Our president is Kurdish... the paradox of office

When former Iraqi President Jalal Talabani sat on the chair of the Arab Summit Conference held in Baghdad in 2012, it was remarkable that a Kurdish president chaired a summit of Arab countries, but at that time it was acceptable and palatable for many in Iraq, given the man's acceptance and charisma, And an active role in an attempt to unite Shaath in the post-Saddam era, and to embark on the stage of building a comprehensive Iraqi identity.

Also, the issue of sharing the three presidencies between Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, was not raised with this strictness at the time, perhaps because the division was not constitutional, and therefore there was an expectation that this division would end, with the upcoming political changes, in addition to the preoccupation with the challenges that confronted the country, and the high hopes for Achieving what the Iraqis wished after the dictatorship phase.

At the Kurdish level, the two major Kurdish parties (the Patriotic Union and the Kurdistan Democratic Party) shared the tasks, so the presidency of the region was the share of the Kurdistan Democratic Party and its head Massoud Barzani, while the share of the presidency of the Federal Republic became the share of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and its leader Jalal Talabani, in an unwritten and unconstitutional agreement also. So far, the position of President of the Republic has been occupied by three leaders of the Patriotic Union, despite the tremors and competition, which began to appear after the crisis of the independence referendum of Iraqi Kurdistan in September 2017, as Massoud Barzani nominated Fouad Hussein to occupy the position of President of the Republic in 2018, a competitor to the current President Barham. Saleh, who won the position as a result of the agreement of the political blocs that angered Barzani at the time.

The repercussions of the (Kurdish president’s) paradox have appeared in its glaring form, since the referendum on the secession of Kurdistan was put forward in September 2017, and it has become imperative for every Kurdish leader who wants to promote himself in his political street in the region to say that he is demanding “the independence of Kurdistan” and that he is working hard to achieve the dream of “establishing an independent Kurdistan state.” » Here lies the crude irony, as this speech implies that it will work to divide Iraq, and that it will not abide by Article (64) of the Federal Constitution of Iraq, which defines the tasks of the President of the Republic and describes him, as “He is the head of the state and the symbol of the unity of the nation, representing the sovereignty of the country, It ensures adherence to the constitution and the preservation of Iraq’s independence, sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity, in accordance with the provisions of the constitution.

If everyone declares that the President of the Republic of Iraq is a protocol position, or as some describe it (honorary) under the parliamentary system of government, he receives and deposits, and calls for a meeting of Parliament, and calls for the formation of the government no more, without having the capabilities to hold real powers, then why Dispute over this position the Kurdish parties? The answer lies in the political balances, the threads of the game and its tensions between Baghdad and Erbil, and the passing of deals based on these tensions. Therefore, it is not only the president’s task (honorary), we remember the position of President Barham Salih when the October uprising overthrew the government of Adel Abdul Mahdi, and the competing Shiite blocs (Sairoon) were put forward. And Al-Fateh) names its candidates for the position of the alternative prime minister, at that time Barham Salih played on the balances of the blocs. It was the Shiite blocs that The position of the Prime Minister is different and conflicting. The President of the Republic will have a greater role than the constitution has drawn for him, a role that is largely based on the skill of arranging the deals of the political blocs. After the Federal Supreme Court in Iraq rejected on February 13, the candidacy of the former Minister of Finance and Foreign Affairs, Hoshyar Zebari (uncle of Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani) to run for the presidency after being accused of corruption against the background of a number of deputies filing a lawsuit to the Federal Court demanding the cancellation of Zebari's nomination. Barzani to push his nephew as a candidate for the position as an alternative to Zebari, who was expelled by the Federal Supreme Court. Kurdistan for a second term, and here the paradox arises, when two Kurdish politicians who are among the most prominent advocates of secession compete to occupy the position of President of the Republic of Iraq.

But we can put the paradox in the form of an innocent inquiry: Is it not possible to break the formula for the monopoly of the components for the positions of the three presidencies to become open to all? At least then the Iraqi situation will emerge from this structural paradox in its dark comic form (the protector of the constitution and the defender of Iraq's unity is at the same time the most vocal advocate of the division of Iraq and the secession of the region). The answer: Certainly, it is not possible to exit from this quota within the parameters of the current Iraqi political process, unless there is a very big shock that may change the Iraqi reality.