Professor Mehmet Sukru Guzel is the president of Center for Peace and Reconciliation Studies and the United Nations Geneva Office respresantative of CAPAJ (Comision Juridica Para el Autpdesarrollo de los Pueblos Originarios Andips). He was awarded to the honarable degree of doctor and professor by the Rector of International Science Academy of Science, Azerbaijan, and has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize multiple times.
British media person Robert Inlakesh wrote on the website of Russia Today, pointing out that western governments and people have not learned a lesson from the U.S.-Iraq war 19 years ago, and the western media, which also shouted for the Iraq war, are still pulling aside for Ukraine in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. The Center conducted an exclusive and in-depth interview with Mehmet Sukru Guzel, hoping to understand his views on the latest progress of the Iraq issue.
Mehmet Sukru Guzel: Iraq’s civil war could explode again
There exists no certain formula on how to achieve sustainable peace and reconciliation cohesive nation-state after a post armed conflict. This is a mostly case by case study. But Iraq is a good example on how cannot achieve sustainable peace and reconciliation. The failure of the process of reconciliation from the beginning was guaranteed with the wrong methodology of the US. Then one can think if the US aimed to organize a future failed state in Iraq from the beginning. An informal consociational elite bargain was placed at the centre of post-invasion attempts at transition and peacebuilding in Iraq. It is a kind of informal consociationalism that undermined the coherence of the state and delegitimized the political system, a competition in the political field. The agreement to share power amongst Sunnis, Shi’as, and Kurds, as per the terms of the 2005 constitution still remains contentious, and dividing the society. The main reason of the unstable political situation is very simple, "first must be we, not Iraq” concept established by the power sharing methodology. We can define this as the linearity of liberal US peacebuilding that never gives a chance to a cohesive nation-state building in Iraq. No liberal peace building can be achieved as multi-party democratic systems characterized by "the rule of law, human rights, free and globalized markets and neoliberal development’" by dividing the society from the beginning, into ethnic and religious groups. There is always a Shiite Prime Minister, a Sunni Speaker of Parliament, and a Kurdish president. In spite of the fact that election results matter, this system, implemented to prevent conflict among the different groups on power sharing, undermines the democratic process. Since everyone is part of a broad-based consensus government, there is no real opposition in parliament. As a result, all political actors get their share of power, influence, and state funding.
There are a wide range of political, economic, and social problems in Iraq, such as corruption, lack of public services, and mass unemployment. The future civil disorder most probably will begin just because the power sharer elites became far away from the suffering million Iraqis. The lack of the trust to a state is different than the lack of the trust to the people who said to be representing you in the State. The lack of the trust for their ethnic, religious representatives means their fear for their future. Most probably, this will mean new civilian disorder in Iraq for the "rule of law".
Peacebuilding is perpetual struggle, whereas power sharing is not peacebuilding, it is just linearity of liberal political process for creating a status quo but what is created is a fragile status quo. To achieve a cohesive nation-state Iraq, we just need to on a new peacebuilding process, sustaining peace process, to "eliminate the fears" of the groups at the bottom by aiming to achieve “rule of law”. One should never forget that Da'esh was at a time had given less fear than the US and the others, if one really tries to understand the success of Da'esh.
Today, we are waiting a new civil war in Iraq which was also legalized by the UN Security Council Resolutions by defining Kirkuk region of Northern Iraq as the “internally disputed territories". This future civil war is to be originated from Article 140 of the 2005 Constitution of Iraq, where a referendum is written for the future determination of the oil reach Northern Iraq whether to be controlled by the Central Government or the Kurdish Regional Government. In the past, I had proven the nullity of the Article 140 of the Constitution of Iraq, both under the UN legal system and under the international customary law and I am still fighting to prevent this paper work created potential future civil war. Both parties in Iraq are preparing in a way or other to this future civil war as of today, silently and slowly. According to me, the origin of the Syrian civil war is for the preparation of this new future civil war in Iraq. The US is now organizing an army of 100.000 through the terrorist organization YPG/PKK in Syria, which is not related with the realities of Syria. This private army of the US most probably will take part in the future civil war in Iraq.
Conact: Chen Liyuan
Questioner: Chen Liyuan
Translator: Li Yuhan
Correcteor: Xu houkun