Throughout the history of there has been two main approach in order to hold Iraq together one is pragmatic the other is consolidatory approach which in this article I will argue none them serve the country‘s security and welfare its people.
First approach adopted by the Iraqi Arabic with both sections Sunnis and Shiites in post and pre-2003 Iraq, because the Iraqi state has struggled with the idea based state, as Barry Buzan uses the term, in other words, as Buzan suggested there is a psychology bounding elements between people what hold the state as solid socio-political and socio-economic block the state and that can be portray itself through historic or religious or particulars ethnic narrative.
However, in the case of Iraq that narrative never portrayed by the Iraqi state legitimately, instance, the Iraq state try to impose that notion of psychological bounding through planting fear by the consolidatory power approach and this consolidatoriry approach has been influencing the Iraqi prime minister and president from the first prime minister Abd ar-Rahman al-Qadri al Gillani to the current one Nouri al-Maliki.
Therefore, to large extend the Kurdish society in Iraq has been the mean victim as result of that consolidators approach in 1998s reach at its pick lead the disappearances approximately 182 thousands innocent civilians and thousands death by WMD and this brutish act has been done by the Iraqi states apparatus and its institutions cooperatively in per-2003 Iraqi World and the aims of the brutal collective acts by the Iraqi state institutions is for two reasons one is to help the Iraqi Sunnis to hold to power and the other one is demographic change of Kurdish population within the neighbouring territories for benefit of Arabs in Iraq.
Noteworthy, the post-2003 there was an attempt to put the Iraqi state in right path by the pragmatic approach and this approach has been the mark of US and Kurds is for helping to holding the Iraqi state together by establishing a constitution that defines Iraq as democratic and federal state with and pluralistic approach. In my view this attempt has failed for three following reasons.
The second, is idea based; historically Kurds struggled with the Iraqi state for preservation of its identity because that psychological notion of bounding has never come to existence among Kurdish community legitimately. Because Iraqi state has failed to provide the security and the welfare of Kurdish community in Iraq in actual fact Iraqi government was a sources of threats for this particular community. Besides that the post-2003 new Iraqi administrations has failed to recognise three aspect of Iraqi constitution that aims to establish that sense of bound for Iraqi state, the state of federalise and power sharing by not referring back to constitution and practically recognised the special circumstances of Kurdistan regions.
Is institutional based, hence Iraq could not mobilised this notion of bounding together legitimately to hold the state together cooperatively try to use state institutions to do it through the force particularly Army and security related institutions such as police and secret service. because of this malicious intentions even try to perverting Kurdish personals to reach the high ranks of these institutions even elements Kurds in some of these institution and today the reduction of Kurdish personals and the elimination of Kurdish population among army ‘s leadership also it is clear
example of current Iraqi administration attentions. In brief this pragmatic of Kurdish leadership has failed in the real power sharing agreements.
Is territorial based, because the Kurdish neighbouring territory with Arabic community in Iraq tend to be rich in natural resource for economic reasons Iraqi different governments try to displace the Kurdish community for the benefit of Arab community, in the post-2003 Iraqi politicians try restore trust by introducing Article 140 for normalising communities territory and make the lasting peace among them and pragmatically Kurdish politicians recognised the title of Disputed Territories for those areas faced mass Arab settlements for the sake of pace despite of that there are massive historical and geographical evidences that demonstrate these terrorise are belonged to Kurdistan. However his attempt for real pace has block as usual but not by the Sunnis but by the Shiites administration in delaying to implement this Article in some cases undermined it.
To sum, according to different Kurdish MPs and politicians such as Dr Mahmoud Othman Kurds has two problem with current Iraqi administration, one is Power sharing based the others is territorial based, according I would argues this view has lack of coherence analytic approach to Kurdish issues with Baghdad. Instance of two there are three fundamental historical problems first is ideas based second is institutional based and third is territorial based. Therefore, I believe the Kurdish political leadership should approach the current Iraqi turmoil by resolving these three pillars with coherence and explicit approach. Overall the Kurdish political leadership should avoid to behaviour pragmatically for the sake of holding Iraqi state together, leadership should act sharply and decisively in the interests of Kurdistan, the dream of de jure independent Kurdistan is by far close to reality and empirically demonstrated through our current de facto as a socio- political and socio-economical unite than the dream of consolidating Iraq as a solid socio-political and socio- economical unite.
By Peshtiwan Ali