Would partition be a good idea for Iraq?

Iraq is a divided society. There is a polarisation between Sunni and Shi’ite Arabs – which is manifested both in the political arena and in violence in the streets. In addition, there is tension between the Kurdish minority and the Arab majority as a whole. The Kurdistan Regional Government tries to operate as independently of the Baghdad government as possible and wants as much autonomy as is feasible.

Both the Shi’ite-dominated government at the Centre and the United States seem to be wedded to the idea of a united Iraq. However, something to bear in mind is that Iraq itself is an artificial state. It was carved out of the Ottoman Empire by the victorious Allies at the end of World War One and was given to Britain to rule as a ‘mandate’ (i.e. a de facto colony). Britain then handed power to the Hashemite dynasty in the 1920s, who had been allies of the British in the struggle against Turkey during WW1.

When the country was created, as was often the case when dominant Western powers re-drew the maps of Africa and Asia, there was no consultation with the people it affected. Thus, perhaps, if it is the will of the people affected, the artificial state created in 1918-22 should be partitioned – especially if it has the potential to reduce communal violence.

The US, its allies and the Central Government do not want to allow the Kurdish-majority areas to decide whether to become independent or not. This seems to me a denial of the democratic rights of the Kurdish population. If they vote in a referendum to become independent of Iraq, then I think this should be honoured. US reluctance to permit this, to my mind, is a result of realpolitik and a desire to keep Turkey on side. However, I have no sympathy with US foreign policy and don’t see why partition should be ruled out simply because it is not to the taste of some NATO members. Given the suffering of the Kurdish population in Iraq over the 80-odd years of its independent existence – when they have been sidelined and subject to state repression – I would not be surprised if a lot of them do want independence.

The Sunni/Shi’ite divide could perhaps also be resolved by partition. It seems that a lot of the tacit support that some Sunnis give to Sunni terrorist groups is because they fear being frozen out of power by the new, Shi’ite dominated government. Furthermore, they also fear attack at the hands of Shi’ite militant forces.

It thus would, arguably, help to give the Sunnis a sense of security if central Iraq was separated from the Shi-ite south. The Sunnis would then have an entity in which they were a majority and would not fear being sidelined. The difficulty, of course, is that some towns and cities (especially Baghdad) have an intermingling of both Sunni and Shi’ite communities. This may make the idea of partition unfeasibly (or, of course, it may require the mixed areas to become a third entity – a city-state of Baghdad). I would be interested to see whether, when offered the chance of self-determination, Sunni voters would take it. The offer of partition would also, to my mind, encourage Shi’ite politicians to take a more considerate approach to the previously-dominant Sunnis – in order to put their minds at rest and to discourage people from voting for partition.

I would be interested to see what people think. Would partition be a viable idea for the long-suffering people of Iraq? Would it reduce violence? Would it deal with the political concerns and fears of the 3 principal communities in the country?