 | ||||
Menu
July 12, 2008
News
Reading President Barzani- Part IV
Kurdishaspect.com - By Dr Kamal Mirawdeli
Part IV: The President and the opposition
It is impossible to have a concept or even a semblance of democracy without the existence of a real and effective opposition party or parties. Democracy is based on accepting diversity, multiparty system, and the ultimate power of people through voting and active voluntary participation in the political life and shaping the political system. Open dialogue, differences of opinion and approach, continuous parliamentary debates, parliamentary Question Times, parliamentary watchdogs, joint parliamentary committees, and having alternative party political programs, leaders, shadow cabinets are the essence of democratic reality. This constitutional daily democratic practice is further protected, supported and made more effective and exciting by the critical role of free media and pro-active role of informed civil society and active conscious citizens. It is this vibrant practice of democracy that in the long run establishes the culture of democracy, dialogue, tolerance and peaceful co-existence and changeover of power in society and makes people proud of their country and their own self-determination. Above all the judiciary remains independent of the state ensuring equal justice to very citizens and there is a higher independent judicial authority such as a national constitutional/federal court that acts as ultimate arbiter in any expected or unexpected dispute between the democratic authorities of the land.
In Kurdistan region a deceptive destructive mechanism called ‘consensus’ or ‘consensus politics’ have been developed, promoted and used to replace and preclude the democratic politics. This consensus means that the leaders of the dominant parties KDP and PUK control everything without any sort of constitutional accountability or legal legitimacy. Then to give legitimacy or appearance of democracy to their monopoly of politics, wealth and life in Kurdish society, they agree to give some handouts and privileges, from what they have illegitimately and illegally appropriated in the first place, to smaller political parties, again without any legal backup, provided that they would accept the monopoly system maintained by KDP and PUK. Any criticism of PUK and KDP or the government controlled by them, or any independent-minded speech or approach is considered a violation of this consensus politics and is punished by cutting or reducing the money, land or posts given to the smaller parties. On the other hand, faithfully tracking the footsteps of Ba’thist politics, they often set up several small rival political groups openly or secretly affiliated to them to use them as tactical tools in specific conditions or to give impression of political diversity in Kurdish society.
Kurdistan Region does not have its own constitution and Iraqi constitution is ignored. There is no law to regulate this sort of relationship between the political parties, the role of opposition or to define and limit the power that the two parties have. It is all illegitimate and practiced as an act of bullying and secretive politics. In this way any space for the existence or emergence of democratic opposition is denied and any attempt in this direction is aborted. It is strange that Kurdish leaders refer daily to constitutional legitimacy and legal powers when discussing or referring to Iraq-related issues, but they have never ever mentioned the words ‘constitution’, ‘constitutional’ and ‘legal legitimacy’ and parliament’s authority in relation to their own practices and approaches to Kurdish politics and government issues. They find no embarrassment, for example, in refusing, after 17 years in power, to say how much really the budget of Kurdistan is, who gets it and how it is spent. They consider the Kurds too sub-human to deserve a word of truth and too docile to fear their reaction.
The Kurds were justified to think that after his election as President in June 2005 Kak Masu’d Barzani together with his nephew PM Nechirvan Barzani, the holders of the two highest posts in the region, would act to change this Saddamite system into a legitimized democratic system through seeking radical constitutional and legal reforms because it is logical that this step would have only strengthened rather than weakened their position and reputation not just in Kurdistan but in the whole world.
But, again, it is unfortunate to notice how parochial and contradictory Masu’d Barzani’s thinking of opposition and democracy is- a thinking that does not go beyond his own party and its past, present and future role in Kurdish society.
Let us read and analyse the rest of Barzani’s speech (continued from part 111): (Khabat, 17 Feb 2008):
Blame and criticism [Khabat’s subtitle]
[Barzani quoted:]” There are blames. It is the right of people of Kurdistan to blame. When you [move] from a party that had been struggling and fighting to a party in power then by God if there is no electricity you are responsible, if there is no bread you are responsible, any problem concerns the life of people you are responsible. Struggle is ongoing but the form of struggle changes. It happened before [moving to power] that we were obliged to think how we could get missiles, RPG’s and ammunition so that we use them in our fighting and to protect ourselves. Now we must think how we can provide electricity to this people and improve their lives, reconstruct the country more. Now this is struggle perhaps in a near future something else comes up, you cannot say that you do all things in one stage.”
“As Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) we are proud that we have never raised a slogan to give it up later. That is we moved stage by stage. We paid a great price to achieve the slogan we have raised. We had setbacks and victories. But now we are in a stage that most of our aims have been achieved. When [Barzani’s] September revolution started you all remember our slogan was ‘autonomy for Kurdistan and democracy for Iraq.’ Then it became ‘true autonomy’ and then became federalism. Now federalism has been fixed in Iraqi constitution that is recognised by the whole world and 80-85 per cent of the Iraqi people voted for it.”
“We need to have a review, to return to the programme and internal rules of our party and ask ourselves: what do we need now? I ask you and myself this question: before we were saying autonomy, true autonomy, federalism. Now all these have been achieved. Then what are we struggling for now? To consolidate this federalism, to develop these rights, to prepare for a new stage? The world is changing not just for us. If we had a conversation 20 years ago and said that we want these and the world would go towards these horizons, perhaps no one would have believed us. By God no one knows in 20 years time where the world would be going! That is why we must be ready and have clear outlook. The changes with God’s help can be very good but they can also be bad. Our programme and path need to change.” [End of quote]
Comment and analysis
- At last people are mentioned even though in one sentence. But how? As people who blame and have right to blame. They have right to blame because the party that struggled to get RPGs and bullets in the mountains to save them, now is in power and people have different expectations of that party. The party is responsible now to give them electricity and bread and happiness! This is its new form of struggle to achieve for people otherwise they will moan and groan and blame the Father party, thus the destiny of people: past, present and future is tied to that party.
- Again it is this party, not others, that has achieved all the successes for Kurds. Again Barzani plays the role of history-teller reducing the whole complicated and tragic history of the Kurds for half a century to three KDP slogans: autonomy, true autonomy, federalism. He is proud that his party truly followed up these three slogan stages and it is his party not others that did this.
- By telling them this simplified story, KDP leader treats his party cadres and through them the whole Kurds like children. Their memory, history and their tragic past and present do not count. The words of the leader are the final truth. There is harmony, continuity and progress in Kurdish history represented by the three slogans of his party and its success to achieve them over half a century without changing the slogans and struggle.
- Barzani tells the poor children: the party has achieved everything for them and now it really does not know what to do, where to go. That is why the party needs to ask the question: where to go after all this great success? And he kindly asks his young cadres to answer this question with him if not for him. The great mission that faces the President and his cadres, or the father and the children, is to re-write their party programme.
Contradictions
- This party-centred and self-centred approach to history is harmful if it is adopted by anyone in any position. It is distorting, divisive and derisory. Even as an ordinary Kurd, let alone a Party leader and a president, Barzani should not have thought so egoistically and naively about the history and struggle of his people. But unfortunately it is ‘his people’ that is missing as a concept. The notion of the party has replaced it.
- The politicians must not think and behave as totalitarian dictators. They should let the writing, studying, interpreting and evaluating history to historians, academics and intellectuals, to university departments and colleges. They should learn from history rather than dictating it.
- Barzani forgets that just a minute ago he talked about Kurdish unity especially between PUK and KDP. But this party-centred reading of Kurdish history contradicts that intension. In particular, the trivial issue of who called for federalism first is an ongoing issue of tension and contention between KDP and PUK as if history is made by slogans and written by party leaders. By focusing on KDP role Barzani marginalizes the role of other Kurdistan parties and thus their right to be equal partners. Unity starts at the level of thinking: common vision, principles and values. “Good thinking, good words, good deeds” is the integrated approach that embodies truth. You cannot separate or ignore any of the three in showing the truth of your intention. Barzani should think as national leader rather than party or tribal leader or a family inheritor. He should have generous spirit and create a broader national vision that embraces and encourages everyone rather than marginalizing and excluding them.
- I do not want to provide an alternative description of history. This is not the aim of this analysis. History should be left to specialists. But of course its naïve to reduce the history of half a century to three slogans. Even the emergence of these slogans had more to do with discontinuity caused by external events rather than by a continuity dictated by political vision. On the other hand very word or concept, philosophically speaking, carries its contradictory mode of existence. ‘Struggle for Kurds’ in the context of these three slogans, is not immune from its opposite: ‘service of the enemies of the Kurds’. But I let this for the interpreters of history to explore and establish.
- While Barzani gives such a simplified logical continuity to three slogans and stages, he soon acknowledges that what has been achieved was the product of external events. Twenty years ago, he says, no one could have predicted or believed the possibility of what has been achieved now; the same way as he cannot predict what might happen over the next 20 years!! So where is leadership? No vision, no strategy, no plans for future- just wait and see what happens next!
- The sad aspect of all this is that Barzani talks to young people, gives them final judgments about their history, makes them silent witnesses to his words, without entering into dialogue with them, letting them ask questions, express opinions and views and think and decide for themselves. Unfortunately, the mission of Kurdish political parties is to prevent free thinking, dialogue and difference.
Realities
But is it true that the Kurdish people have achieved their aims?
The aim of any national movement is to achieve self-determination and many nations have achieved this although they have not paid a fraction of our price and sacrifice, mainly through educated determined political leadership with strategic vision and trusted relationship with their own people. Kurdish movement in south has never had political philosophy, vision, strategic aims, clear programmes, intellectual and cultural content, mechanisms for participation and exchange with people. Autonomy, real autonomy, federalism have been distortions and deceptions dictated by external events, conspracies and influences and never expressed the real aims for which our people offered incredible sacrifices- the aim of independence and free national state which has been suppressed and betrayed by dominant Kurdish parties who have abused historical opportunities for achieving it for their illegitimate personal power and wealth.
Federalism that Barzani considers achieved and final because it is mentioned in the Iraqi constitution, is so far just an illusion.
- Still ‘federalism’ is restricted only to the three governorates that Saddam himself withdrew from in 1991 and had international legal status and protection through UN. This status has been relegated by returning to Iraq.
- The nature and power of federal regions is still not clear in the constitution and the constitution itself is subject to review and amendment according to the process of changing power relations internally, regionally and internationally.
- Federalism without Kirkuk and incorporation of Kurdish areas detached and Arabised by Saddam means nothing. The Kurds should have made the return of Kirkuk and other districts an absolute never-compromised pre-condition for their participation in the liberation and reconstruction of Iraq and should have involved the superpowers in a clear written agreement supported by the UN to legally fix this condition. Although both KDP and PUK, for the purpose of popular consumption, often claim that Kirkuk is their most important aim, the fact is they never had any strategy for Kirkuk but rather used it as a card to strengthen their own position in Iraq and party control over Kurdish society. All the political observers involved in the issue of Kirkuk have clearly stated that what has harmed the case of Kirkuk more than anything else, has not been the position of Iraqi government, role of Turkey, the position of coalition and other external factors but the criminal selfish and tribal party politics and rivalry of irresponsible unaccountable KDP and PUK party officials for short term party and personal gains. Instead of having a pre-greed national strategy and agenda for Kirkuk and Arabised Kurdish areas in Mosul, KDP and PUK have been pursuing petty fights over land, positions and party control over people through using corruption methods of bribery, illegal employment and distribution of property and land. Of course Barzani could have prevented, stopped or at least postponed this harmful party politics if he had strategic long-term national vision that overrides petty tribal and party politics. He still can take initiative and do this!
- What has been achieved for the Kurdish people? What has been achieved for 200,000 Anfal victims in mass graves? What has been achieved for their families? Has every anfal family been compensated, housed and decent life and education and dignity provided to them?
- What ahs been achieved to the displaced families of Kirkuk? Have they returned to their won homes and compensated?
- What studies do we have to show how anfal, genocide, and the destruction of 4000 villages by Saddam and then the criminal KDP/PUK inter-fighting have affected our society, our children, our morality, our psychology, our past and future and how we can rebuild ourselves as country, society, culture and individuals?
- What has been achieved for Halabja, as town and as people who suffered from chemical attacks? Has Halabja been rebuilt as a new model modern town of culture and challenge? Isn’t Halabja still ruins? Don’t the victims of chemical attack still die of their wounds and diseases without anyone paying attention to them?
- What has been achieved for Qaladiza that Saddam completely bulldozed after Halabja? Has it been rebuilt as modern European-type town? Have its people been compensated and empowered to return and develop?
- What has been achieved for our young people? Are they better off now? Are they happy and proud of their country? Do they feel that there is a country, a society, a system they belong to? Are they provided with the best first class education and the doors of equal opportunities for employment and development open to them? Then why do many of them commit suicide, thousands still migrate abroad and the rest are either alienated marginalized groups or parasites of the corrupt party machine with no productive role in society?
- What have we achieved for our children? Have we passed laws to ensure full education and social care provision for children and prevent child labour and physical and sexual abuse of children?
- What has been achieved for women? Do they participate in all aspects of society? Do we ever hear of the hideous crimes of women killing?
- Have thousands of able and well-qualified professionals and educated Kurds abroad been encouraged and given opportunity to return to participate inn the reconstruction, development and democratisation of their country?
- Have we built appropriate legal infrastructure for our society’s functioning as government? Have we built proper internationally-recognised bureaucratic and democratic structure of government and civil institutions? Do we have a proper banking system and financial infrastructure and legal commercial regulations?
- Has the agricultural and economic infrastructure of Kurdish society been rebuilt? Are our villages again vibrant with beauty and local production of crop, fruit, vegetables, dairy products, cattle, local arts and crafts, popular culture, and national folklore?
These are just some issues that Barzani should have considered when he thought about what has been achieved and also what needs to be done next. These are the issues that should be reviewed leading to a strategic long-tern planning for national and social development. Review of the political programme of a party is an issue for one party and its officials. The President should be greater than his party and think and act as a national leader with long-term national vision and action plan for democratic socio-economic and cultural development of Kurdish nation.
[To be continued]
_________________________
Reader comments
Comments containing threats, foul language or thinly disguised foul language will be deleted. Keep it civil, stay on topic and your posts will remain online. Terms of Use
_________________________
| ||||
| ||||
Advertisements
