Операция «Иракская свобода» началась под предлогом поиска оружия массового поражения в Ираке и привела к свержению режима Саддама Хусейна и арабской социалистической партии «Баас». Впоследствии инспекторы ООН и военных сил США пришли к выводу, что на момент начала военной операции у Ирака не было программ оружия массового уничтожения, а Саддам Хусейн не был связан с «Аль-Каидой»[1], в совершении которой его обвиняли в Соединенные Штаты Америки. Спустя 13 лет после начала операции «Иракская свобода» Великобритания также признала, что режим Саддама Хусейна «не представлял непосредственной угрозы» для планеты на момент начала иракской кампании. Однако «Запад» до сих пор не хочет говорить, что именно вмешательство США привело к краху государства Ирак.
Ключевые слова: международное право, мир, вооруженный конфликт, миростроительство, Ирак.
Peacebuilding in Iraq: International Law and Policy
Abstract:
Operation Iraqi Freedom began under the pretext of searching for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and led to the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime and the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party. Subsequently, the inspectors of the United Nations and the US military concluded that at the time of the start of the military operation, Baghdad had no weapons of mass destruction programs, and Hussein was not connected to al-Qaeda[2] which he was accused of perpetrating in the United States of America. 13 years after the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom, the UK also recognized that Saddam Hussein’s regime «was not an imminent threat» to the planet at the time the Iraqi campaign began. However, the West is still reluctant to say that it was US intervention that led to the collapse of the state of Iraq.
KEYWORDS: international law, peace, armed conflict, peace building, Iraq.
Everything that happens in Iraq as a whole, each of its parts, is evaluated very differently depending on how the observer sees Iraq’s future. It depends on how to resolve the main contradiction that defines all aspects of life in Iraq — the conflict between Sunni Arabs and Shiite Arabs that has turned into a phase of military confrontation. The fact that we put this contradiction and this conflict in the first place does not diminish the importance of the Kurdish issue, which may eventually become a major issue for the Middle East, but it will happen when the entire vast Kurdish world takes action. Now, regardless of the size of the role of the Kurds in present-day Iraq, their fate is secondary to the Sunni-Shiite conflict, which paints the situation not only in Iraq, but also in the Middle East as a whole, in currently bleak colours.
The Kurds did not intend to interfere in this long-running fratricidal war, but they would not stand idly by, as they intended to take advantage of this situation to return and unite their lands. With the fall of Mosul militarily, which is the third largest administrative governorate of Iraq after it was unstable in security, and the control of the federal and local governments was not at the level required for them. To prepare the fertile ground for the fall of Mosul in the hands of ISIS or the so-called (Islamic State)[3], whose title is far from the content of any heavenly religion, which led to the violation of the military, security and intelligence institutions in the province, thus and without introduction, which drew the attention of the local and international observer. There is a plan and scenario prepared in advance to tear up national unity, stir riots, and pass agendas prepared by forces inside and outside Iraq to overthrow the government, which was basically fragile and came to serve foreign agendas. On the other hand, it is necessary to mention the role played by the former governor of Mosul (Atheel al-Nujaifi and his brother, the former Speaker of the Iraqi Council of Representatives (Osama al-Nujaifi) in preparation for this catastrophic event. It should be noted that during that stage, specifically after 2003, a large group of senior Baathists loyal to the former regime, and who mourned the previous era, were brought close to Atheel al-Nujaifi and appointed in his own office and given positions in Government departments in the governorate later revealed that they had relations with some terrorist cells.
Here, it must be noted that there are international bodies that contributed to sponsoring sectarianism in Iraq, and the period between 2005-2007 was one of the most difficult periods for Iraqis who witnessed the worst bloody scene in history. But what was not taken into consideration is the synergy of the religious institution with the people to renounce sectarianism and liberate the city from the hands of ISIS at the hands of the Shiite Arabs and the diverse popular military factions that were formed at that time with the fatwa of sufficient jihad issued by the supreme religious authority of Shiite Muslims, Sayyid Ali al-Sistani, on the necessity of cohesion in this The difficult times, the rejection of sectarianism, and the expulsion of the barbaric remnants of ISIS, which America saw as compelled to display its military power, and always showed its passion for the liberation of countries and the spread of so-called democracy. ISIS was defeated by a joint Iraqi-American intelligence effort to kill many ISIS remnants and force the rest to flee. The Kurds were able to extend their control over the Kurdish areas illegally wrested from Kurdistan during the administrative reforms and the policy of Arabization of Kurdish lands under Saddam Hussein. In fact, in the beginning, the Kurds’ tactics and strategy was to use their neighbours’ struggle to return territory, as well as to isolate Iraqi Kurdistan with the subsequent declaration of independence. This seems to be the most realistic development option, since the invasion of ISIS, which seized the areas of settlement of the Sunni Arabs, and whose future goals were based on dividing Iraq into three separate parts: Kurdistan, the lands of the Sunni Arabs, and the areas of the Shiites, but this strategy has not been achieved to this day. The provinces of Iraq remained united after the abject failure of ISIS to implement its plan. Many political observers of the Kurdish situation in Iraq know that the Kurds have obtained a confederate rule since the era of Saddam Hussein, who wanted to provide autonomy but not independence for the Kurdish people, which was unique in the region. But the aspirations of the Kurds did not stop and will not stop at this point. The Kurdish dream of an independent state has been present for many years. In my opinion, the conditions for independence are not available, as the region’s budget is unable to meet the dues of its citizens, despite the central government in Baghdad allocating billions of oil imports to them. In addition, the defence system of the region represented by the Peshmerga forces is also not up to the level of the regular army, in addition to that the oil fields located within the geographical area of the region are also insufficient to achieve the budget that would meet the needs of the region and provide them with comprehensive independence if the imports of the southern oil fields located in southern Iraq are still being paid in the form of salaries, aid and services to the region to this day.
However, in the summer of 2014, the summit of ISIS seemed possible to achieve more, namely the complete revenge of the Sunni Arabs, whose defeat in the 2003 war had turned into a humiliating loss of prestige in the country for their pride and their transformation from a dominant minority into a discriminatory minority. These actions, both in the direction of Erbil and in the direction of Baghdad, which were weaker at that time, the fall of which would be a severe blow to both the prestige of the United States and the prestige of Iran that does not surrender. Its allies, they changed the military and political situation in Iraq. Iran and the United States entered the war with ISIS, whose help is irreplaceable for Erbil, and now, in fact, to Shiite, and moreover pro-Iranian, Baghdad. At the same time, although both the United States and Iran, although their existence is motivated by different goals, formally see the future of Iraq as it is: Iraq, according to their ideas, must preserve its territorial integrity. As a result, it turns out that Erbil and Baghdad, in their own way simultaneously with Washington and Tehran, are not only allies, but were made to calculate, and perhaps formally accept, by giving appropriate commitments, the prospect of maintaining a united Iraq in which they are forced to reconcile as the Shiite Arabs find with the Sunni Arabs and the Kurds in their place.
This was manifested in the transfer of power under pressure from Nuri al-Maliki, who did not want to leave his position, to Haider al-Abadi, who adopted, albeit slowly, the removal of obstacles in the relations between Erbil and Baghdad, which threatened to separate permanently, or even push these government entities. We are now talking about the de facto equal rights of Erbil and Baghdad to the political, legal, social and economic development of the areas under their control while maintaining federal unity, but with a rather weak federal status. This is what we find clearly evident today as observers of the thorny political situation in Iraq, despite the victory of the Sadrist movement in the parliamentary elections on October 10, 2021. According to the final results, it was confirmed that the Sadrist bloc led by Muqtada al-Sadr won the largest number of parliamentary seats, with 73 seats in the 329-seat parliament. We find a repetition of the same political game by the head of the Law Bloc, former Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, in a desperate attempt to harmonize with the winning bloc to achieve gains that would have strengthened the division, and it has so far failed to elect the three presidencies, the Prime Minister, the Speaker of Parliament and the President of the Republic, and the conflict is still going on between the right to the winning bloc in the legislative elections and the political quotas between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.
The conclusion of the December 2, 2014 agreement on oil, budget and financing of the Peshmerga is another step towards the formation of such a state, and before that there was recognition of Erbil’s right to organize self-defence and receive military and humanitarian aid. straight from western countries. Of course, this is only the beginning, as the December 2 agreement still needs to be passed by Parliament, but it recognizes the right of Iraqi Kurdistan at the level of the Iraqi government to develop oil production and sell its oil and gas, which is the economic basis for Kurdish independence. This has been the stumbling block in their relationship for a long time. But many things have been isolated for a long time: the Kurds have already defended their language and lands, as well as their power in this region.
The conclusion of this agreement can only be welcome, because it lays the necessary stones for the establishment of a true federal Iraq, because it creates the basis for a truly self-governing, not limited by the status of the development of the Kurdish region. In fact, it is a real alternative to formal independence, which is also difficult to achieve due to external conditions, and in the current course it is possible to eliminate the vertical subordination of the regions to the centre, and Iraq can actually become a network. structure. If we evaluate the potential of this direction for the development of the state, then the new federal Iraq, which, however, has not yet occurred, is likely to enter the path of such a political development that creates a society at a higher level in this sphere than, for example, the European Union , which is seen from Erbil as a highly conservative and strictly regulated society.
Of course there are still concerns that the nature of Iraq’s central government, which tends to be authoritarian and even slide into dictatorship, will not change, and thus we can expect an attempt to make up for what has been lost on the part of Baghdad. But do not exaggerate this risk. In addition, the security of any country, and in our case the region, is not definitively guaranteed, but requires constant work, constant strengthening.
Today, by concluding this agreement, Kurdistan does not lose anything, because after a while it will be much stronger and, in any case, it will be able to achieve what it can only dream of today. In this regard, do not be alarmed by the fact that the imminent declaration of Kurdish independence was cancelled. Today, as in 1992 or 2003, this would be a move whose negative consequences are quite evident. Of course, many Kurds were waiting and waiting for this step, despite all the risks associated with it, but it would be very bad if, in my opinion, negative Kurdistan repeated the Israeli experience. Unlike Israel, Kurdistan, even without being an independent and independent state, is firmly rooted in its territory, where the Kurds have been constantly living for thousands of years.
None of the neighbours deny or oppose basic Kurdish rights. It is important for Kurdistan, with all the changes in its status as a state, to remain a full member of Middle Eastern society. Accordingly, the main thing is that Kurdistan is on the path of progress, building its economic strength and military capabilities, which will eventually lead to its recognition, but it needs recognition from not many Western countries, something that the Kurds are almost guaranteed, from its neighbours who are still far from ready for this step.
And last but not least, and in response to Western readings of the internal situation in Iraq and its mosaic components, I say that the strength of the Kurdistan region is derived from the strength of the State of Iraq as one of its beautiful components as part of its ancient historical land. If the Kurdish-Western scheme or vice versa lies in isolating this region under the pretext of independence, the results will be an uncalculated step because there are countries that do not like the existence of an independent Kurdish state!!! We must always remember the proverb that says in unity is strength and in division is weakness. Unity is the focus of all the laws of life because it stemmed from one source, which is the one God. There is no power without unity and no resistance without union.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC LIST
1. Bob Woodward. Plan of Attack, USA / Bob Woodward. Moscow: 2004.
2. Colby Boselle. My War: Killing Time in Iraq / Colby Buzell. M: «Putnam Adult; 1 edition», October 2005. — 368 p.
3. Allison GT Nuclear Terror. The most terrible but preventable catastrophe. / GT Allison. M.: «LKI», 2007. — 296 p.
4. Leonid Mlechin. Putin, Bush and the Iraq War / Leonid Mlechin. M: «Axmo», «Yuza» 2005. — 640 p.
5. DVD Kuznetsov. The Iraqi crisis. Outline of events. Documents and materials: a textbook. / Dr. Kuznetsov. M.: Blagoveshchensk: BSPU Publishing House, 2006. — 259 p.
Информация об авторе:
Аль-Мутаири Форат Заки Салих, аспирант третьего курса кафедры международного современного права Российского университета дружбы народов
Information about the author:
Al- Mutairi Forat Zaki Salih, Third-year PHD Student- Department of International Contemporary Law, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Ulitsa Miklukho-Maklaya, 6, Moskva, 117198
[1] The activity of this movement was recognized as terrorist, banned in the Russian Federation by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, dated February 14, 2003 No. GKPI 03-116,entered into force on 04.03.2003.
[2] The activity of this movement was recognized as terrorist, banned in the Russian Federation by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, dated February 14, 2003 No. GKPI 03-116,entered into force on 04.03.2003.
[3] The activity of this movement was recognized as terrorist, banned in the Russian Federation by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, dated December 29, 2014 AKPI 14-1424С, entered into force on 13.02.2015.
