Iraq in 2017

[Jedburgh]

WINEP, 14 Jan 09: Kirkuk: A Test for the International Community

On January 31, most Iraqis will go to the polls and express their political preferences in provincial elections, but four of Iraq's provinces -- the three governorates within the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) and Kirkuk province -- will not hold elections. Kirkuk's noninclusion is a symbol of its unresolved status, and its elections are on hold until the Council of Representatives in Baghdad passes a special election law. There is little impetus, however, for the different ethnic factions to compromise on such a law unless the international community strongly supports the process.....

[Jedburgh]

ICG, 28 Mar 11: Iraq and the Kurds: Confronting Withdrawal Fears

....Given great uncertainty over how security conditions will develop along the trigger line in the coming year, progress in political negotiations over the disputed territories’ status has become more imperative than ever. While neither Baghdad nor Erbil appears to have an interest in armed confrontation, and both sides seem intent for the moment to capitalise on the mutual goodwill that arose from formation of the new coalition government, the disputed territories conflict is so fundamental to Baghdad-Erbil relations that a single incident could trigger a dangerous escalation. The unilateral deployment of Kurdish asaesh in Kirkuk city in November 2010 and of peshmergas / zerevanis into Kirkuk governorate in February 2011 were two such incidents. Violence has been avoided so far, in large measure because of the Baghdad-Erbil-U.S. security arrangement, but these moves stoked local anger as well as unease over the Kurds’ long-term plans; they could still give rise to violent response and will vastly complicate negotiations for a deal, especially if the Kurds’ military forces are not withdrawn to the Kurdistan region....

USIP, 28 Mar 11: Preventing Arab-Kurd Conflict in Iraq after the Withdrawal of U.S. Forces

Summary

• Since the fall of the former regime, in 2003, there has been continuous concern that fighting might break out between the Arabs and the Kurds over Kirkuk and the boundary of the Kurdistan Regional Government.

• In response to requests to help manage tensions between the different security forces, General Odierno, then Commanding General of United States Forces-Iraq, developed a Joint Security Architecture, bringing together Iraqi Security Forces, Kurdish forces, and US forces to work against their common enemy, the al-Qaeda.

• US forces are due to start pulling out of their conflict prevention role along the ‘trigger line’ that divides the Kurds and the Arabs in the disputed territories, by the summer of 2011. Unless new conflict prevention mechanisms are put in place, there is a real risk that tensions could boil over as people tire of waiting for a political resolution.

[Bill Moore]

First off we need to stop closing these threads, the history of these issues as they evolve are important. Kirkuk was a flash point in 2003 when we first went in, and has remained a flashpoint. The Kurds waited until they thought they had a position of advantage to claim it as sovereign ground. I have mixed feelings on the issue, I know Turkey (a NATO ally sort of), Iran, Syria, and Iraq are all opposed to an independent Kurdistan, and Kirkuk is essential to an independent Kurdistan's economic viability. However, with opposition on all sides to a landlocked country, how can they hope to survive if over flight into and out of is denied, and land lines of communication are closely monitored and controlled?

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...-lurch-9319720

US strategy sees Raqa fall but leaves Kurds in lurch

The power shift shows that, while US leadership has kept a coalition together long enough to defeat the militants, the region's political future is far from secure.

And experts warn that Washington's bitter foe Iran is poised to take advantage while US friends like the Iraqi Kurds retreat under pressure from Baghdad and Ankara.

Much like the other results of our war with Iraq, there is nothing unfolding now that was not predicted by regional experts. The only surprise is it took this long to happen. While many of us wish the Kurds the best, those who know the Kurds also know they're divided, and a number of outside actors, Iran being one of them, will leverage these tensions to pursue their ends.

[Bill Moore]

This article is relevant to the discussion.

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/are...-overseas-role

Areas Freed From Islamic State Will Test U.S. Policy On Limiting Overseas Role

Losing the Syrian Kurds as allies may be inevitable: Supremely pragmatic, they have never completely cut ties with Assad and Russia.

“The Americans were useful to them, but they were not in dreamland, thinking that the Americans were ever anything more than occasional, useful partners,” said Paul Salem, senior vice president for analysis and research at the Middle East Institute.