Please don't type in all CAPS, it's the equivalent to YELLING, let alone hard to read, thank you.
Let's hope we can get some ladies and gentlement from the U.K. to comment on their situation and history. I would love to hear how they feel their example of a country will work for Iraq. I will try and research some on my own and give some comments soon.
Brich britain isn't really federal at all. In fact its become a complete constitutional mess in recent years with some legislation covering Scotland only, some covering England and Wales, some Wales only etc, etc.
For example a controversial new tuition fees system for English universities was just passed by a tiny majority comprised of the votes of Scottish MPs whose voters will not be affected by the system which makes no sense and is causing increasing dismay.
Link at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotl...and/
3432767.stm
Kurdo,
This is all "pre-negotiations" talk. The Kurds are talking form both sides of their mouths. They tell everyone that they don't want to break Iraq, but then turn around and threaten that that is exactly what they will do if they don't get what they want. Here is what they will get. Automony in the currently Kurdish controlled areas of Dihok, Arbil and Sulaimania. Federation? Maybe a few years down the road. Again, the Kurds will get what the USA will give them. And the US will not abandon Turkey for the Kurds.
BTW, don't underestimate Turkish invation plots. Turkey will invade regardless of EU membership if the Kurds become naughty.
What you describe sounds more like the American model than the British. In theory, the federal government has certain powers that are delegated to it by the states. Among these powers is the regulation of comerce between those states but not within an individual state. The states have their own constitutions and laws. The only restriction is that those laws may not violate the federal constitution. That means that a state may grant its citizens more freedom than that granted by the federal constitution, but not less. In many respects, the states are effectively independent countries. For example, if a person accused of a crime in one state is caught and arrested in another state, the first state must request his extradition from the second, and the accused person may fight that extradition in the courts of the second state.
Kurdo-
If you don't mind, I would like to link this post in the history/info section of World Inquiry
thanks-
Kurdo,
Now that I've had time to think, I realize I may have been harsh with you and may have come off as a hate-filled person. I apologize for that. (my objections about the use of the word 'weapons' still stand).
That said, you've made some interesting points here with this post. When I first started thinking about the Iraq/Kurd situation, my first thought was model it like ours, where there's a 'state' for the Shia, a 'state' for the Sunni and a 'state' for the Kurds, and where everybody is free to live in whatever state they want (not purely Shia in the Shia south, if you know what I mean). The United States of Iraq.. or something to that effect, with all three states working towards a better future for the whole of Iraq. Just my 2 cents. Take care.
Personally, I believe that Iraq would do best to emulate the early US rather than the UK. by this I mean: Give the provinces/states relative autonomy. This would allow them to focus on their local economy and sociopolitical structure with more involvement than one national entity. the national entity is there to hold the states together, and garuntee the citizens all the same basic rights. after the states have progressed considerably, then you can change the focus however you wish... however the main goal as of right now is to get Iraq back on it's feet
This is an email I sent to Salam after reading his post....
I really could never understand the opposition to federalism. It is the only thing that will save Iraq just like it did the United States after our revolution in 1776. There were severe divisions in the North and the South, federalism allowed the South to keep a certain level of independence and ethnic separation while still a vital part of the union.
A civil war did break out 80 years after the founding of the United States but it was primarily about 1 issue, slavery, and not about the south's ethnic independence.
Even today each US state has different laws that the federal government cannot interfere with. That is something the Kurds need and the Shia. The Shia state laws will be different than the Kurdish and Sunni, and that's fine as long as they are federally united under the Iraq flag and proud of it.
I am a 100% American of Mexican ancestry. Hispanics have become the largest minority in the USA. I am Americans first. I have never been to Mexico but enjoy the culture and some of its traditions. I served in Vietnam and my son is in (you guessed it) Iraq right now. My point being that the Kurds can do the same thing. Isn't there some Kurds in Turkey? What do they consider themselves? In my case it is my country first then my ethnicity/culture and only if my ethnicity/culture do not go against my country. Go USA Army............
Well said, sir. I think that one of the problems that people from other countries have in understanding Americans is that they just have no conception of how big the country is and how we have many representatives of every ethnic group and culture on Earth and we are all mixed up together. They simply can't conceive of the fact that such a heterogeneous group can not only get along with each other, but marry each other and work together to create the freeist, richest, and most powerful society that the world has ever known.
My prayers are with your son in Iraq. May he return home safely and continue his contribution to our country.
Yes...Well said...American Mexican. Also...Well said Realist.
I'm an American, Scottish Irish, Native American, French person mutt and proud of it.
I remember the surprise of an American Jewish friend when he went to the American South to find that his Jewish relatives identified as American, Southerner, and finally Jewish.
We are a nation of mutts.
Let's not sugar coat things or be misleading. Things are not perfect in America. Not all Americans get along all the time. However the beauty of it is that most Americans do tolerate and even embrace our differences. By working toward common goals we stay united.
Therefore I also believe dividing Iraq into 'states' might work. To keep any one region from having too much power you could do like we do here.
We have two legislative bodies; the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Senate consist of two representatives from each state. The House of Representatives is based upon the population of each state. Both 'houses' must approve of any action before it becomes law.
Mexican-American please tell your son thanks and that his efforts are appreciated.
The irish fought a bitter war for independance against the brits, and the scottish want to leave the union.. u should think of federalism like the united states.. each state is pretty much automonous in terms of criminal and civil law.. but is part of a union.. a federation..
anonymous
i am scottish and can tell you demands for independance have fallen since devolution and I consider myself british first
alan
as if Al-Qaeda has a wonderful sense of timing, they know exactly how to ruin anything
Al Qaeda Trying to Spark a 'Civil War' in Iraq
I come from a mix of Dutch, Irish, German and Wales, those were my 4 fathers (granparents origins).
or is that Fore Fathers, like before you, I dunno, I just known where my grandparents are from, lol.
Rich,
Well, the Dutch, German, and Welsh ancestry is probably OK, but I'd keep quiet about the Irish part. 
The Canandian situation is probably the most applicable. Many Quebecois see themselves as Quebecois first and Canadian second but Canada stays together at peace and difference are kept at bay. Hopefully people can learn to forgive about happened in the past. This puts another variable in the situation. After all we have lost I really hope this works out for the best. A happy peacefully existance for everyone.
Kurds have been getting the short end of the stick for centuries.Countries have openly conspired to keep them repressed.Even today,we speak of Turkey's "response" to Iraqi Kurds being free.
Don't settle for federalism my friend.A Federal government means a Federal Army,and we all know its main purpose would be to keep Kurdish ambitions in check.
Use this time to strengthen defenses,and put up a good fight when Turks,Persians,or Arabs descend on you again.The world will be watching this time.....
I guess along with everything else, we nned to hold civic education classes in IRaq so everybody comes to understand what 'federalism' means.It looks from here like each of the former Governorates could organize themselves into states, provinces or whatever they would like to be called etc;each with its own seat of government and each region allowed to make its own local laws, as long as they do not violate the national constitution, which is what the 13 colonies of the US did, and how the US runs now. OUr civil war was fought over which was more sovereign, states rights, or the good of the whole nation and all its citizens.
Perhaps Iraq would find itself content to conduct itself as three distinct bands like on the flag-the shia south, the sunni center and kurdish north, and stop fighting over whether one could prevail over another, over the whole country.The Kurds get their region, the sunnis get one for them, the shia get one for them, and no one has to worry about whether one will dominate over another. and everyone separates local issues from whole country issues. free to live as one wishes, so long as no one compels, imposes or robs anyone else with/of the same freedoms.
Our american revolution was fought over our rage at having british rule tax us without our being there to have a voice in the decision. We wanted full say in what was debated and discussed in shaping laws. We distilled this sentiment into our principle that being governed should be by consent of the governed, and that we agree that we are the ones governing ourselves. When I hear someone complain about 'the government' as if it were a thing apart, I remind them that "the government" is us, and no one else.
hmmm... well people don't totally like the British model that is why I said with some changes..
well..why not the American model ? It is very successful and it is the most successful constituion model in the world..
but there are some problems with it in Iraq.. Just like Britain, Iraq has different ethnic groups living in specific areas for thousands of years.. now all these areas has its own specificity..
but in USA it is not like this.. i.e An English, Spanish, African, etc all live in the same street..but in Iraq (apart from the capital) there are places where all the citzens are Arabs, Kurds, Turkmens, Assyrians, Chaldeans, etc... There are some towns where you can't find a single Arab or a single Kurd ! Now that is why I chose the British model.. i.e. you have the Scots where they have been living in their homelands for thousands of years..the same goes for the English and the Welsh.. each area has its own speciality..
cont..
cont..
Canada is also another good example... so I am thinking like we can have a combination of these models.. perhaps we could make the most successful model in the whole world !
I wish the Arab Iraqis come up wish some models..
Now talking about independence for Kurds.. there is nothing to hide.. most Kurds dreams of independence.. The Kurds are happy being independent... the Iraqi Arabs are happy to keep Kurdistan part of Iraq.... Now how can we make both happy ? hope you come up with some ideas
cont.. (God I hate this 1000 character lol)
this relates to the iraq situation in that shia don't want to be governed by sunnis, sunnis don't want to be governed by shia, and the kurds want to govern themselves. so it ought to be. being governed by whom you consent to be governed by. this would work just fine in each of the three 'bands'[using the flag]. The national government [in the U.S. model, the Federal Government] only takes on responsibility for those areas which no one state or region or 'band' can settle or dictate to another. Things like money, disputes between states, broadcasting, national roads,national defense, flight control..etc. have to be controlled by a higher body of equal representation so no one feels stepped on, or as we did, taxed without a say in it.
maybe the flag for the new iraq should be turned upside down! green in the top[north] for the kurds, white in the middle for the sunni [turbans] and black in the south for the shia[black turbans and black abeyas]!!!
hey? three bands, three sovereign different governing regions, but one iraq. and no one to fear being dominated by a world view they don't like. and the chaldeans, the assyrians, the turkomen, each can have their special 'states' or provinces or whatever they'll be called, where they govern themselves and are utterly respected the same as anyone.
the flag can have patches of colors for each of them in it too, perhaps according to which 'band' of the country their region falls in. might even put crescents on it where the muslims dominate, and a cross where the christians concentrate. now THAT would be a shock wouldn't it? and if this ridiculous hatred of the jews ever stops, they might be able to come back to mesopotamia as they once were, and the star of david might some day be added to that flag with equal place.
Hi Kurdo!
I tried to add a comment but could not zip my thoughts into the maximum of 1000 characters. I hope you don't mind me dropping a link to
xkDax | bLOG here...
Grtz
Kurdo,
Why not have states like the US with congressmen and senators. I has worked for the Greeks, the Romans and has worked for the US for 200 plus years.
Kristof,
very wise words in fact. This is what I hope for.. People can't rely on temporary governments for their fate and destiney..The whole idea why Kurds ask for independence or at least a federal state is because they fear the return of prosecution.. They can't trust the Iraqi governments anymore.. that is why they are asking for some kind of guarantees (at least a federal state would protect some of their rights)!
janet in venice beach
yeah that is a very cool idea.. as an intiative from you I decided to design a new Iraqi flag and publish it here.. a flag which could suit all.
traceman/pittsburgh,
Some aspects of the US federal system might work for Iraq but some principles should be changed.. we all know that the US system is the most effective in the world !
regards all
I believe Canada is having some problems with one proivence wanting its seperation but still wanting the currency of Canada or something, I just rememeber people commenting on it. I feel it might be good short term for seperation, but in the end I feel seperation along ethinic lines keeps people bonded to protecting family ( ethnic group first ) then the freedom of their countrymen. I dunno. I believe any step taken in any of the three models mentioned is postive. I believe Iraq will have its own style, and I would be very happy if their model will result better then ours or anyone else's in history. I feel its possible to learn from our mistakes and start off better then we did.
The U.S.A. had a way to unite a varied of ideas and people who wanted to be protected with their ideas, and in the end turned out pretty good. I wish change could of happen with out war, that is the greatest form of government, one that can radically change with its people's will with out blood.
Kurdo,
Good explorations of the concepts. Of course, we would love for Iraq to emulate our form of government. But most of us recognize that the translation has to adapt to significant differences in culture. The main idea that everyone seems to agree on is the one of local representation combined with national government.
Kurdo,
Each place has unique circumstances, special historical events related to that place and time during which the government was conceived. Click on my homepage (it's not mine) to read about a play about the writing of America's founding documents. It is being translated into Arabic. On the left, click on "Operation Iraq" "About the play" and "E-book"
Like I said before, circumstances are unique to each location and time. We can only tell our story. I hope that much of it can be useful to the forming of the new Iraqi government.
About the flag. I had an idea about the three stipes rotated a little to match the general angle of the two rivers. The top would be red, to represent the blood shed by all. The middle would be green, to represent the fertility of the area. The bottom would be tan, to represent the tie to desert culture. And the three areas would be separated by two blue ribbons that would represent the rivers.
Kurdo, I think Canada has a problem because the Western provinces have all the resources and the Eastern provinces tell them what to do and spend their money. Would this same problem happen in a Federal (Kurdistan, Sunni, Shiia) Iraq? Wouldn't the Sunnis have no resources but control the capital, Baghdad? My understanding is that the oil has been found in the North and South, but not in the middle. The Christians should get their own state in this scenario as well. They could be the liquor producers, protected by the federal government!
The problem for Iraq does not appear to be if one can design a federal union, but how the rights and freedoms of minority individuals (ie Sunni or Christians in mainly Shia areas, or Kurds in the Sunni triangle) can be protected. It is too easy to relegate many to be second class citizens simply because an area has be defined "Kurdish", or "Shia" or "Sunni". One thing I am sure of - a working system will not mean one free of conflict, debate or difference of opinion!
continued:
- Take Canada as an example; we have a wide range of diversity across this country in ecomonies, language, religion and viewpoint. We send inordinate amounts of time debating our identity, seeking the right balance between federal and provincial powers, arguing and voting in referendums for separation or inclusion of one part or another... But we do it peacefully, without bloodshed or violence, often without even great acrimony.... "To accommodate diversity is not for all to speak with a common voice.. it is to sing in multipart harmony". At least sometimes, when not amicably arguing!
One thing that bothers me is the number of posts that either state or assume that the subunits in a federal structure should be based on ethnicity. In my opinion, this is a guarantee of failure. It has been tried elsewhere (e.g., Lebenon, South Africa) and invariably fails. Just assigning "ethnicity" when rights and priviledges depend thereon is a nightmare.
The whole idea here is to encourage people to think of themselves as Iraqis first. Enshrining ethnic distinctions in governmental structures is a guaranteed way of preventing this. I think that subunits based on geography, with only certain specified powers delegated to a federal government, is the best way to avoid ethnic fragmentation.
Kurdo,
I am a Texan. Legend has it that Texas is the only state in the US that has the right to secede, if it wishes. I really don't know if that's true or not, but the vast majority of Texans would laugh at the idea of independence because we know we are much better off being part of the union.
At the most basic level, a federalist system will only succeed so long as the participants believe that the benefits of participation outweigh the costs. What do you see as the benefits to the Kurds in being a part of a larger, federalist, Iraq?
Kurdo,
I'm concerned that Iraq would suffer the fate of Yugoslavia, (Big nasty civil war) if it tried to split along ethnic lines. The problem there was that although much of the country was fairly homogeneous, there were significant regions that were mixed or had minority groups living within an area dominated by another ethnic group. Looking at ethnographic maps of Iraq, I see the same thing. While it may be true that, "there are some towns where you can't find a single Arab or a single Kurd," as long as there are significant regions where this is not the case, there could be trouble.
That being said, I don't think an independent Kurdistan is necessarily a bad idea. You'd have to make sure though that both Kurdistan and what ever is left respect the rights of minorities. Preferably any splitting should be consensual both on the part of the nation being split from and the new nation.
Marcus
I agree with Marcus (and disagree with Lydia). Iraq should be split along geographic lines, not ethnic lines. Look at what happened to India/Pakistan when it was formed. The Muslims wanted their own state after waiting thousands of years. Unfortunately, this motivated many Muslims to move to Pakistan due to animosity from their Hindu neighbors and vica-versa. Now there have been several wars since then with tens of millions of lives lost.
A provisional government isn't necessarily a bad thing. If you look at the history of the US, it didn't become a superpower overnight. First, there was the Continental Congress, which was an almost completely powerless federal government whose sole purpose was basically to serve as a United Nations for the colonies. Since this didn't work very well after a few years, there was a convention during which a new constitution was prepared (in secret, since they were supposed to be refining the Continental Congress). They then had to convince each colony to ratify it. It had to be unanimous so that no individual colony would be forced to join the new government.
So why such a fuss? The US is divided by States, each state is run by its own local governments and a Governor, all elected by the people of that state. The federal (central) government oversees the states in federal matters.The people of each state vote for those they want to represent them in the federal govt in Washington. The American model has served us well, especially due to the people having access to local government issues. We are all "Americans" but it is about geography not race,religion etc. I hope cool heads rule in this matter, it's about serving the people not the interests of one group or the other. Americans understand it is not perfect but the best in the world.
Commenting by HaloScan
