Jalal Talabani’s Patriotic Union of
Kurdistan-were fighting one another. Barzani even sought help from Saddam
Hussein, while Talabani turned for assistance to Iran. But eventually these two
old adversaries realized they could do better by joining hands and splitting the
spoils of an ever-growing economy. In 1998 they signed an American-brokered
peace treaty in Washington. In 2002, just prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq,
they created a joint parliament in Erbil uniting the Barzani-controlled areas
(Dohuk and Erbil) with Talabani’s preserve (Sulaymaniyah).
The Kurdish
compact, which has deepened over the years, allows Barzani predominance in the
KRG while Talabani represents Kurdish interests in Baghdad as president of Iraq.
This is a rare instance of veteran guerrilla fighters hanging up their guns and
concentrating on peaceful development, making the kind of leap that Yasser
Arafat never could.
Taking advantage of their newfound autonomy, the
Kurds have instituted pro-growth policies that encourage outside investment,
something that is still viewed with great suspicion in the rest of Iraq, where
the socialist legacy of the Baathist state lingers even among the most strident
anti-Baathists.
Flexibility Toward Israel
Kurdish leaders have also shown geopolitical wisdom by not seeking
independence as demanded by most of their people. They realize that, surrounded
by hostile states, an independent Kurdistan could not flourish. Instead of
confronting its neighbors, the Kurdish Regional Government is working with them.
Its most notable success has come with Turkey, which in 2007 was threatening to
invade the KRG to root out rebels from Turkey’s own Kurdish community, the PKK
(Kurdistan Workers Party). Today the KRG and Turkey have flourishing trade ties
and expanding diplomatic links. The Turkish government has even invited Massoud
Barzani to visit in his capacity as president of the Kurdish Regional
Government, whose very existence the Turks only recently recognized.
Another sign of the Kurds’ sagacity is their attitude toward Israel. In
Iraq proper, visiting the “Zionist entity” is still considered a death-defying
feat to be undertaken only by the extremely brave or foolish. (Mithal al Alusi,
a member of parliament who has visited Israel, was charged with visiting an
“enemy state,” and his sons were killed in a terrorist attack.)
But the
Kurds, who are secular Sunni Muslims, are notably pro-Israeli in their
attitudes. If it would not risk a major rift with the rest of Iraq, they would
be happy to establish formal ties with the Jewish state. As it is, they maintain
informal links. The Barzanis, the first family of the KRG, have a branch in
Israel with whom they keep in contact. “It would be good for Iraq to have good
relations with Israel,” a senior Kurdish politician told me.
The record
is hardly perfect. Heavy-handed Kurdish attempts to extend their influence
across northern Iraq have caused a backlash among Arabs and created an opening
for extremist groups. In some areas they have been guilty of anti-Arab ethnic
cleansing in an attempt to make up for anti-Kurdish campaigns under Saddam
Hussein. Also, although an opposition party called Gorran (“Change”) is growing
in influence after its members split from Talabani’s camp, political
intimidation-even, on occasion, violent intimidation-still occurs.
Recently, for instance, journalists accused Kurdish security forces of
killing a young writer who was critical of the Barzanis and other powerful
clans. Deplorable as they are, such events are also rare-certainly less
prevalent in the KRG than in the rest of Iraq.
So too with corruption,
which remains a problem in the KRG (its leading politicians are fabulously
wealthy), but far less so than in the rest of Iraq. One old Iraq hand suggested
to me that payoffs to politicians in the KRG run only 20 percent of a contract
as opposed to 50 percent or more in the rest of the country. More important,
Kurdish politicians deliver results; they don’t just pocket the proceeds and
leave their constituents without basic services. The KRG might be seen as a
monument to the kind of “honest graft” that built America’s major cities, as
opposed to the kleptocratic practice too often evident among Iraqi Arab
politicians.
Harbinger for Iraq?
The Kurdish
model suggests what Iraq can become in a few years-but only if it continues to
improve in fighting crime and terrorism, reducing corruption, and developing the
rule of law. Much of this is outside American control, but we can have a major
impact on the security situation. A key component of Kurdish success, after all,
has been American protection, offered in one form or another since 1991, when
the George H.W. Bush administration proclaimed a “no fly” zone to keep Saddam’s
aircraft from bombing the Kurds. American planes were still patrolling the
no-fly zone at the time of the U.S. invasion in 2003. Some kind of long-term
protection will be necessary in the rest of Iraq, which must deal in the future
with hostile neighbors and suspicious sectarian factions. As it stands, however,
the last American troops are supposed to withdraw on December 31, 2011.
That is a worrisome prospect because Iraqi political disputes can still
engender violence. Nowhere is the danger greater than along the Green Line
separating the KRG from the rest of Iraq. The boundary remains disputed, with
the Kurds keen to assert their sovereignty over the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and
other parts of northern Iraq. The Kurdish peshmerga and Iraqi troops have been
on the verge of gunfire numerous times, pulling back only as a result of
American mediation. Today U.S. troops patrol the Green Line in cooperation with
the peshmerga and Iraqi forces.
If U.S. troops are withdrawn before land
disputes between the KRG and Iraq proper are resolved, Kurdish politicians warn
that the result could be war. That is an especially worrisome possibility
because the United States has agreed to sell the Iraqi armed forces M-1 tanks
and F-16 fighters. We have a moral and strategic obligation to ensure that this
high-tech hardware is never used against our Kurdish friends. That argues for
keeping a small U.S. force in Iraq after 2011, perhaps 10,000 to 15,000 troops
and trainers. The Kurds, for one, would love to host a U.S. military base. The
Obama administration should push for that once a new government takes power in
Baghdad and negotiations begin on a new Iraqi-American strategic accord to take
the place of the one negotiated by President Bush and Nouri al Maliki in 2008.
Kurdish Iraq: An Emerging Success - Source