Look at Kurdistan.. An American Institute: The Iraqi state is cracking, and the solution is in the r

POSTED ON[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] BY [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[size=52]Look at Kurdistan.. An American Institute: The Iraqi state is cracking, and the solution is in the regions[/size]

[size=45]The Washington Institute criticized the decline in decentralization of power and the predominance of centralization in Iraq, which is causing a rift in the state, while urging the expansion of ties between the Kurdistan Regional Government and Baghdad.[/size]
[size=45]And under the title “Centralization Syndrome and State Fracture in Iraq,” the American Institute considered, in a report, that decentralization of power could have been the best way to avoid a return to the syndrome of tyranny and corruption, as was the case during the era of Saddam Hussein, but instead Baghdad was preferred. Centralized power - while at the same time creating a rift in the state through sectarian nepotism and competition.[/size]
[size=45]Centralization and decentralization[/size]
[size=45]The American report added, “It was possible that the decentralization of power and influence in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq was an antidote against his tyrannical and brutal regime, but decentralization was constantly retreated in favor of centralization, and the strength and attractiveness of federalism and elected provincial councils began to dwindle in front of more power in Baghdad.[/size]
[size=45]The report spoke of a paradox represented in the influence and power in Baghdad distributed among ethnic and sectarian parties and factions, as most Iraqi political groups have come to see geographical decentralization as a threat to the territorial integrity of Iraq, according to the American Institute.[/size]
[size=45]sink[/size]
[size=45]He explained, “In the absence of any single political or ethno-sectarian group capable of exercising enough influence to control the rest, the centralization of power has led to Baghdad becoming a hotbed of corruption and patronage networks that compete for power and state privileges.[/size]
[size=45]Traditionally, “a strong state is the rationale for supporting centralization, but ironically, weakening the state is the common goal among the ruling parties in Iraq,” especially since it was the centralization of power and wealth in the weak state that allowed for the mass corruption and theft that spread in Iraq. According to the report of the American Institute.[/size]
[size=45]In light of the approaching twentieth anniversary of regime change in Iraq, the report indicated that “many are wondering whether Iraq is still a democratic country,” noting that “decentralization was a partial guarantee of democratic transition, and a protection against the re-emergence of tyrants like Saddam Hussein.”[/size]
[size=45]formation of regions[/size]
[size=45]Similar to democracy, decentralization would ensure greater recognition of the ethnic, sectarian, and geographical diversity in Iraq, as the 2005 constitution enshrined decentralization in the form of federalism and elected provincial councils with great executive powers, according to the Washington Institute.[/size]
[size=45]As well as the National Charter, it set the criteria for forming more regions and gave the power to issue laws that would regulate the relationship between the regions and the federal government, says the American report.[/size]
[size=45]However, on the ground, trends tended towards re-consolidating the centralization of power and influence in the hands of the federal government. Despite initial proposals to form new regions, the Kurdistan Region of Iraq is still the only federal region in the country.[/size]
[size=45]In addition, the last time Iraq and the Kurdistan Region held provincial elections were in 2013 and 2014, respectively, even in 2019, the Iraqi Council of Representatives dissolved the provincial councils.[/size]
[size=45]Share positions[/size]
[size=45]Therefore, the report considered that “geographical and administrative decentralization has lost its political luster in favor of a strong state with central authority, and ethnic and sectarian feudalism in the state has flourished in its place, taking the form of a policy of patronage, where political blocs that reach the House of Representatives share state institutions and assets.”[/size]
[size=45]The American report noted that “the Iraqi government concentrates power and wealth in Baghdad away from the regions and governorates, but Baghdad itself is decentralized among the parties that make up the government,” adding that “such ethnic and sectarian policies have become a steadfast aspect of the system of government at some point.” After Saddam, Iraqi politics practically abandoned decentralization in favor of a weak central government from within.[/size]
[size=45]The report stated, “Decentralized rule was somewhat alien to Iraq, because since its inception as a state, it has been largely ruled by a central government, whether it be a monarchy, military or one-party dictatorship, while the autonomy granted to the Kurds in 1970 was short-lived.” There was little scope for decentralizing command and control under the Arab socialist ideology of the Baath Party, and even less so under the militarization that prevailed during Iraq's eight-year war with Iran.[/size]
[size=45]Governance of the Kurdistan Region[/size]
[size=45]And the American report saw that “the formation of the Kurdistan Regional Government in 1992 is not because Baghdad transferred power to the northern Kurdish provinces, but rather because Saddam lost control of them in the aftermath of the first Gulf War.”[/size]
[size=45]The report warned that “the federal system of government is considered an anomaly in the region, because despite the great differences, all neighboring countries of Iraq follow a centralized system, and besides, Iran and Turkey were skeptical about Kurdish federalism in Iraq for fear that it would provide a model for the Kurdish minorities in their countries.”[/size]
[size=45]He pointed out that "the commitment of the Kurdish political factions to federalism was not stable at all," explaining that "the Kurds fluctuated across the spectrum of decentralization, from autonomy to full independence."[/size]
[size=45]Sunni and federal[/size]
[size=45]And the American report added: “When the Shiite opposition parties were in exile, they adopted the concept of federalism as their envisioned system of governance in Iraq in the post-Saddam era, but soon abandoned it as soon as they came to power.”[/size]
[size=45]He continued, "On the contrary, the Sunni groups were the first to oppose federalism, but in the end they saw it as a guarantee against militia encroachment on their lands."[/size]
[size=45]The report noted that “Iraq is returning to centralization at a slow but steady pace, and instead of (Kurdistan Region) being the first among several regions to be established within the federal state of Iraq, it is still the only region in the country, as the parties often rejected it.” Federal Sunnis equated it with dissension, and when the main Iraqi Shiite parties were on the opposition front, and then in the first stages of their rule after Saddam, they adopted federalism, but they quickly abandoned it as soon as it became firmly established in power, and proposals, such as (the Basra region), became outside the political calculations ".[/size]
[size=45]Shiite parties[/size]
[size=45]The American report indicated the victory of the Shiite parties in the ethnic and sectarian conflict, as this power and this wealth aroused their appetite for central rule, especially after the defeat of ISIS and the increase in oil exports.[/size]
[size=45]He pointed out that “these political incentives partially explain why the Iraqi parliaments did not pass the required laws and build the necessary institutions to consolidate federalism, such as the (Federal Council), (Federal Supreme Court) and (National Oil and Gas Law).[/size]
[size=45]Kurdistan secession[/size]
[size=45]And the report of the American “Washington Institute” saw that “Kurdistan has withstood the role of the region because it is difficult for the Iraqi government to swallow, as the regional government has established solid facts on the ground, such as the Peshmerga forces and the energy sector.”[/size]
[size=45]Despite this, the report indicated that “the Iraqi Kurdish parties, despite being among the main supporters of federalism, also got rid of decentralization, and the Kurdish representatives in the Iraqi state did not do much to push for the necessary legislation that would grant federalism greater permanence.”[/size]
[size=45]And the American report indicated that “Kurdish power and wealth led to an increase in Kurdish aspirations to establish a state,” referring to the independence referendum in 2017.[/size]
[size=45]And he considered that “the ties between the regional government and Baghdad were not strong enough to maintain a happy life for both sides, and were not weak enough for separation to be possible, but the Kurdish referendum justified the Arabs’ suspicions that federalism was a password for separation all along.[/size]
[size=45]power disintegration[/size]
[size=45]The report stated that "the central government, which is concentrated in its grip of power and wealth, but is also divided among dozens of influential political entities, is weak in nature, unpredictable and lacks stability."[/size]
[size=45]The American report pointed out, “The failure of this regime to protect Iraqi sovereignty, prevent terrorism, and provide prosperity,” explaining that “this deficit in governance stems from the central, rather weak, Iraqi state that is exhausted by all the parties in power for the sake of their narrow interests.”[/size]
[size=45]The report noted that “the network of patronage is expanding instead of uniting, as political families and leaders have become superior to political offices and their previous influence,” noting that “competing rulers cannot seize the entire country or a geographical part of it, as they are content with acquiring government agencies and benefit from their resources.[/size]
[size=45]Provincial council elections[/size]
[size=45]The American report said, “The new Iraqi government may press for elections for the provincial councils just to avoid holding national elections, adding that it will be difficult to reconfigure the provincial councils due to their corruption and lack of efficiency in performance, which is what prompted the general panic that led to their dissolution.” in the first place.[/size]
[size=45]The report suggested that “the most secure way to move forward in relations between the regional government and Baghdad is to re-work on federalism, that is, the legislative, institutional and administrative infrastructures necessary for the establishment of this federal system.”[/size]
[size=45]The “Washington Institute” report concluded by saying, “Resuscitating decentralization that would foster a more accountable government may require serious investments in local governance capacity and expanding links between Erbil and Baghdad.[/size]
[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]