Sam Ghandchi
Persian Text متن فارسی
Over ten years ago
when the US invaded Iraq, some neocon analysts claimed Iraq would become the
next Japan through efforts similar to what the US embarked on in Japan after
WWII. A decade later, we surely know those predictions were utterly wrong. I
should add that futurists like Daniel Bell clearly distanced themselves
from neoconservatism at that time (1).
A month ago after
the start of Civil War in Iraq, ISIS took over the city of Mosul, and subsequently
Iraqi Kurdistan took over city of Kirkuk. We are hearing quick
verdicts as if the division of Iraq to three countries is a done deal. If the
invasion of Iraq took more than a decade to show its results, the outcome of
civil war in Iraq may not be known for some time.
Even in a country
like the United States of 1860's, with almost a century of Constitution and Supreme Court,
still a bloody civil war broke out when the state governments of the
South proclaimed state rights above human rights in their dispute with the
federal government on the issue of slavery. The pro slavery states tried to use
the state rights to the point of separation of confederate states from the
United States but were defeated militarily (2).
The main issue of
Iraq's civil war is religious and ethnic discrimination by its federal
government. On one hand, ISIS wants a more discriminatory government of Sunni
Islam which it
considers as a continuation of Umayyads, Abbasids and Ottomans and even calls
Iran's military, the Safavid army. On the other hand, other religious and
ethnic groups including Sunni Arabs and Kurds want a secular government which would not
discriminate based on religion or ethnicity.
One thing that has
been shown in this ordeal is the weakness of federalism in Iraq and
unfortunately the damage to federalism was also done by Iraqi Kurdistan although
the Kurds were the bastions of federalism in Iraq. An issue such as relationship
between the state of Kurdistan and the central government should have been
raised to the supreme court of Iraq long before all these events because it
relates to the interpretation of constitution.
Still, one should
emphasize a legal process to settle such issues or else, every time any
political or religious group is unhappy, they can take control of an oil rich area of the country and call for
a referendum by those living in that region and claim independence. Such an
approach is contrary to the spirit of democracy and federalism and actually helps
the consolidation of
dictatorship in the country, something one may expect from ISIS Caliphate but not from Iraqi
Kurdistan. In fact, the current wave of separatism can galvanize both Iraq's
central government and the separatist states towards dictatorship.
Sam Ghandchi, Editor/Publisher
IRANSCOPE
July 11, 2014
Footnotes:
1. Neocons,
Daniel Bell and Iran
2. Does Federalism Allow States To Deny Human Rights
ایران#
#iran
iranscope@
پستها
هیچ نظری موجود نیست:
ارسال یک نظر