One Common Trench or Two Opposite Sides?/Part 4

The Kurdish Question

What is our opinion of the Kurdish national question? We will not remain silent when confronted with harmful trends. We do not share the attitude of the Communist Party member who tolerates harmful aspects of a nationalist movement although they contradict his own ideas and doctrines. If the Communist Party had been the leader of the Revolution, it certainly would regard some of the concepts, which it is now tolerating as deviations, and dangers, which should be eliminated. The experiences of the socialist countries are proof of this.

We are, therefore, led to believe that many of the ideas expressed now by the Communist Party are merely means for making gains at the expense of the ABSP and do not constitute a principled stand. On the other hand, when a Ba’athist makes a mistake and violates his leadership’s instructions, his error also amounts to a deviation.

We must understand that this country will remain within its present geographical boundaries forever. Any changes in its political image should be linked to the struggle for Pan-Arab unity and objectives. We must understand that the national question should be approached with a conception of autonomy established by reasonable thinking based on faith in the people and not as a result of the abnormal conditions, which we have undergone.

At a meeting of the Legislative Council of the Autonomous Area I made the following statement:

“When does it become both materially and spiritually impossible to secede? Materially, it becomes impossible through prevention of secession, and spiritually, by mental and spiritual rejection of secession by the overwhelming majority of the Kurdish people and by all Iraqis. Only then would it be impossible to infringe upon the unity of our people and territory. If their balance were upset and one of these two factors prevailed at the expense of the other, our progress would be considerably compromised. Consequently, if any of us imagines that material impossibility alone would be sufficient for ensuring the unity of the destiny of the Iraqi people, he would surely be wrong. This is not the only basis of our work and policies.

“On the other hand, if we view the question impracticably, unobjectively and apolitically, imagining that we could find a solution through a casual mental exercise, we would be inviting the imperialists to undermine the unity of our people. It is with such a balanced outlook that we should strengthen and develop the Autonomous institutions, to enhance their activity in the political, social and economic processes, which aim at building a new Iraq in the spirit of the great July Revolution, under the leadership of your party, the ABSP.

“There is no room for one-sided conceptions based exclusively on the use of force for foiling the imperialist designs and schemes. Nor can we tolerate utopian views which underestimate the importance of force in the process of development and in the protection of the sovereignty and the national and territorial unity of Iraq, for all time.”

The antagonistic forces, including those supporting secession, should find it both spiritually and materially impossible to achieve their aims... spiritually, in the sense that our people in Kurdistan believe that their destiny is ultimately linked to the territorial integrity of this, associating all their aims and aspirations with it.

The material side of this question is a function of the legal, political, economic and even military measures taken by the State. In principle there should be a balance between these two elements. Either of these two factors alone cannot prevent antagonistic activities in the Kurdistan Autonomous Area. Moreover, anyone who imagines that dealing with abstract principles alone is sufficient will not promote Iraq’s unity, but only lead our people to incorrect conclusions.

On the other hand, any concept proceeding exclusively from the efficiency of political, military, economic and similar measures would also be a deviation.

Antagonistic activity should be ruled out as a matter of principle, by measures stemming from principles. Such an orientation will inspire our people in the Autonomous Area to believe that the leadership in Baghdad is but a part of themselves, striving for their own benefit and working for the national cause, in the same way that they are doing. In addition to that, certain other prerequisites should be satisfied: controlling the borders, moving inhabitants twenty kilometers from the borders to prevent infiltration, creating networks for gathering information and keeping watch on harmful trends, deploying an army in the area, building roads in the mountains, etc.

Another important point is the necessity for providing a means of self-examination. Let us suppose that each of you were to change his position. The Ba’athist, for instance, would place himself in a Communist’s shoes, or vice-versa. How would each of you act in the face of any social, political, economic or national conditions experienced by Iraq either now or in the future? If we did this, we would certainly minimize our criticism of each other. Also, the results and formulas of cooperation would be more positive.