Global General

Special

Newsmaker

Asia Pacific

America

Middle East

Europe

Africa

Kirkuk oil may make or break Iraq's future

(China Daily)
Updated: 2009-11-05 10:29

Long term, money also plays a role. Because of the surrounding oil, whoever controls Kirkuk stands to benefit enormously.

Residents walk through a market next to the Kirkuk Castle in 2003. [File Photo]

A different divide

The Kurdish-Arab dispute over Kirkuk is different from Iraq's main political dispute between Sunni Arabs and Shiite Arabs, which plays out more in the capital of Baghdad and surrounding areas.

The Sunni-Shiite split has less relevance in Kirkuk where both Kurds and Arabs are mostly Sunni Muslims. There, the fear among Arabs - both Sunnis and Shiites - is that Kurds will gobble up all jobs and government benefits if Kirkuk joins Kurdistan.

The US has been watching the debate intensely for any repercussions it may have for a US military withdrawal.

Under a plan by President Barack Obama, all US combat troops will be out of the country by the end of August 2010, leaving about 50,000 trainers and support troops in Iraq. Those remaining troops would leave by the end of 2011.

Related readings:  Iraq vote may be delayed, election head warns  CNPC, British BP sign Iraq big oil deal  Al-Qaida linked group claims Baghdad attacks  Bombings target government in Baghdad, 147 killed  US speeds Iraq withdrawal; 4,000 more headed home

US military commanders say the majority of the troop departures would come about 60 days after the planned Iraqi election - the idea being to get the country on stable footing before making any major troop changes.

Any delay in the election date could possibly push back the troop withdrawal. US officials have said that they are still hoping the Jan 16 date will go forward, but say their troop draw-down plan is not set in stone.

Election politics

As the election approaches, tensions have increased with Arab lawmakers saying Kirkuk is an Iraqi city and Kurdish lawmakers boycotting a parliament session last week over the issue.

Iraq's central government should have tried to resolve the underlying Kirkuk issue long before now, asserts Mohammed Ihsan, the former Minister of Disputed Territories, who is now in the Kurdistan regional government.

"They forget that without sorting out this issue, you cannot develop a serious partnership throughout the country," Ihsan said.

But a Turkomen lawmaker, Abbas al-Bayati, said Iraq's parliament has not given up hopes of a deal on the election law. "Delaying the elections is a red line. Elections must not be postponed at any price."

The tensions over Kirkuk - already high - rose last week after Massoud Barzani, the president of the Kurdish autonomous region in the north, said in a speech: "We refuse to give Kirkuk a special status in the election."

The wording refers to an April United Nations report recommending giving Kirkuk such "special status" with oversight by both the near-autonomous Kurdish region and the central government in Baghdad. Kurds reject that.

The controversy over Barzani's words was further complicated, at least initially, by a mistranslation of his remarks on Iraqi state television, which inaccurately quoted him as saying he pledged to "annex" Kirkuk - a more hardline position.

The mistranslation aside, emotions run high.

Fawzi Akram, a legislator in radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's bloc, who listened to Barzani's speech in the original Kurdish, called his comments provocative.

"We must contain the situation, not make it more complicated," he said. "Kirkuk is an Iraqi city."

AP-Xinhua

   Previous page 1 2 Next Page  

   Previous page 1 2 Next Page