Baathist legacies
SOMA - By Dr Denise Natali
When the Baathist regime was overthrown, people in the Kurdistan Region rejoiced in the streets, celebrating the end of dictatorial rule and the beginning of a new period of freedom.
The fervor of reform continued when a federal Iraqi system was established and with it, the constitutional and institutional mechanisms to help sustain a more open political system.
Economic liberalization has been an integral part of this reform effort, encouraging the move from a bazaar economy to one based on market exchange. However, despite these attempts of democratic governance, reformers have been constrained by the historical legacies of Baathism, and most notably, the culture of fear and suspicion.
These constraints underline the impact of predecessor regimes in shaping attitudes and behavior of local populations and the need to ‘overcome the past’ before any real transition to democracy can continue and be consolidated.
Given the long experience Iraq has had with authoritarianism and the brutality of the Baathist regime, it is not surprising that the past weighs so heavily on the Kurdistan Region.
The centralized rule of the Baathist government and omnipresence of its security apparatus quashed all room for debate and disagreement. Individuals were assassinated for expressing political ideas that differed from Baathist ideology.
Those who refused to be part of the Baath party risked imprisonment or death. Kurdish nationalists and their friends and families were placed under constant surveillance and often made to disappear.
State-led repression necessitated survival strategies based on patronage, isolation, and silence. It also created a culture of fear and suspicion among local populations.
Since the Baathist regime was everywhere people became afraid to express their own opinions and unable to trust anyone outside the family unit.
These legacies have been reinforced by traditional social structures based on endogenous relations and the continued saliency of localist and tribal identities.
The danger of Baathist legacies is that they have allowed the transmission of mentalities, behavior, and ways of securing mechanisms of power to shape contemporary Kurdish politics and society.
Perceptions of ‘outsiders’, whether they be foreigners or diasporic Kurds, are often tainted with distrust, at least initially, which impedes the implementation of efficient and effective development programs. Methods of surveillance and centralized control also have continued under the guise of democratization.
Since 2003 the drive to rebuild and unify the Kurdistan Region as part of a federalized Iraq has resulted in the centralization of the KRG and expansion of its security apparatus, including the emergence of a security sector in which individuals can seek gainful employment.
Indeed, given the security conditions of the Iraqi state and the need to assure a stable and economically viable Kurdistan Region, Kurdish officials are obliged to employ methods of surveillance.
Ongoing Al Qaida threats in porous border areas and inside city centers warrant a strong security apparatus and effective means in which the identities and activities of suspicious individuals can be verified.
These measures include elaborate security checks at supermarkets, hotels, and other public spaces. They are clearly in the interest of local populations and foreign visitors and have kept the Kurdistan Region relatively safe and secure from the violence that has destabilized the rest of Iraq.
Still, the need for enhanced security against potential terrorist threats should not replace the commitment to develop a more open socio-economic and political system.
Power-sharing, decentralized rule, and market-based economies cannot properly function if individuals remain committed to old-style Soviet centralized rule and its antiquated governance and administrative structures.
An associational life cannot thrive if people do not trust anyone outside the family unit. A modern education system cannot be developed if wasta takes precedence over merit-based achievement.
If the Kurdish elites are truly interested in engaging in a democratic transition then they will have to help society overcome its past. Most important is dismantling the culture of fear and distrust that continues to shape structures, behavior, and decision-making.
The fine line between security, surveillance, and social distrust should be clarified so that progress can be made in all arenas simultaneously.
This effort should include measures that the Baathists failed to do: the creation of more expansive spaces for individuals to make choices and express their opinions without the risk of repression.
Implementing regular, free and fair elections at the regional, provincial, and local levels is one step in this direction. Making the opinions of average people matter will serve as an important litmus test of the KRG’s ability to instill confidence in society.
Change will also require social engineering by the Kurdish elite, particularly as people move away from rural lifestyles to urban-based ones.
Encouraging cosmopolitan attitudes can help break down the saliency of localist and tribal identities and create an environment in which populations can live with one another and outsiders without suspicion or fear.
Building social trust will certainly require time and patience. However, the wait is certainly worthwhile, since no real democratic reforms can be sustained without it.
Dr Natali is an honorary fellow at the Institute for Arab and Islamic Studies, Exeter University, and teaches at the University of Kurdistan-Hawler.
Printed with permission. From Soma
___________________
 | ||||
MENU
November 23, 2008
NEWS
| ||||
| ||||
Sponsors
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
