2026-02-24T10:53:49+00:00
font
Enable Reading Mode
A-
A
A+
Shafaq News
By Ali Hussein Feyli
An “Iraq without the Kurds” would not represent merely
a geographic or political shift; beyond the deep historical bonds, it would
mean the collapse of economic, security, and social ties. The consequences
would be swift, comprehensive, and cross-border. It cannot be claimed that the
crisis between Baghdad and Erbil is the making of one side alone.
Baghdad understands that the Kurdish people’s vision
is a blend of national aspirations, legal rights, and identity. Any solution
must therefore take these dimensions into account.
Those with a pragmatic outlook, concerned primarily
with livelihoods and stability, expect authorities to ease tensions rather than
obstruct efforts to resolve long-standing structural crises whose wounds have
remained open for years. Otherwise, future generations will inherit it.
The identity- and citizenship-related dimensions of an
“Iraq without the Kurds” scenario would either transform social relations or
eliminate them altogether. What is being practiced today is a policy of
ignoring rights and suspending justice, one that would impose a long-term
social and moral cost that cannot be repaired.
The defining question is whether Iraqis seek to revive
their shared history in an inclusive manner, or allow moments of political
recklessness that cross “sacred lines” to burn away a collective human legacy
and the values of citizenship.
At a time when even relations between two neighbors
require a long-term strategy, why does no Iraqi minister or official “among
those who shape disastrous outcomes” recognize that the current situation poses
an imminent threat? This type of conduct and policy is what ultimately
determines the future of Iraqis.
The loss of any part of Iraq’s geography would not
simply alter borders; its consequences would be accelerating and extremely
costly. Rational policymaking in the face of such risks would not spare the
Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Planning, or any related institution from
accountability.
To mitigate the damage of a scenario involving the
loss of the people and geography of Kurdistan, central decision-making in
Baghdad requires a technical, not tactical, approach; financial justice rather
than a “ministry of cutting off livelihoods”; and careful planning instead of
concealed mismanagement.
Openness free from fanaticism is a necessary prior
intention, as the prevailing trajectory in this country is toward deeper
polarization, the real danger of rupture, and the expansion of further crises.
Proponents of such ideas futilely promote the notion
that “lifting injustice” can be achieved through forced displacement and
transferring the inhabitants of one area to another. In reality, reversing this
course is what rebuilds trust and creates an inclusive identity among the
country’s components. Every step that lacks rationality will carry a long-term
cost and generate new crises. A carefully considered political decision can
determine the path toward stability or collapse.
Attempting a solution requires alignment in will and
public decision-making to prevent the accumulation of factors that fuel
political instability, radicalization, rising protests, and further social
fragmentation among the country’s components. This process demands legal and
political measures, not coercive and arbitrary actions.
This article was originally written in Arabic.
