Iraqi politicians shift about on Article 140
28 September 2010
Kirkuk to remain a complicated issue
There is not now nor will there ever be an agreement on the Kirkuk issue, says one Kurdish lawmaker.
The controversial subject of Kirkuk remains a permanent claim for Kurds as Iraqi parties continue negotiations on government formation. However, many Iraqi political leaders clearly expressed their objections to Kurdish claims over the oil-rich city.
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani announced that Kurds demand to obtain the post of presidency can be negotiated within the talks on government formation. It is possible for this post not to be taken by a Kurd again, said Talabani in a short interview with al-Arabiya TV last Saturday. Talabani then added: But the issue of Kirkuk is a constitutional demand and is not debatable, according to Iraqi constitutional Article 140. Later, Talabani advisor Fakhri Kareem replied to media reports about Talabani's statement.
In or out of the current talks on government formation, Kirkuk remains a complicated issue that Iraqi powers have not agreed upon. Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Osman complained that the current political parties who are in power now have changed their stances about Kirkuk and Article 140, although they were present when the Constitution was written.
Article 140 addresses whether Kirkuk and a few other towns are historically and geographically a part of Kurdistan Region. The regulations in three steps normalizes demographic changes brought to those towns in the past decades, paves the way for holding a census, and then allows a referendum for the original people of the disputed areas to decide on their destiny. They may choose to be under the control of the Kurdish region or remain under the federal government of Baghdad.
At that time, Kurds were more powerful and had two choices to return Kirkuk under their control, Osman said. They either had to do it by force or satisfy a legal mechanism. The first choice, he explained, was abandoned because the Kurds were backing peaceful solutions and feared reactions from the Arabs and Turkmen as well as American forces. The Americans mostly showed opposition to such an idea; they want to come across in confronting any specific group, but they want a solution satisfy all the Kurds, Arabs, and Turkmen. The three groups never had an agreement on this issue, and they will not have one in the future.
Osman defended the right of linking Kirkuk to Kurdistan Region based on historical and geographic facts. He said that this province is a part of Kurdistan that has been subjected Arabization. Some Arab parties still attempt to continue the Arabization of Kirkuk, he said.
?We all can solve the problem of Kirkuk through agreements among the political parties in a way that guarantees the right of every sect, said Kirkuk Arab leader Mazin Abdul-Jabar, calling on Kurds not to stick to Article 140. The solution cannot come through the rigid laws. He also called on Kurdish leaders to be more open about this issue with his al-Iraqiya list, because they have a powerful influence in the provinces neighboring Kurdistan Region and in the disputed provinces.
The Iraqiya list--led by Iyad Allawi--placed first in the last elections with 91 seats in Parliament; it collected Turkmen and Sunni Arab parties in Kirkuk, thus each al-Iraqiya and the Kurdistan coalition equally obtained the 12 seats of the province six each. As Turkman leader and Parliament member Arshad al-Salihi said about their association into al-Iraqiya, they made an agreement with Allawi's bloc to take up a special program for the Kirkuk issue we agreed that there are mistakes in the Constitution and one is the expiration of Article 140. He added: Kirkuk will never be annexed to Kurdistan Region; it is a national matter.
The solution of Kirkuk must not fall in favor of one component and leave nothing for the other, said Najat Hussein, explaining the point of view of his Iraqi Supreme Islamic Council--led by Ammar al-Hakeem--which keeps good relations with Kurds. Hussein, branch leader of his party in Kirkuk, added: r. al-Hakeem believes that solving the Kirkuk issue must satisfy the three components: Kurds, Arabs, and Turkmen.
Meanwhile, al-Hakeem's party is allied with a currently bigger influence based on the number of Parliament seats: Al-Sadir Stream, which is led by Muqtada al-Sadr. Mr. Muqtada never considered Kirkuk part of Kurdistan land, and Article 140 must be amended in a way that allows more benefits to Arabs and Turkmen, said Ra'ad al-Askhari, representative of al-Sadr Stream in Kirkuk.
Since the referendum on the Constitution in October 2005, opinions show that Iraqi leaders have drifted further apart instead of closer to an agreement on the complicated Kirkuk issue.
By Rebwar Usman
© The Kurdish Globe 2010
28 September 2010
Kirkuk to remain a complicated issue
There is not now nor will there ever be an agreement on the Kirkuk issue, says one Kurdish lawmaker.
The controversial subject of Kirkuk remains a permanent claim for Kurds as Iraqi parties continue negotiations on government formation. However, many Iraqi political leaders clearly expressed their objections to Kurdish claims over the oil-rich city.
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani announced that Kurds demand to obtain the post of presidency can be negotiated within the talks on government formation. It is possible for this post not to be taken by a Kurd again, said Talabani in a short interview with al-Arabiya TV last Saturday. Talabani then added: But the issue of Kirkuk is a constitutional demand and is not debatable, according to Iraqi constitutional Article 140. Later, Talabani advisor Fakhri Kareem replied to media reports about Talabani's statement.
In or out of the current talks on government formation, Kirkuk remains a complicated issue that Iraqi powers have not agreed upon. Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Osman complained that the current political parties who are in power now have changed their stances about Kirkuk and Article 140, although they were present when the Constitution was written.
Article 140 addresses whether Kirkuk and a few other towns are historically and geographically a part of Kurdistan Region. The regulations in three steps normalizes demographic changes brought to those towns in the past decades, paves the way for holding a census, and then allows a referendum for the original people of the disputed areas to decide on their destiny. They may choose to be under the control of the Kurdish region or remain under the federal government of Baghdad.
At that time, Kurds were more powerful and had two choices to return Kirkuk under their control, Osman said. They either had to do it by force or satisfy a legal mechanism. The first choice, he explained, was abandoned because the Kurds were backing peaceful solutions and feared reactions from the Arabs and Turkmen as well as American forces. The Americans mostly showed opposition to such an idea; they want to come across in confronting any specific group, but they want a solution satisfy all the Kurds, Arabs, and Turkmen. The three groups never had an agreement on this issue, and they will not have one in the future.
Osman defended the right of linking Kirkuk to Kurdistan Region based on historical and geographic facts. He said that this province is a part of Kurdistan that has been subjected Arabization. Some Arab parties still attempt to continue the Arabization of Kirkuk, he said.
?We all can solve the problem of Kirkuk through agreements among the political parties in a way that guarantees the right of every sect, said Kirkuk Arab leader Mazin Abdul-Jabar, calling on Kurds not to stick to Article 140. The solution cannot come through the rigid laws. He also called on Kurdish leaders to be more open about this issue with his al-Iraqiya list, because they have a powerful influence in the provinces neighboring Kurdistan Region and in the disputed provinces.
The Iraqiya list--led by Iyad Allawi--placed first in the last elections with 91 seats in Parliament; it collected Turkmen and Sunni Arab parties in Kirkuk, thus each al-Iraqiya and the Kurdistan coalition equally obtained the 12 seats of the province six each. As Turkman leader and Parliament member Arshad al-Salihi said about their association into al-Iraqiya, they made an agreement with Allawi's bloc to take up a special program for the Kirkuk issue we agreed that there are mistakes in the Constitution and one is the expiration of Article 140. He added: Kirkuk will never be annexed to Kurdistan Region; it is a national matter.
The solution of Kirkuk must not fall in favor of one component and leave nothing for the other, said Najat Hussein, explaining the point of view of his Iraqi Supreme Islamic Council--led by Ammar al-Hakeem--which keeps good relations with Kurds. Hussein, branch leader of his party in Kirkuk, added: r. al-Hakeem believes that solving the Kirkuk issue must satisfy the three components: Kurds, Arabs, and Turkmen.
Meanwhile, al-Hakeem's party is allied with a currently bigger influence based on the number of Parliament seats: Al-Sadir Stream, which is led by Muqtada al-Sadr. Mr. Muqtada never considered Kirkuk part of Kurdistan land, and Article 140 must be amended in a way that allows more benefits to Arabs and Turkmen, said Ra'ad al-Askhari, representative of al-Sadr Stream in Kirkuk.
Since the referendum on the Constitution in October 2005, opinions show that Iraqi leaders have drifted further apart instead of closer to an agreement on the complicated Kirkuk issue.
By Rebwar Usman
© The Kurdish Globe 2010