Posted: June 20th, 2015
Topic: Kurdistan diplomacy
Abstract
The present study was dedicated to analysis of the UN diplomacy’s role in Kurdistan in 2011-2014. Numerous UN Offices have been operating in Kurdistan since the 1990s, upon provision of protection of basic human rights and lives by the Allied Forces. Since then, the function of the UN in this region changed from security provision and protection to assistance in diplomatic and political relations, resolution of disputes, and establishment of sound democratic structures in this administrative unit through legal elections and political restructuring. This study utilized a case study approach to research, which encompassed a survey with 25 UN officials and secondary data analysis to arrive at comprehensive conclusions about the role that the UN diplomacy played in the region within the past couple of years. Findings suggest that UNAMI and other UN Offices are generally efficient in resolving some issues Kurdistan is facing, including humanitarian aid, addressing the needs of refugees and IDPs, and resolution of diplomatic disputes. However, this study also revealed that UN Offices fail to address the present-day realities of Kurdistan’s existence and the overall tension in the region including ISIS spread, tensions in Iraq-Kurdistan relations, and conflicts inside the KRG political structure. Recommendations for policy change so that the UN becomes more effective in its assistance to Kurdistan are provided at the end of the research.
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW… 15
Role of UN Diplomacy in Kurdistan (2011-2014) 20
UN Diplomacy and Establishment of Relations with Other Countries. 21
Addressing Kurdistan’s Humanitarian Needs. 22
Health Protection and Promotion. 25
Children’s Issues in Kurdistan. 27
Control over Weapon Use in Kurdistan. 29
Political and Economic Involvement of UN in Kurdistan’s Issues. 32
Diplomacy Challenges of the UN in Kurdistan. 34
Threat of Kurdistan’s Empowerment through Bonds with ME Countries. 35
Challenging Iraq-Kurdistan Relations. 38
Political Barriers to UN Assistance. 43
Media Coverage of Kurdistan’s Development and UN Assistance with Intervention. 44
Socio-Demographic Information about Respondents. 54
Information about Respondents’ UN Offices. 56
Assessment of UN Efficiency in Resolving Kurdistan’s Problems. 59
Estimates of UN’s Successes and Failures. 65
Barriers to UN Efficiency in Kurdistan. 67
Future Prospects of UN’s Role in Kurdistan. 69
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 72
Recommendations for Policy Change. 79
Recommendations for Further Research. 81
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
The present chapter introduces key information and facts underlying this research, and shows why this research is significant. The United Nations Organization has been involved in the negotiation and diplomacy actions in the Kurdistan region of Iraq for a long period so far, with the purpose of reconciling the autonomous Kurdish region with the mainstream government of Iraq. The UN contribution is immense in the establishment of a peaceful negotiation and cooperation process, though there are still many challenges to resolve on the way to fruitful partnership and coexistence. Hence, this study is dedicated to analysing the role of the UN in helping Kurdistan with its transformation into an autonomous region with a perspective of becoming an independent state, and the contribution of the UN diplomats to international developments in relations of Kurdistan with Iraq and the rest of the world. This chapter provides background data about the situation, formulates the research problem, purpose, and research questions, and presents the structure of upcoming chapters.
Background
The Kurds have never had a state of their own, and the present-day concentration of Kurds is geographically located at the intersection of the borders of Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. Historically a part of the Persian and Ottoman empires, Kurdistan was an independent state only for three years, from 1920 to 1923, and was later divided between Iraq and Turkey, thus confining Kurds to living as ethnic minorities in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria. Iraq and Iran had unfriendly relations for many decades, which further complicated collaboration and communication of Kurds across these countries’ borders (Every Culture, 2015).
However, Kurds have also always held a relentless struggle for their independence; this way, the Kurdish armed forces called “peshmerga” have been conducting military activities against Iraqi armed forces to preserve their territories. The Kurdistan Workers Party is also involved in struggle for independence as a radical political and military group (The Economist, 2015). After the overturn of the Saddam regime in 2003, Kurds finally received an opportunity to establish their own autonomous state in the territory of Iraq, which is now known under the name Iraqi Kurdistan, Southern Kurdistan, or the Kurdistan Region. After gaining autonomy, Kurds in the newly created autonomous territorial unit had to solve many pressing issues such as rebuilding their infrastructure, creating a viable state administration, and helping the displaced Kurds who suffered because of violent clashes and war. Though the path was hard, nowadays Kurdistan represents a parliamentary democracy with a stable vector of political and economic development (BBC News, 2015).
The current prosperity and stability of Kurdistan is much the tribute to the US active support and assistance in the region, first by overthrowing the Saddam regime and then by providing multi-faceted support packages for the Kurds in the times of crisis (Ahmad, 2004). The UN also has a long-standing tradition of assisting Kurds in the countries where they were oppressed and non-recognized for many decades; UN cooperation with Kurdistan started in the 1980s when Kurdish diaspora organizations resorted to representatives of the United Nations’ agencies for considering the political status of Kurds. Cooperation further changed its focus towards wider protection of Kurds’ political, social, and cultural rights in the Middle East with the official support of the European Union in that struggle (Eliassi, 2014, p 3).
Problem Statement
In 1991, the UN Security Council published Resolution 688 condemning repression of Kurds, and after that, the UN established a no-fly zone in northern Iraq (Meho, 2004, p 329). However, the most decisive document that rules the UN diplomatic relations with Kurdistan even now was the UN Resolution 986 that guaranteed allocation of 13% of oil revenues received under the Oil-for-Food Program, and created the basis for long-term support of the UN to Kurdistan (Eliassi, 2013, p 3). Resolution 986 contributed to steady development of Kurdistan since the establishment of the Oil for Food Program in 1996, allowing Iraq to export $2 billion worth of petroleum and petroleum products per 6 months, with 13% of the revenue allocated to Kurdish needs. For many years, this UN-overseen program gradually improved the living standards of Kurds and helped the establishment of the Kurdish state, coupled with normalization of relations between the rivalling Kurdish parties.
In 2014, a considerable breakthrough was observed in the relations between Iraq and Kurdistan; the Iraqi government signed an oil export agreement with the northern region of Kurdistan, thus showing progress in the resolution of a many-years’ political crisis and tension between the two (Bradley, Kent, and Adnan, 2014). The Deputy Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Iraq (DSRSG) Mr. Gyorgy Busztin claimed that the oil agreement is a very considerable step forward in the Iraq-KRG relations. According to him, “transfer of funds from the Central Government to the Kurdistan Regional Government confirms that both sides are committed to the implementation of the oil agreement signed in December last year” (United Nations Iraq, 2015). However, there are many other tensions and problems to be solved between Iraq and Kurdistan to contribute to further growth and development of the latter as a state on its own. Iraq is a destabilized country in crisis, which has numerous disputes with Kurdistan regarding territories and oil ownership, so all these factors slow down and prevent Kurdistan’s full-scale development. Tension between Iraq and Kurdistan also intensified in 2014 after seizure of the historical town of Kirkuk by the Kurdish Peshmerga forces to prevent its control by ISIS terrorists (BBC News, 2015).
The UN conducts active work towards resolution of the most troubling issues in Kurdistan so far. For instance, at the beginning of 2015, the UNAMI Regional Erbil Office Head Mr Sokol Kondi met with the speaker of the Kurdistan Parliament to discuss the current situation and progress with the war against terror in Kurdistan, the situation in areas out of control of KRG, the process of preparation for elections and referendum in the region, etc. Thus, collaboration between UNAMI representatives and KRG is now quite active in terms of protecting the rights of ethnic minorities residing in Kurdistan, transferring UN experiences for democratic elections, and enhancing the economic, political, and social potential of the state (Kurdistan Parliament, 2015).
Nevertheless, despite considerable progress towards stabilization of the state and creation of a sound economic, social, and political structure in Kurdistan, this autonomous unit still has to overcome many challenges with which the UN diplomats now assist Kurdish governmental authorities. For instance, the geographical position of Kurdistan makes it landlocked by the countries unsympathetic to Kurdish political and territorial aspirations, such as Turkey and Iran. Moreover, Kurdistan borders on Syria – a country now torn by the horrors of the long-lasting civil war. There are serious challenges to Kurdistan’s development as a state inside the power structure of Kurdistan as well; a long-standing opposition between the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdistan Democratic Party ended with a civil war in the 1990s and even put the existence of autonomous Kurdistan government to risk (Cordesman, Mausner, and Derby, 2010, p 76).
This problem finds its reflection in Kurdistan’s indecisiveness regarding independence. Barzanis’ Kurdish Democratic Party is in friendly relations with Turkey, and it pushes towards reclaiming greater autonomy from Iraq. The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, in its turn, holds closer ties with Iraqi government in Baghdad, thus calling for maintenance of a semi-autonomous status of Kurdistan (The Economist, 2014). However, seizure of Iraqi territories by Kurdish armed forces in the summer of 2014 takes Kurdistan closer to independence, no matter what its political leaders strive to.
Purpose of the Study
Since the onset of Kurdistan’s formation as an autonomous administrative unit in Iraq, the UN played a serious role in helping Kurds establish their state and achieve higher standards of quality of living, healthcare, and economy. By means of introducing a UN resolution 986, the UN guaranteed that a certain percentage of national budget be allocated to Kurds’ needs, thus creating a legitimate instrument of Kurdish financing and support for Kurdistan’s autonomous development. However, the UN diplomacy has not managed to resolve all issues in the region, and there are still some conflicts and tensions to resolve on the way towards Kurdistan’s full-pledged independence and prosperity. Moreover, the US is mostly credited with assistance to Kurdistan in its independent development, while the UN’s role is seen as a secondary one. Hence, the purpose of this study has been formulated as follows: to identify ways and means through which the UN diplomats contributed to Kurdistan’s development and helped Kurdish government to resolve its territorial, political, and diplomatic conflicts during its transformation process.
Research Questions
In compliance with the formulated problem statement and purpose of the study, the researcher has come up with the following set of research questions for this study:
- How did the Kurds seek to establish a Kurdistan government?
- What obstacles did the UN strive to eliminate when assisting in creation of a democratic Kurdistan?
- What challenges did the UN authorities face when attempting to reconcile Iraq and Kurdistan, and to resolve Kurdistan’s diplomatic conflicts?
Significance of the Study
The UN has a very long and rich history of assisting Kurdistan in its establishment as an autonomous administrative unit of Iraq, protection of oppressed Kurds, and improvement of KRG’s diplomatic relations with neighbouring countries and the central Iraqi government. As claimed by Malanczuk (1991, p 115), the UN Security Council initially worked on the creation of a demilitarized zone between Iraq and Kuwait in the 1990s, and controlled ceasefire in the region, while other international assistance authorities worked more precisely in the diplomatic field to establish support for the Kurdish refugees, to provide emergency relief operations, and to solve the problem of adequate protection of the Kurds and Iraq itself. However, after that, the UN diplomatic missions have become closely involved in the diplomatic relations of Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) with its neighbouring countries and the international diplomatic community.
The UN actively works on the resolution of diplomatic crises in a variety of directions. For instance, it has contributed to signing the 2013 ceasefire with the PKK that has been conducting guerrilla warfare in the region for several decades, thus destabilizing Kurdistan and slowing down its economic, social, and political progress. PKK is still regarded a terrorist group by NATO, the USA, Turkey, the UK, and France, but the UN has does not consider it terrorist. Furthermore, the Special Political and Decolonization Committee designated by the UN now works on assessment of Kurds’ treatment in the Middle East countries where they live in high concentrations to decide whether they have the right to statehood. The UN now helps Syrian Kurdish refugees fleeing their country under the threat of ISIS spread, and provides Kurds with humanitarian aid, support for economic sustainability and stability (UNHCR, 2015).
So far, there are many challenges for the UN in its diplomatic and security guarantee roles in Iraq in general, and Kurdistan in particular. First, the security situation is non-conducive to the establishment of peace and partnership in the country and region overall (Traub, 2007, p 4). Moreover, the KRG authorities claim their right to be their own representatives in international diplomatic negotiations. According to Dindar Zebari, the assistant head of Kurdistan’s Department of Foreign Affairs, the central government of Iraq should recognize KRG representatives as official diplomats, following the model of Canada’s Quebec diplomatic representatives (Cordoba, 2013). The KRG now claims that no UN office, consulate general, or other international organizations can act without full participation of the Kurdish government.
Hence, it is evident that though the UN has provided immense assistance and security protection in the region for several decades, since the outraging attacks of Saddam regime on Kurds in the 1990s, Kurdistan is increasingly directed towards full autonomy, independence, and international representation. A number of diplomatic failures of the UN are also slowing down UN and KRG cooperation, especially under the model of UN supremacy in those relations favored by the UN authorities. Kurdistan that rose under assistance of the UN and the US now wishes more freedom and recognition in the international landscape, which (coupled with the aggravating political and military situation in Iraq and neighboring countries because of ISIS spread) contributes to the uncertain future of Kurdistan as an independent state.
As the presented evidence suggests, it is vital to provide a detailed analysis of the role of UN diplomacy for Kurdistan in 2011-2014 to show the successes and failures of UN Offices, and assess the UN contribution to stability, security, and development of the region. These conclusions may shed light on the real-life value of the UN presence in Kurdistan’s economic, social, and political life, as well as diplomatic representation in the region and the rest of the world. Moreover, these findings may help to create a clearer image of the recent developments achieved by joint efforts of the UN, KRG, and Iraqi missions for the stabilization of the political situation in this region.
Organization of the Study
The present study is organized in five chapters; the present chapter is the introductory one, giving initial information on the topic and presenting the research aim and questions to be explored. The next chapter, literature review, gives a much more detailed overview of the history of Kurdistan’s establishment as an autonomous region in Iraq’s territory, and explains the ways in which the UN diplomats were involved in the Kurdish establishment process within the past five years. Literature on the UN efforts to address Kurdish humanitarian needs and non-proliferation of weapon use, addressing the nation’s healthcare needs and health promotion, as well as resolving children’s protection and health. UN’s diplomatic means used to achieve better economic and political development of Kurdistan are considered, and political, cultural, and military barriers to UN diplomatic activity are explored.
The third chapter presents the methodology of this study. Here, the researcher provides details about the selected research method and research design, and gives information about data collection and analysis procedures involved in this study. Information about sampling and participants of the study, as well as the advantages of case study as a preferred research method, is also presented in this section.
The fourth chapter presents results of data analysis conducted within this study. The case study approach involves collecting and analysing data from a variety of sources for creating a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon of interest. Hence, in this study, results of survey research with UN officials are correlated with secondary data findings from the UN documents and sources on the nature of assistance to Kurdistan and barriers experienced in the UN diplomatic process in the region. The final chapter, chapter five, contains a concluding discussion of the study’s findings and gives recommendations for further research in the field.
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter focuses on the history of Kurdistan’s region in Iraq, its cultural and economic bonds with Middle East countries, and its connection with the UN agencies and foreign countries. In particular, the researcher analyses the literature on the role of UN assistance in Iraqi Kurdistan concerning economic, political, social, and humanitarian involvement. Further on, the author explores the issue of the weapons and discusses how the control over the weapons of mass destruction can contribute to the peace in the whole region. This chapter also concentrates on the diplomacy challenges in Iraqi Kurdistan, as well as on possible strategies to ensure peace in the Kurds’ territories. The last section of the literature review focuses on the media coverages of Kurdistan in Iraq and other countries to show the difference between the Western and Middle Eastern attitudes towards its independence.
Kurdistan’s Development towards Independence and Growth
Nowadays, complex geopolitical processes are taking place in the Middle East, particularly in Iraq, which influences the emergence of trends towards the creation of the new states (Mikhin, 2014). Kurdistan is among those territories, as it seeks to establish an independent state that would bring about a better environment for the increasing population of the Kurds. Despite the combative Iraqi political arena, the Kurdistan Region of Iraq is pressing ahead with its ambitious programme for economic development and greater autonomy (Natali, 2013, p 71). Current president of Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani, maintains that a referendum on the independence of the region could help to establish peace and prosperity of the area and prepare the ground for further development (Mikhin, 2014). It seems that today, Iraqi Kurdistan is getting closer to its dream of becoming independent; however, there are still many challenges to overcome.
Kurdistan’s development towards independence started decades ago. First of all, largely Sunni Muslim people today called Kurds have always had their own language and culture, but lived in different areas of Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Armenia, and Syria. Before World War I, traditional Kurdish life revolved mainly around sheep and goat herding. Some experts claimed that during that time of an agrarian society with a powerful tribal component, Kurdish nationalism emerged as an ideology (Hassanpour, 1994). However, only the Ottoman Empire’s collapse led to the first serious national awakening of the Kurdish tribes (Langer, 2014).
Kurdish nationalism began to appear alongside Arab and Turkish national upheavals during the late 19th and early 20th century, with a focus on their common history and culture. The split became particularly noticeable in the days following the Ottoman defeat by the Allied Powers in 1918. Those supporting the region’s independence sent a hurried delegation to the Conference of Versailles to present the interests of the Kurdish nation (Nezan, 2015). The 1920 Treaty of Sevres between France, Great Britain and the United States, which created the modern states of Syria, Iraq, and Kuwait, was to have included the possibility of a Kurdish state in the region. Unfortunately, these hopes were dashed three years later, when the Treaty of Lausanne that established the boundaries of modern Turkey did not take into account the Kurdish state and left Kurds with minority status in their countries. After the overthrow of the Turkish monarchy by Kemal Ataturk, Iran, Iraq, and Turkey agreed not to recognize the independent Kurdish state (Nezan, 2015). Thus, at the end of 1925, the country of the Kurds found itself divided between the states of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria.
Unsurprisingly, because of the failed attempts to establish independence, Kurds have formed a long tradition of heroic struggle throughout the 20th century (Spyer, 2013). Interestingly, Kurds were both favoured and repressed by European colonial administrations in Iraq and Syria, as they had special autonomy and were relatively well-off (Langer, 2014). In 1932, Iraq declared independence from the British administration, which was followed by the rule of the dictator Saddam Hussein. During his leadership, the Kurdistan Democratic Party and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan were considered illegal, and have been constantly persecuted (Hunt, 2005).
Guerrilla war against the repressive Iraqi government began in 1960 with a KDP-led rebellion. In 1983, the Iraqi Kurds rose up yet again inspired by Massoud Barzani from the Kurdish Democratic Party and Jalal Talabani from Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (Spyer, 2013). This war led to a stalemate in 1970, with casualties from 75,000 to 105,000 lives. The only result of this fight was the Iraqi–Kurdish Autonomy Agreement of 1970 presupposing a certain degree of the land’s autonomy and Kurds’ representation in the government bodies. Nevertheless, despite long struggle and negotiations, this agreement brought no significant changes to the political life of the region (McDowall, 2004).
Under the rule of Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath Party, the Iraqi government intensified its discrimination of Kurds, massacring thousands of Kurdish civilians in an effort to suppress their rebellion. Most infamously, Saddam used nerve gas on civilians in the town of Halabja, which killed approximately 5,000 people. After Kurds had supported Iran in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war, Saddam Hussein destroyed multiple villages, attacking peasants with chemical weapons and resettling the inhabitants to camps in southern and less mountainous areas (Langer, 2014). By the end of this Anfal campaign, 150–200,000 people were killed, more than 4,000 settlements destroyed, approximately 1.5 million people resettled, and almost 45,000 out of 75,000 square kilometres of Kurdistan were cleared (Stansfield, 2003).
Kurds rebelled again after the Persian Gulf War, but were crushed again by Iraqi troops. At the beginning of 1991, following Iraq’s defeat by the US-led alliance, Kurds initiated uprisings first in the south of Iraq and then in the rest of Kurdish cities and towns (Hassanpour, 1994). Quickly, the Kurdish Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan took over all Kurdistan areas within several weeks. However, Iraqi forces retook much of these territories. After millions of Kurds fled to the mountains on the borders of Turkey and Iran, Western allies intervened to create a special safe zone around Zakho and Dohuk to ensure peace on the Kurdish lands (Hassanpour, 1994). Since the 2003 US invasion, this zone is considered a quasi-sovereign entity having its own political system, armed forces, and economic expectations (Spyer, 2013).
Struggle for independence has been challenged by the continuous inter-Kurdish violence. Ever since Jalal Talabani’s split from the Barzani family-dominated Kurdistan Democratic Party in 1975 and the formation of the opposing Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), Kurds in Iraq have been divided into two conflicting camps (Harris, 2014). Founded in 1978, Kurdistan Workers Party added fuel to the fire of dissent (Kurda, 2015). One of the most infamous conflicts between the parties continued from 1992 to 1998, and it has led to the death of several thousand Kurdish people, while tens of thousands were forced to flee (Kurda, 2015). Situation was aggravated by the fact that Jalal Talabani from the PUK was the former president of Iraq, and constituted a unifying and stabilizing force in the Kurdish region. Among the factors that provoked the discord between these parties was the absence of a pluralist and democratic political culture within the country. In addition, the totalitarian character of politics resulted in applying ruthless methods for gaining power, which consisted in acquiring scarce resources by any means in a society struggling with poverty.
Beginning from 2003, the parties completed a reconciliation initiated by the Americans, and both secured their legitimacy by participating in elections that were believed to be free and fair (Alaaldin, 2014). In 2005, the leader of the PUK Jalal Talabani was elected as Iraq’s first post-war president, while representatives of the KDP and PUK hold senior government posts in Baghdad, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister (Rogg and Rimscha, 2007). In 2014, Fuad Masum from the KDP was elected by the parliament representatives to become the seventh president of Iraq (Austin, 2014). Recently, he stated that a referendum should be held to decide whether Kurds are truly committed to the idea of independence. However, Masum assured that even if the results would be positive, the government needs a lot of time to implement the strategy in practice (Reinl, 2014a).
Today, both the KDP and PUK run the government jointly, with small communist and radical groups and newer Islamist groups on the margins. Unfortunately, the dreams of a ‘Great Kurdistan’ seem unattainable, as all big Kurdish parties (KDP and the PUK in Iraq, Komalah and the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK) and the Kurdistan Democratic Party-Iran (KDP-I) in Iran, the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in Turkey) concentrate on the situation only in their own geographical area and do not have a common national agenda (Koivunen, 2011).
Iraqi Kurdistan remains one of the most secure territories in the country protected by peshmerga (Kurdistan special military forces). After the spread of Islamic extremist groups, thousands of people fled to Iraqi Kurdistan, and their numbers grow with the escalation of this conflict. Although PKK and PUK maintain friendly and collaborative relationships, the KDP and PKK continue to struggle with one another for influence throughout other areas inhabited by Kurds. Therefore, there is a high possibility of the new civil war that may influence all Kurdish groups in the region and encourage the Turkish intervention (Harris, 2014). Kurds and the international community can undertake certain steps to reduce the threat of a new deadly conflict between the Kurdish political elites. At this stage, an independent Kurdistan may be the best option for both economic development and regional stability (Austin, 2014). As an independent state, Kurdistan could not only ask for humanitarian support, but also protect its lands from the violence and terror of ISIS and contribute to the world economy (its oil deposits have been estimated as 45 billion barrels in reserve).
In many ways, the regions of Iraq under Kurdish control already look like an independent State separated from the rest of the country (Mikhin, 2014). Surprisingly, Muslim and Christian communities manage to live there side by side, and women have a chance to play a prominent role in community life and politics. Moreover, Kurds have established a democratic government of institutions and demonstrated commitment and competence in protecting the stability and security of Kurdistan against any outside radical Islamist attacks (Shareef and Janroj, 2014). Despite the optimistic aspirations for independence, divisions among the Iraqi Kurdish parties and political leaders, as well as increased meddling by foreign control might undermine the impulse for a sovereign Kurdish state (Chomani, 2014). Therefore, the majority of experts maintain that Arab Iraq and the Kurdistan Region should be divided in a peaceful way with the help of the UN, the EU, the US, and the Arab League that could head the negotiations (Shareef and Janroj, 2014).
Role of UN Diplomacy in Kurdistan (2011-2014)
Back in 2005, the Kurdistan Regional Government and the United Nations signed an agreement that established the basis for international Kurdistan policy (Clarry, 2005). In recent years, the United Nations has become the diplomatic mediator between the Iraqi federal government and Kurdistan region to resolve pressures resulted from struggle over the land and power that has been griping the country and dividing its citizens. The United Nations Assistance Mission to Iraq (UNAMI), among other things, assists the development of international relationships between Kurdistan and other countries by supporting its strive for progress and changes (Gunter, 2010). Today, there is a glimmer of hope that the United Nations may encourage Kurdistan and Iraq citizens to forge a compromise and make a breakthrough towards independence.
UN Diplomacy and Establishment of Relations with Other Countries
The Kurdistan Region distinguishes itself from the rest of Iraq because it not only avoids perpetual sectarian rivalry, but also witnesses a remarkable economic, political, and social development. Some experts believe that this happens due to wide cooperation with various international organizations and an open diplomatic vision (Barzani, 2014). Today, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) tries to promote dynamic foreign relations, as they are undoubtedly the integral components of the territory’s economic and social development. In particular, Kurdistan has managed to build strong collaborative relationships with the UN agencies operating in Iraq, and this assistance helped the territory to develop its foreign policy (Barzani, 2014). The US foreign policy is especially occupied with Iraq and its neighbours, as stable relations with Kurdistan are believed to help the USA to gain influence in the region (Charountaki, 2010). Nowadays, a total of 28 UN member states have established their diplomatic presence in Iraqi Kurdistan, and such multinational bodies as the EU, ICRC, and Japan International Cooperation Agency also have their offices in this region (Voller, 2014).
Iraq has occupied a place on the UN Security Council’s agenda for over three decades (Scherrer, 2014). The UN relationships with Kurdistan as a part of Iraq territories started in the 1980s when Kurds resorted to representatives of the United Nations’ agencies for considering the political status of Kurds. In the 1990s, the UN agencies did not have a systematic cooperation policy, so collaboration was rather limited and insufficient. However, during that time, the UN established an extremely important programme called Oil for Food (1995) that helped the local people to survive, get necessary medicine, equipment, food, and protection from the Saddam rule (Russell, 2014, p 82). Obviously, from a merely political relationship, the UN diplomacy with Kurdistan and Iraq further developed to include Kurds’ political, social, and cultural rights in the Middle East (Eliassi, 2014).
Kurdistan’s foreign policy depends greatly on the relationship between the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and the Iraqi central government, as well as with the Turkish and Syrian leaders (Maggiolini, 2013). Kurds as members of a federal Iraq remain committed to the country’s foreign policy. The Kurdistan Region participates in the federal government’s diplomatic missions through the work of its citizens in Iraq’s embassies around the world and in the Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Interestingly, KRG managed to establish its offices in such countries as Australia, France, Germany, Russian Federation, the USA, and the United Kingdom. Through this worldwide representation, Kurds promote international awareness and interest in their culture, politics, economics, education, and business, as well as encourage investments in the region (Department of Foreign Relations, 2015). In the present-day context, Islamist extremists overrunning swathes of territory and Iraqi-Kurds leaders disputing over autonomy pose a serious threat to the established peace and foreign cooperation (Reinl, 2014b). This situation endangers the whole political regime and creates new challenges for civilians and refugees.
Addressing Kurdistan’s Humanitarian Needs
Soon after operation “Desert Storm” ended, revolts and humanitarian crises erupted in Iraq and Kurdistan territories (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013). Thousands of Kurds left their homes to save their lives, and the humanitarian situation in the country became even more serious and endangering. Coalition forces under the leadership of the UK and France imposed ‘no-fly zones’ both in the North and the South to help the Iraqi citizens in overcoming the challenges. Meanwhile, the UN Secretariat established a pioneering stop-gap arrangement stationing UN Guards in northern Iraq. Due to its existence, thousands of Kurdish refugees received a chance to get a sufficient international assistance provided by the UN agencies (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013).
In 1995, the UN Security Council launched the Oil-for-Food programme to support the Kurdistan people in the period of extensive sanctions. This decision was made while thousands of Iraqi citizens including children and women have been dying from severe malnutrition and diseases. Humanitarian relief could have come earlier to save the majority of people if the Baghdad government had accepted the Security Council programme back in 1991 (Cortright, Lopez, and Gerber, 2002). Nevertheless, despite the governments’ reluctance to accept help, the Oil-for-Food programme managed to deliver significant supplies of food, medicaments, and other humanitarian goods. As reported by the UN agencies, enough medicines and vaccines have been imported to eradicate polio and drastically reduce such dangerous diseases as malaria, cholera, meningitis, measles, mumps, and tuberculosis (Office of the Iraq Programme, 2015). In general, this humanitarian relief operation has managed to eliminate the consequences of the Saddam’s rule and provide the Kurds with all necessary sanitation support and funding to restore the normal functioning.
Since the 2000s, the UN in Iraq has continued to play a vital humanitarian and peace-building role (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013). The humanitarian costs of the war continued to burden Iraq because nearly five million citizens have been displaced from their homes since 2003. Some of the refugees went to Jordan and Syria, but nearly three million are still displaced within the country. Such office as Integrated Coordination Office for Development & Humanitarian Affairs (ICODHA) collaborate with the Iraqi government to address the humanitarian needs of the region. The main aim of ICODHA is to collect necessary information on the needs of the local citizens that helps the Government of Iraq and Non- Governmental organizations (NGOs) to distribute products and investment (United Nations Iraq, 2015a). Similarly, the United Nations World Food Program is aiming to assist millions of people with humanitarian support under its Emergency Operation (WFP, 2014).
In 2014, with the escalation of the conflict between ISIS and Middle East countries, the humanitarian situation in the region began to aggravate once again (UN Assistance Mission for Iraq, 2014). Islamic radicals seem to be not the only problem in this case, as the Kurdish regional government has not received its anticipated budget allocation since March, which caused great problems in the territories suffering from an immense influx of refugees (Reinl, 2014b). The Special Representative of Secretary-General to Iarq Mr. Nickolay Mladenov expressed his concerns over the current state of events, saying,
“The Government of Iraq and the Kurdistan Regional Government should urgently restore their security cooperation in dealing with the crisis. I call on all Iraqi authorities, civil society and international partners to work with the United Nations to ensure the delivery of life saving humanitarian assistance” (United Nations Iraq, 2014, n.p.).
Meanwhile, the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP, 2014) reported that the humanitarian situation in Kurdish territories is reaching critical levels. A lack of coordination and huge gaps in humanitarian assistance are causing inexpressible hardship for nearly 900,000 people displaced by the conflict in Iraq (Amnesty International, 2014). It has been decided that the Kurdistan Region in Iraq should get the provision of both the short-term emergency response, and more sustainable and durable solutions to support the local people and refugees (United Nations Iraq, 2015b). Authorities, the UN’s World Food Programme, as well as several NGOs, all work together to increase their coverage of the food needs to internally displaced people (IDP), despite them being located in over 1,000 dispersed locations across the country (Humanitarian Response, 2015).
Health Protection and Promotion
With the aggravation of the current situation, healthcare provision in Iraqi Kurdistan falls below international standards, with overcrowding and a disturbing lack of adequate health services acknowledged as key problems (Foreign & Commonwealth Office, 2015). Although investigation undertaken by RAND (2014) claimed that access to healthcare and the total number of health facilities in Iraqi Kurdistan is adequate, other experts underline that Kurdistan’s healthcare is still at an early development stage (Di Stefano Pironti, 2014). Poor leadership and management competencies lead to ineffective and inefficient use of resources and staff capabilities, while internal power struggles and disputes do not allow the healthcare system to develop (Tawfik-Shukor and Khoshnaw, 2010). In the summer of 2014, the United Nations declared the humanitarian situation in Iraq to be a “Level 3 Emergency”, which is the highest level observed also in Syria, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic (UN Peacekeeping, 2014). By the end of 2014, patient caseloads have increased at hospitals and clinics due to weather conditions, including heavy rains and low temperatures, which led to the staff shortage and lack of medicaments (United Nations Iraq, 2015b).
Since 2014, the Kurdistan Region in Iraq (KRG) has been struggling to ensure sufficient healthcare provision to its citizens and refugees. Approximately 744,500 of refugees live today on the territory of the KRG, and the majority do not have proper shelter, food security, as well as water, sanitation, and hygiene assistance (USAID, 2014). Various UN agencies and NGOs are working together to help address the immediate needs of the population. For example, USAID/OFDA is supporting an NGO to provide sanitation and hygiene assistance for the internally displaced people in Kurdistan (USAID, 2014). Furthermore, it is important to know that over the past two years, health partners established five additional transportable health clinics to support primary and secondary care, and invested in two hospitals helping the patients with malnutrition complications (Humanitarian Response, 2015). In addition, the Government of Japan initiated a plan to provide 18 ambulances to support the Kurdistan Regional Government during the IDP crisis (United Nations Iraq, 2015b).
With insufficient sanitation, overcrowding, and psychosocial trauma associated with inadequate living conditions, Kurdistan suffers from the heightened risks of health epidemics (INFRA Iraq, 2015). In such environment, access to sufficient healthcare provision and services becomes the matter of life and death. For access to health services to be guaranteed, international organizations including UN agencies employ innovative approaches by engaging the government, volunteers, and civil society (INFRA Iraq, 2015). Thus, a national polio vaccination campaign began in Iraq in 2015 to vaccinate 5.9 million children under five years old (United Nations Iraq, 2015c). As far as polio usually hits the most disadvantaged groups of the population, UN agencies are working actively to stop the outbreaks of this disease in the refugee camps across the Iraqi Kurdistan.
The specialized agency of the United Nations called the World Health Organization (WHO) has made the biggest contribution to the health promotion and provision in Kurdistan. At the end of 2014, with the winter approaching and bringing more troubles to the refugees in camps, WHO initiated a plan to fight such cold-related illnesses as pneumonia, measles, and acute respiratory infections (World Health Organization, 2014). The program presupposed training healthcare workers in the region, providing sufficient equipment and supplies to the health facilities, delivering antibiotics, nebulizers and other medicines to treat the emerging diseases, and initiating immunization. In addition, WHO worked on increasing community awareness and promoting education campaigns to help the people establish proper health behavior that could protect them from deadly infections (World Health Organization, 2014). With these actions still in progress, the World Health Organization aims to eradicate the dangerous epidemics in the camps, and to secure the most vulnerable groups such as small children and elderly people.
The work of UN agencies in the provision of adequate healthcare in Kurdistan cannot be overestimated. Such basic things as clean water, hygiene, and sanitation helped thousands of refugees to escape fatal outcomes during the winter season (World Health Organization, 2014). Unfortunately, with spring coming, healthcare-associated problems have not become less pressing. Massive population displacement in Iraq caused by increasing ISIS aggression set millions of people at risk of exposure to cholera and flu (World Health Organization, 2014). Therefore, international agencies are planning to increase their assistance to Kurdistan during the following months. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC, 2015) maintains that even with the gradual stabilization in the region, there will be at least five more years of intense humanitarian activity, as millions of people lack health services, food and housing, and water and sanitation.
Children’s Issues in Kurdistan
With the ongoing tension and fights all over the country, Kurdish children have to live in refugee camps with no proper care, food, sanitation, and education. The Kurdistan Parliament attempted to improve these grave conditions by formally ratifying the Child Protection Law on 28 July 2013 (Zebari, 2013). This important protection law was aimed to improve the lifestyle of Kurdish children, enhance citizen’s understanding of child rights, and deal with child abuse that the region is facing. In addition, it was believed to enable children in Kurdistan to finish high school and prepare for university. Despite popular official interest in laws concerning women’s and youth rights, as well as domestic violence and abuse, children were excluded from them for quite a long period (Zebari, 2013). Although violations of children’s rights are still a burning issue, the Child Protection Law created an essential basis for further development of children’s assistance in the region.
The UNICEF helps the Kurdish government to solve the most pressing problems connected with children’s security and health. In 2013, the UNICEF’s global supply warehouse responded to the growing needs of Syrian refugees in Iraq by providing 100 tonnes of supplies including school materials and temporary schools to Syrian refugee children and their families in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (UN News Centre, 2013). In the same year, UNICEF, UNHCR, and UNESCO joined efforts to organize the “Back to School” campaign in Erbil with the attendance of approximately 500 children from Syrian refugee and local communities (UNESCO Office for Iraq, 2013). This program was launched with the support of the Kurdistan Regional Government and NGOs because almost 77% of school-aged children were not enrolled and could not receive even basic education. Unfortunately, it could make them the lost generation without a chance for better future.
With the ISIS spread in the region in 2014, nearly 700 schools in the Kurdish region of Iraq have been turned into refugee camps (Van den Berghe, 2014). As a result, more than half a million children were not going to school as planned. The director of the Save the Children in Iraq, Tina Yu explained: “Despite the efforts of the Iraqi authorities, the children who are currently living in these classrooms, as well as the children who are supposed to come here to follow classes, have no access to education” (Van den Berghe, 2014, para 14). Obviously, the Iraqi government could not find an alternative solution, hoping that the situation would not last. Thus, the United Nations released a statement encouraging its agencies to initiate certain steps to help the Iraqi government find proper accommodation for the refugee families so that schools could be available for educational purposes (Van den Berghe, 2014).
In 2014, ACTED’s Child Protection and Assessment and Monitoring teams conducted an assessment to identify the needs of displaced children in Kurdistan (ACTED, 2014). It has been found that children living in refugee camps in Kurdistan suffer from ongoing psychosocial distress, limited access to basic resources, and an unsafe environment. In addition, parents reported multiple manifestations of psychological stress such as unusual crying and screaming, violence, aggressive crimes, unwillingness to help parents or siblings, sadness, and continuous nightmares. Moreover, these children are not only at increased risks of dying in violent attacks, but also higher possibilities of being exploited through the child labour (ACTED, 2014).
Because refugee camps cannot offer its young inhabitants any engaging activities, children are left without proper care and psychological development. What is more damaging for the lives of these children is the fact that some of them are quite often recruited by armed groups to take part in combat operations. Therefore, researchers concluded that the primary responsibility of the government and UN agencies is to provide these children with emergency psychosocial support, healthcare, and at least basic education (ACTED, 2014). In 2015, some of these recommendations are being applied in practice. For example, UNESCO and its partners opened a new secondary school at Baharka Camp in Kurdistan to provide high-quality secondary education to children and adolescents living in refugee camps (UNESCO Office for Iraq, 2015). Marzio Babille, the UNICEF Representative in Iraq, said, “We are in a race against time. These children survived conflicts to reach safety, but now they face new challenges” (United Nations Iraq, 2015d). It seems that the least UN agencies can do is to help these children escape the harsh reality by committing themselves to education.
Control over Weapon Use in Kurdistan
One cannot deny the fact that while international attempts to address some of Iraq’s humanitarian needs were being made, Iraq’s military situation remains worrying. With this in mind, an important question to consider is the use of weapons for mass destruction in Iraqi Kurdistan (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013, p 3). This is a vital aspect of the internal policy that could influence international security, as during the wartime, states often use weapons to destroy other nations (Hough, 2014). Although due to the implementation of the famous Resolution 687, the community managed to achieve elimination of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and missiles within the territory of over 150 kilometres, evidence suggests there may still be weapons threatening the worldwide peace (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013, p 3).
The United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) was established in 1991 to monitor weapons use on the Iraqi territories. Among the main objectives of the UNSCOM, there is possession of all biological and chemical weapons, monitoring Iraq’s compliance with the Resolution 687, and supervising the destruction of all 150 km-range ballistic missiles (Rifkind, 1996). As the US forces and UNSCOM moved through Iraq, there were initial reports that chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction might have been uncovered, but closer examinations produced negative results. Many experts questioned the quality and transparency of analysis and intelligence, doubting the reliability of information about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs. As a result, this inspection regime survived until 1998, and involved continuous interruptions, confrontations, denial and deception, as wells as Iraqi refusal to cooperate (Richelson, 2004). As Seymour Hersh stated, “the result of the American hijacking of the UN’s intelligence activities was that while Saddam Hussein survived, UNSCOM did not” (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013, p 4). Although UNSCOM mission failed to address its initial aims in full measure, it managed to achieve certain results. In particular, UNSCOM reported having destroyed more than 480,000 liters of chemical warfare agents, several missile launch support vehicles, and the equipment for the production of missiles and components (Rifkind, 1996).
In 1999, the UN Security Council passed the Resolution 1284, replacing UNSCOM with the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC). Officials demanded Iraq to “allow UNMOVIC teams immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all areas, facilities, equipment, records and means of transport which they wished to inspect in accordance with the mandate of UNMOVIC” (Osmańczyk & Mango, 2003, p 1162). However, weapons inspectors continued to be denied access to Iraq, with the government maintaining its rejection of the previously passed resolution (Human Rights Watch, 2002, p 436). In the beginning of the 2000s, UNMOVIC inspectors visited nearly 70 sites in the country without locating any substantial evidence of Iraqi non-compliance with the regulations (Ismael & Ismael, 2015, p 53).
After decades of conflict and the downfall of Saddam Hussein following the massive 2003 US-led invasion, Iraqi territories including the Kurdistan Region are still flooded with weapons (Mahmoud, 2013). The situation has been aggravated by violent ISIS attacks on the Kurdish territories, so Peshmerga forces protecting Kurds were induced to seek for the weapons assistance. Experts claimed that Peshmerga militants need to be institutionalized as they are poorly equipped compared to the Islamic State’s new capabilities (Abu-Nasr, 2014). “We need new weapons, we need machine guns, artillery, armored vehicles, mine detection and removal equipment and helicopters,” – maintains Rosch Shaways, a Peshmerga commander and the Iraq’s deputy prime minister (Abu-Nasr, 2014, n.p.). Meanwhile, Iraq’s central government is impeding foreign military assistance to the Kurdish Peshmerga forces in their fight with the ISIS (Rudaw, 2014). Western countries including the USA, Germany, and the United Kingdom have provided military assistance and training to the Kurdish forces, but it seems that the central government fears that helping Kurds could increase their aspirations of independence from Iraq. According to the latest information, Britain has sent 40 heavy machine guns and ammunition to Peshmerga forces, but denied other requests, insisting that it would channel its delivery through the Iraqi government (Chulov, 2015).
Neighboring countries have also expressed their concerns with the Kurdish weapons. Some experts believe that in case of a conflict with Turkey, Kurdish forces can create possible nuclear threats to the neighboring Turkish Kurdistan (Iranian Diplomacy, 2015). Others claim Kurdish militants would try to use their expertise, nuclear materials, and even nuclear weapons components to strengthen or strategically protect the Kurdish autonomy. If this happens, Kurds from Iraq will encourage establishing a wider Kurdistan that extends from Iraq to Turkey, Iran, Syria, and Armenia. These potential aspirations are dangerous, as neighboring countries may attempt to increase their military equipment for the protection of their territories, which subsequently will increase the overall number of the weapons in the Middle East (Iranian Diplomacy, 2015).
Political and Economic Involvement of UN in Kurdistan’s Issues
It is important to know that the current stability of Kurdistan compared to other Middle East regions would be impossible without a close cooperation with UN agencies. First, the United States and other countries established an “air umbrella” over the Kurdistan region to protect its inhabitants from Iraqi forces, which created the basis for further development of the region (Gedda, 1992, n.p.). Second, during the period of UN economic embargo against Iraq, the UN Oil for Food programme helped Kurds to get necessary equipment, humanitarian supplies, and healthcare, which was lacking in the rest of Iraq. Third, the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) was established in 2003 to facilitate the regional dialogue between Iraq and its neighbours, support political dialogue and national reconciliation, assist in electoral processes, and promote the protection of human rights, and establishment of judicial and legal reforms (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013, p 7).
The UNAMI signed its first Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) for the period 2011-2014 with the Iraqi Government in March 2011 (UNDP, 2015). This document entirely aligned with the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (2011-2014) that underlined the main points of partnership between Iraq and the rest of the world (UNDP, 2015). In particular, The United Nations Development Programme aimed at fostering the participation and reconciliation, strengthening governing institutions, grounding democratic principles, and promoting recovery and development (UNDP, 2015).
Application of these postulates in practice brought several tangible results. For example, UN professionals helped the country to regulate 2013 provincial elections according to the principles of democracy and transparency. UNDP provided capacity-building support to the Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) responsible for the 2013 Governorate Council elections. In particular, the UN ensured accurate data management during this event, encouraged women’s participation and a contribution of youth and people with disabilities. In addition, the UNDP helped to resolve electoral disputes and monitored the use of election materials (UNDP, 2015).
Currently, UN agencies help the KRG to solve political conflicts with the Government of Iraq. In 2014, Iraq threatened Kurds that it will complain to the United Nations about the oil exports. Iraqi officials claimed that unlimited oil sales “undermine Iraqi sovereignty and are illegal”, and warned of more lawsuits against the Kurdish region and Turkey that helps to exploit the oil (Faucon, 2014). Later that year, however, the head of the UNAMI, Nickolay Mladenov, announced the passing of the agreement between two governments that presupposed the disbursement of the KRG budget from the country’s budget, and payment of Peshmergas’ salaries (UN News Centre, 2014b).
Undoubtedly, the United Nations diplomacy and economic aid is crucial to the survival and success of a peaceful and advanced Kurdistan. Therefore, various UN organizations try to address the most pressing economic issues, such as poverty and corruption, and to bring investors to this promising land. Thus, the problems of infrastructure such as electricity, water and sanitation, oil, irrigation, transportation and industry have been addressed in the first place so that to decrease the scale of humanitarian needs (UNDP, 2015). The economic involvement of UN agencies in Kurdistan also includes increasing the rate of investment that has resulted in the development of a trade sector. It subsequently promotes the international relations and establishes a global environment that enhances engagement of Iraq with other countries (Muftuler-Bac, 2014, p 10-13).
Furthermore, one should note that the UNDP made a significant contribution to the social development of Kurdistan. It has been reported that UNDP (2015) achieved equal opportunities for men and women to access tuberculosis treatment, launched Iraq’s first specialized tuberculosis (TB) hospital in Sulaymaniyah, and funded facilities for women and children. Equally important, the UNDP (2015) created nearly five million of temporary jobs nationwide to eradicate unemployment and offer better living conditions for those involved in the program. Similarly, this UN agency paid much attention to human rights in the region. It helped the Iraqi government to pass the anti-domestic violence bill, establish the independent High Commission for Human Rights, and track incidents of domestic and gender-based violence (UNDP, 2015).
Diplomacy Challenges of the UN in Kurdistan
Although the Kurdistan Region in Iraq has already started its way towards a better economic and political situation, this process can be aggravated by the challenges that diplomatic barriers bring about, making it difficult for the country to commit to the process of transformation (Whitman and Juncos, 2014, p 157). Ilgit and Ozkececi-Taner (2013) believed that alliances between the Kurdish government and other Middle East states pose a threat to the Western countries, which subsequently creates a challenge for the Kurdistan government aiming to become the member of the Security Council in the following years. Therefore, unregulated political cooperation between the Middle East countries and the Kurdistan region may affect the long-term success and achievement of Kurdistan’s objectives (Aras, 2011, p 594). This is an important aspect to consider while developing strategies of political and economic collaboration with Iraq. Cultural differences and regional peculiarities also play an immense role in this process, as the United Nations’ representatives often see the world differently that Kurds do (Goldman, 2013, p 371).
Threat of Kurdistan’s Empowerment through Bonds with Middle East Countries
There is a growing support for the claim that political and economic alliances between the Kurdish government and other Middle East powers are becoming a threat to the Western world (Ilgit and Ozkececi-Taner, 2013). For a long period, the Kurdish issue has been an intertwined and complex regional dilemma in Iraq and the whole Middle East. Throughout the modern history, the Kurdish problem has been openly used by four countries including Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq to address various political and economic objectives. However, none of the powers, as well as international officials, who supported the Kurdish strife for independence truly thought about Kurdish interests, using them as a political tool (Tokmajyak, 2012). Growing turmoil throughout the Middle East has created the possibility for major changes to the status of Kurds in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to predict how exactly the relationships between Kurdistan and other countries may develop in the nearest future (Atlantic Council, 2014).
Kurdistan is also close to countries hostile to its ambitions because an independent Kurdistan could shake the foundations of the whole Middle East. In particular, it is important to discuss the Kurdistan relations with its neighboring Turkey territories. For a long period, political associations with this country have remained strong. Kurdistan Regional government tried not to antagonize Ankara, as both the Kurds and the Turks were interested in the continuous flow of oil (Tokmajyak, 2012). Today, as the world oil prices are decreasing at a fast pace, Erbil, Ankara, and Baghdad authorities want as much KRG and Kirkuk oil as possible flowing to the world markets. Interestingly, the Turkish government’s support of the KRG quest for financial independence in terms of the oil revenues has become a surprise for some political powers, as this assistance created a conflict between Turkey and Baghdad (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014). The Iraqi oil minister, Abdul-Kareem Luaibi, told reporters that if Turkey continues to develop export of Kurdish oil, “it is meddling in the division of Iraq” (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014, n.p.).
Evidence suggests that the Turkey-Kurdistan-Iraq relations are not as positive as it may seem. Turkey and Iraqi officials are afraid that their own large Kurdish population, which has ongoing violent disputes with Ankara and Baghdad, would someday want to separate and join the Greater Kurdistan (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014). Thus, Turkey tries to sustain balance between economic development and political discretion. As a prominent Turkish official told, “Turkey’s policy is to strengthen economic interdependence with Iraqi Kurds, not to leverage them to independence” (Daloglu, 2013, n.p.). It would be logical to suggest that if Turkey continues the economic alliance with Kurds without Iraq’s involvement, it may create an ongoing tension between the states. Moreover, Iraq’s close ties to Iran and support for President Bashar Assad in Syria have angered Turkey’s officials and convinced them not to rely on Iraq (The Economist, 2012). Obviously, this lack of consensus on economic issues threatens the stability of the whole Middle East and undermines the political relations that have been established with so much effort (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014).
Furthermore, it is important to analyze the Kurdish-Iranian relations, as they also can shift the balance of power in the region. Richards (2013) believed that for Iraqi Kurds, relations with Iran must be perceived through the prism of relations with Iraqi government and Iraq as a whole, as well as with its neighboring countries. At the beginning of the 2000s, Tehran leveraged its popularity among Iraqi Kurds, as it was the biggest sworn enemy of the US (Richards, 2013). Since 2003, with an increasing security and stability, the Iraqi Kurds have gradually strengthened their relations with Iran. During the past several years, Iran gained a meaningful influence in the KRG, primarily after sending Iranian troops to Kurdistan to help resist ISIS (Richards, 2013). “We will continue to strengthen our relationship with our eastern neighbor Iran,” Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani said in a statement in 2014. He added on saying, “the Islamic Republic of Iran was the first state to help us… and it provided us with weapons and equipment,” suggesting that the cooperation between KRG and Iran will increase in the future (Reuters, 2014, n.p.). However, it seems that Iran keeps in mind that Kurdistan is a part of Iraq, so its relations with Baghdad remain the priority of the Iranian foreign policy (Hashem, 2014).
The data appears to suggest that lately, both the KDP and PUK have grown more dependent on Iran and Turkey rather than the United States, which is clear in the two parties’ media discourses (Chomani, 2013). However, it is doubtful that these political alliances would bring Iraqi Kurdistan a relative independence, as its neighbors try to use it to increase their influence in the region rather than improve economic and humanitarian conditions. Political intrigues between the Turkey and Iran, the two rival regional powers, will definitely continue to exert pressure on Kurdistan, which will subsequently set barriers to UN assistance and diplomacy (Chomani, 2013). One can only hope that an extensive KRG’s involvement in regional security will show its partners the Iraqi Kurdistan is a vital and distinctive component of the Middle East politics that should be respected and counted with (Gulmohamad, 2014).
Challenging Iraq-Kurdistan Relations
Kurdistan political and economic development has always depended on the decisions made in Baghdad. Kurdish people rebelling against central power, as well as urban Kurdish nationalists, have played a role in Iraqi development since it was created from the Ottoman Empire after the First World War (Rogg and Rimscha, 2007, p 826). Within the past decades, tensions between the central government in Baghdad and the regional administration in Erbil continued to aggravate over a series of other issues including oil export, disputed zones, and autonomy (Policy Analysis Unit-ACRPS, 2014). In addition, the 2003 US invasion was gladly supported by the Kurdish political forces, which fanned the flames between Iraq’s Sunni Arabs and the Kurdistan people. All these issues have made Iraq-Kurdistan relations quite complicated for UN agencies to deal with.
Experts argue that after the 2003 invasion and cooperation between Iraqi Kurdistan U.S. militaries, Iraq-Kurdistan relations have been steadily deteriorating (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014). With the U.S. intervention in progress, Masud Barzani and Jalal Talabani wrote to the President Bush. “America has no better friend than the people of Iraqi Kurdistan”, and this collaboration with Americans empowered Kurds to stand for their rights in the country (Ahmad, 2004, n.p.). Iraq’s new constitution, passed in 2005, confirmed Kurdistan’s special status by granting the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Erbil a self-rule over the provinces of Dohuk, Erbil, and Sulaymaniyah. However, despite this revolutionary decision, Baghdad has still done everything it can to stop the development Kurdish autonomy and to prevent other territories with prevailing ethnic minorities from demanding autonomy as well (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014).
Oil is the major cause of disagreement between the Iraqi government and Kurdistan. Although Iraq has a federal oil law by which Baghdad sets general guidelines for the central and local governments relating to the oil sector and foreign investment, the Kurdistan region did not seem to pay much attention to it (Rogg and Rimscha, 2007, p 832). Oil experts in Iraq considered the production-sharing agreements concluded by the KRG and international oil companies as threatening to Iraq’s national wealth, while Kurdish officials believed that increasing revenues could help to build a better country with a stable economy. However, Baghdad was reluctant to give Kurds their freedom. According to Iraq’s authorities, Kurdistan’s ambitions threaten to tear the Iraqi federation apart by fostering similar hopes in its oil-producing provinces in the south (The Economist, 2012). Obviously, by attracting more foreign investment and exporting more oil and gas, Iraqi Kurdistan could drift further away from Baghdad and gain greater autonomy (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014).
During the past three years, the conflict over resources in northern Iraq has come to a boil. In 2012, KRG suspended its supply of oil for export through the national Iraqi pipeline, arguing that Baghdad had not repaid operating costs to producing companies (International Crisis Group, 2012). Moreover, Kurds were reluctant to agree with the UN estimates that because Kurds constituted 17% of Iraq’s population, they should receive 17% of the country’s net state revenues (Knights, 2014). Iraq’s policy pushed the Kurds to the brink of bankruptcy and induced them to accelerate their independent oil sales. Therefore, anxious to become independent, authorities in Erbil focused on strengthening the relations with Turkey, which needed the oil supplies the most. The federal government in Baghdad, responsible for managing revenues and oil shipments, attempted to block Kurdistan from exporting oil on its own, but seemed to achieve no significant changes (Meric and Hacaoglu, 2014).
The end of the dispute over oil revenues came with passing of the agreement between the Government of Iraq and KRG in 2014. It has been agreed that 550,000 barrels per day of oil would be sent to the Iraqi oil ministry, while the Kurds will receive their 17% share of the national budget in return (BBC, 2014). United Nations representatives in Iraq welcomed this agreement and assured that UNAMI is planning to continue supporting the process of finding a consensus between two governments (UN News Centre, 2014c). Unfortunately, the Iraqi federal government has not been able to hold up its side of the deal, as Baghdad paid only US$200 million to the KRG, which is only 20% of the money owed to them. Nevertheless, experts agree that this deal will provide a boost for international oil companies operating in the Kurdistan region over time and enhance cooperation between the two major powers in the country (Daragahi, Solomon and Raval, 2014).
Disputed zones is another problem between Iraqi federal government and the KRG. For the past years, Iraq’s Sunni Arabs and Kurds have been fighting over the status of the disputed zones in Kirkuk, Nineveh, Salah ad Din, and Diyala (Policy Analysis Unit-ACRPS, 2014). Arabs and Turkmen in Kirkuk complained that Kurds had gained control of the province in 2003, and since that time, moved half a million Kurds into Kirkuk (Hurriyet DailyNews, 2008). In 2005, Sunnis boycotted the referendum to sanction Iraq’s post-invasion constitution, so the status of these disputed zones has remained one of the burning issues in Iraq-Kurdistan relations. In this regard, UN launched a report on Iraq’s disputed territories to avert clashes (Hurriyet DailyNews, 2008). UN representatives believed that ending tensions in the north is a crucial step towards the lasting peace in Iraq, as continuing disputes between the dominant Sunni and majority Shi’ite Muslims could be followed by civil war between Arabs and Kurds. Meanwhile, Kurdish and Arab proponents in northern Iraq were preparing for a long fight over disputed areas as they awaited the publication of UN reports (Londoño, 2009).
In 2015, Diyala, Kirkuk, and western Mosul have again become the occasions of dispute, as Peshmerga forces refused to give back these territories and “never ever let Arabs control them again” (Natali, 2015, n.p.). Despite Baghdad’s objections, Kurdish forces have prevented displaced Arabs from returning to disputed areas of Iraq that Kurdish authorities want to include in their autonomous region (Agence France Presse, 2015). Human Rights Watch (HRW) stated that Iraqi Kurdish forces of the KRG had destroyed Arab settlements in areas that can become a part of the autonomous region (Radio Free Europe, 2015). The HRW representatives also warned the KRG against implementing a “collective punishment of entire Arab communities” for ISIS’ attacks (Agence France Presse, 2015, n.p.). However, Iraqi Kurds consider these territories as rightfully belonging to the Kurdistan Region, and they are taking gradual steps to consolidate their control (Natali, 2015).
With these events still in progress, it is difficult to say how Iraq-Kurdistan relations will develop in the nearest future and how UN agencies can stop the new war and ensure the safe development of a region. Experts maintain that the challenging relationship between Kurdistan and Iraq may affect the long-term success of the achievement of the Kurdistan objectives (Aras, 2011, p 594). One should also keep in mind that any aggressive moves against the KRG by the federal government will inevitably provoke a reaction from Israel and Turkey, whose politicians have substantial material interests in the Kurdish region, which is considered a major oil producer and a potential place for profitable investments (Cogan, 2014). Therefore, the major contribution the UN can make to securing peace in Iraq is to support negotiations between Iraqi powers on disputed internal boundaries and resources by providing political advice at all levels (International Crisis Group, 2012).
Cultural Differences
Kurds’ culture and way of living may influence the UN intervention process because of the differences that exist between the foreign agencies and the ideals that the Kurds develop on day-to-day basis. Some experts maintain that cultural ignorance may lead to actions that deteriorate development of Kurdistan and its relations with foreign partners (Goldman, 2013, p 371). International organizations operating in the country need to remember that ethnic and religious distinctions play an immense role in the success of Kurdistan’s objectives.
Kurdish people distinguish themselves from the rest of the Iraqi population, as they have different ethnic composition and religion (mainly Muslims but also Yazidis, the Yarsan, and Christians), belong to the non-Arabic-speaking groups, and have their distinct culture and language (Rarick et al., 2014). That alone makes them an exception in the Middle East, opposing them to the rest of the Arab world (Ottaway and Ottaway, 2014). After the creation of Iraq as an independent kingdom in 1932, the policies adopted by the monarchy sought to maintain the Sunni dominance, creating a conflict between the Arab Sunni communities and the Kurds (Ghabra, 2001). This involved eliminating the existing language and culture of Arab, Persian, and Islamic elements, and eradicating all traces of a distinct Kurdish identity (Elfenbein, 2007). In other words, the Iraqi regime attempted to remove all remnants and traces of Kurdish culture, ethnicity, and identity (Ibrahim, 2015). This approach to multicultural Iraqi society has led to Kurds being left on the margins of national life.
Upon Hussein’s defeat, Kurdish people received a chance to change the existing order. Although their region is not officially independent, they enjoy relative freedom of culture, language, and religion (Elfenbein, 2007). Today, Kurdish people and political leaders have hopes to secure their freedom of culture by achieving the full state independence. In order to do this, Kurds need to convince the powerful states and the UN representatives that their aspirations and ambitions are justified and historically based (Ibrahim, 2015). As far as Kurds are able to achieve their primary goal only with the ample support of the USA and United Nations, experts suggest that these major powers need to be informed on the basic cultural and ethnic peculiarities of Kurdish people.
Political Barriers to UN Assistance
The current literature shows a consensus view on the idea that Iraq’s political instability is the major barrier to the UN assistance. Iraqi Kurds have been separately involved in ongoing political and territorial disputes with Baghdad, and their conflict aggravated after the violent attacks of Islamic State on Iraqi territories (Katzman, 2015). Although the United States, the United Nations, and other countries have tried to solve the disputes quietly, their efforts have limited and mixed results (Cordesman, 2010). Today, peshmerga forces refuse to leave the territories previously cleared from ISIS militants. UN agencies and international forces are expected to get involved in the dispute, but need a clear plan of actions that would benefit the country’s stability and economic development (Policy Analysis Unit-ACRPS, 2014).
Experts emphasize that Kurdish officials need to build diplomatic support for an independent Kurdistan, particularly amongst Western countries, as it is the only possible way to promote the state’s interests on the world stage. In 2013, Dindar Zebari, assistant head of Kurdistan’s Department of Foreign Relations, claimed that the central government should follow the federal constitution and recognize representatives of the KRG as official diplomats (Cordoba, 2013). Experts underline that as far as the Iraqi constitution of 2005 officially recognized KRG and gave it internal sovereignty, it should not prevent Kurdistan from building relations with the United Nations and foreign representatives (Cordoba, 2013). Therefore, KRG officials suggested that it would be fair and logical to be recognized both as Iraqi diplomats and KRG representatives because it could give them an opportunity to advocate for their rights.
In general, multiple problems prevent UN agencies from providing valuable and effective assistance to Iraqi Kurdistan. Severe government repression against minority groups gives rise to an armed resistance throughout the state that undermines the peaceful negotiation principles. Furthermore, foreign support given to the Shia and Sunni extremists from the Gulf States could also fuel a wider regional struggle among the Iraqi territories (Council on Foreign Relations Press, 2012). In addition, the latest refusal of Peshmerga forces to leave the Arab areas can lead to a new civil war between Kurds and Baghdad. On the logical grounds, there is no compelling reason to argue that the UN leadership in such a crisis will be crucial, as all nations and states share an interest in Iraqi stability. Therefore, literature proves that the UN engagement will significantly reduce the likelihood of ethno-sectarian conflicts and a collapse of the constitutional order in Iraq (Council on Foreign Relations Press, 2012).
Media Coverage of Kurdistan’s Development and UN’s Assistance with its Intervention
With media sources increasing its influence on people’s opinions and attitudes, experts emphasize that their role in the political development cannot be overestimated. After an extensive cooperation with the United Nations and the USA in 2003-2004, Kurds undermined their reputation among the Arab population of Iraq. In 2004, many Arabic media stations fuelled ethnic hatred, which led to the increasing Arab antipathy toward Kurds. This conflict has gone so far that Kurdish people could not even travel to Baghdad or Mosul without being killed (Ahmad, 2004). Terrorists of al Qaeda considered Kurds their sworn enemies, and they even ambushed, murdered, and burned several Kurdish members of the Iraq Civil Defence Corp in Samarra (Ahmad, 2004). Restrictive policies and repression in Iraq have forced Kurdish TV channels including Med-TV, Medya-TV and Roj-TV to move to Europe, where their work would not be regulated (Sinclair and Smets, 2014).
International media, through newspapers and television, has always focused on Kurdistan’s independence. Evidence suggests that international media, generally project that Iraq will be divided and Kurdistan will become independent (The Kurdish Globe, 2014). Reputable sources such as The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and Reuters keep maintaining that the current situation in Iraq has created great chances for Kurds to build an independent state they have dreamed of. Their views are grounded on the assumption that as far as Peshmerga forces have entered areas previously abandoned by the Iraqi army, they could use this situation to ensure stability and security of the territories and their citizens (The Kurdish Globe, 2014). Experts propound the view that oil has already helped Iraqi Kurdistan to secure its place on the global energy map, and it could bring further investments in the economy of the region, thus bringing it the desired freedom from Baghdad. Obviously, international media coverage only contributes to Kurdistan’s development and helps its officials to establish relations with other countries (Elbakyan, 2014).
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the methodology guiding this research. The beginning sections thereof lay out the mixed methods research methodology and give details about case study as a research design. Further on, data about participants and sampling methods is provided, and data collection and analysis methods are discussed. The chapter ends with clarification of limitations and ethical considerations that this study entails.
Research Methodology
Traditionally, research is divided into qualitative and quantitative, with quantitative researchers measuring variables and testing hypothesized relationships in controlled situations, and qualitative researchers interpreting subjective experiences and meanings people ascribe to the surrounding world (Benz and Newman, 2008, p 1). Qualitative research is rooted in the naturalistic philosophical paradigm that interprets the surrounding reality as changeable and subjective, depending on the meanings people assign to various phenomena. Quantitative research leans towards a positivist philosophy stating that the surrounding reality is static and unchangeable, thus can be measured with statistical tools and instruments. Hence, these two approaches have traditionally stood in opposition because of their fundamentally different ways of seeing and experiencing the world (Benz and Newman, 2008, p 2).
Each of these methods has a legacy of its own in research, but theoretical changes and developments of the 20th century have made research more interdisciplinary and complex, which requires more complex approaches to solving research problems. Thus, mixed methods research designs developed as a remedy for the problem of complexity in research; they combine qualitative and quantitative methods for simplifying movement across study disciplines (Hesse-Biber and Levy, 2010, p 359). Pawlak (2011, p 291) supported that opinion by pointing out that mixed methods research methodology is justified if it works satisfactorily for defining and solving the formulated research problem.
Mixed methods research has a number of advantages for a researcher aiming at solving a complex research problem; on the one hand, qualitative research allows theory generation by means of using a small sample of participants, while quantitative research makes it possible to test and refine the theory and generalize findings. Thus, mixed methods research allows capitalizing on strengths of both approaches and at the same time reducing the negative impact of their limitations. Moreover, mixed methods research allows triangulation of findings from multiple data sources, which increases the study’s validity and reliability (Andrew, Pedersen, and McEvoy, 2011, p 47).
The mixed methods research methodology for this study is particularly useful, since it will allow comparison and contrast of data from various sources and of various types. This way, surveys containing both open-ended and closed-ended questions were analyzed in a single data analysis endeavor, while these data were further supported by UN documents’ and published information review. As a result of such a complex approach to data collection and analysis, a more or less full, objective, and consistent image of the UN diplomacy progresses and failures in Kurdistan was achieved, which would be much harder to accomplish if data were collected only from one source, and were analyzed in one way. In that case, findings would be much more limited, and no generalizations could be made.
Research Design
Taking into account the mixed methods research methodology selected for the present study, the research design was selected accordingly, to allow data collection from a variety of sources. The researcher chose to use the case study research that is typically used for verifying a theory in the real world, to study characteristics of a unique situation, and to research a phenomenon in detail for discovering its new features (Andrew, Pedersen, and McEvoy, 2011, p 132). Case study’s major benefit is that it helps not only to solve practical issues in the field of interest, but also to test existing theoretical concepts. Thus, case studies are used for exploration, description, illustration, or explanation of a selected phenomenon.
Martin and Hanington (2012, p 28) described case study research as a research strategy involving in-depth investigation of single events in their context, with the use of multiple sources of research evidence. Traditional focus of case studies lies within obtaining a detailed and comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon. These features make case studies inclusive, since they consider the whole situation and explore interrelationships between variables, so the absence of depth of inquiry is usually compensated by its breadth and ability to generalize findings (Martin and Hanington, 2012, p 28). In addition, Nnadi-Okolo (1990, p 102) claimed that case study research represents the observational type of study suitable for situations in which the background and specific components of a situation are recorded and analyzed. Consequently, the value of case studies is their ability to offer a comprehensive image of a problem, principle, or process.
Case study research is thus particularly suitable for this study because it favors the use of various data sources, their analysis, comparison, and contrast, and their further synthesis for gaining a clearer and fuller image of the context of interest. In this situation, the phenomenon of research interest is the extent and nature of UN diplomacy efforts assisting the establishment of Kurdistan as a state, protection of Kurds against aggression of neighboring states, and promotion of Kurdistan’s political, social, and economic development. This phenomenon is too broad to target its analysis with a single research focus, so a case study is used to make the broad outreach to various opinions, data sources, and aspects of this phenomenon, which allowed presenting a valuable dataset with productive study outcomes.
Participants and Sampling
Participants for this study were selected among the UN officials currently employed in the UN Offices in Kurdistan. There are several agencies of the UN now operating in Iraq and extending their operations to the region of Kurdistan, including WFP, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNDP, IOM, OCHA, UNFPA, UNESCO, FAO, UNHABITAT, UNOPS, UNWOMEN, and UNIDO. The chief mission directly involved in diplomatic and other assistance to Kurdistan is the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI). Hence, the researcher selected 50 officials for contacting them with a request to complete surveys on the role of the UN diplomacy in Kurdistan in 2011-2014. Surveys were sent out by e-mail for the respondents, clarifying the aims and purposes of this research and indicating that returning a filled survey is accepted as voluntary and informed consent for participation in the study. Respondents were given one week for the completion of the survey.
Sampling of participants was undertaken on the purposive basis; purposive sampling is defined as non-random method of participants’ selection according to a predefined set of their characteristics that allows creating a rich dataset specifically regarding to the community of interest (Walker, 2010, p 211). As clarified by Grinnell and Unrau (2010), purposive sampling involves selection of each element based on its specific purpose because of the study of a specific limited group. Such sampling method is particularly helpful in case the researcher wants to contact individuals knowledgeable on specific issues under investigation. Therefore, purposive sampling appeared the most appropriate method of participant sampling for this study based on the need to obtain information about UN diplomacy from the UN officials working in that field and possessing first-hand expert knowledge on the subject.
Data Collection
The primary data collection method of this study is survey; as noted by Gravetter and Forzano (2011, p 373), surveys and questionnaires are often used in social sciences because of their efficiency in collecting large amounts of information. Moreover, surveys allow researchers to obtain information about respondents’ attitudes, opinions, personal characteristics, and behaviors in certain situations and contexts of interest. Survey research suggests that no direct observation is necessary for the researcher to gain understanding of the group’s characteristics and features. Therefore, surveys are a time-efficient data collection instrument for collecting data from large numbers of respondents and efficient in getting vital information from the sample of respondents of interest.
The survey used in this study was compiled personally by the researcher, based on the needs dictated by this research – see Appendix A. It included 21 questions, and was divided into three sections: the first part asked for personal information of respondents, the second part – for information about their diplomatic mission, and the third part – for information about their opinions and knowledge about the UN role in diplomatic relations of Kurdistan with Iraq, neighboring countries, and the rest of the world. The final couple of questions in section three asked respondents to give narrative responses about UN diplomatic achievements, failures, and recommendations for increasing the UN agencies’ diplomatic efficiency in Kurdistan. Hence, both qualitative and quantitative findings were expected to be received from the survey respondents.
The present case study was also complemented with secondary data collection from such sources and the UN and Kurdistan’s publications, reports of experts, international organizations, or other official news or assessments of diplomatic progress in the region. These data sources were further correlated with survey findings to substantiate or contrast the opinions of surveyed UN officials. Hence, compilation of both primary and secondary data within one case study of the UN diplomacy in Kurdistan in 2011-2014 helped to create a broader, more comprehensive image of the situation in region and the UN role in it.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted in this study on the basis of the principle of triangulation made possible because of use of several data sources. According to Klenke (2008, p 157), triangulation is one of advantages of combining quantitative and qualitative research approaches within the mixed methods study. Thus, triangulation is the method of cumulative validation of findings, and a method for production of a more complete picture of the investigated phenomenon. Blaikie (2009, p 224) also pointed out the possibility of comparing qualitative and quantitative data, transforming one type of data into another one, and using different methods at different levels for the sake of producing a multi-aspect, comprehensive analysis of the object of interest. Here, the object of research interest is the role of UN diplomacy in Kurdistan in 2011-2014, so survey analysis provided quantitative data that was analyzed with the help of descriptive statistics and organized in charts, diagrams, and graphs to illustrate the dominant attitudes and opinions about UN diplomatic involvement in Kurdistan’s issues and transformation processes. However, survey data are usually subjective by nature, since they are provided by individuals biased by their personal opinions, attitudes, and limited knowledge. Hence, increase of validity and reliability of findings was achieved by correlating the received quantitative data with objective qualitative data from reports and publications. That correlative analysis and comparison/contrast of data from various sources further enabled the production of a synthetic, comprehensive, and all-encompassing conclusion giving a closer snapshot of the UN diplomacy, along with its gains and failures, in the region.
Limitations
Despite the fact that mixed methods research is initially intended for reducing the impact of disadvantages and limitations of both qualitative and quantitative research approaches, it also has certain limitations that have to be taken into account when assessing the study’s validity, reliability, generalizability, and its overall scholarly value. Terry (2011, p 105) pointed out that conducting a high-quality mixed methods study requires the researcher to understand all intricacies of each research method involved in the study, and to pay enough attention to analyzing and reconciling conflicting results, if they are obtained from different data sources. Moreover, mixed methods research may become more time-consuming than quantitative or qualitative methods alone are, since both data collection and data analysis become lengthier in this approach.
Denscombe (2014, 161) also cautioned that the distinction between quantitative and qualitative methods of research may oversimplify matters, while in fact, the clarity and simplicity with which the research findings may be manifested may conceal a much more complex and challenging reality. Additionally, it is vital to keep in mind that the philosophical paradigm of pragmatism underlying mixed methods research is very often prone to misinterpretation; while pragmatism usually dictates working with findings no matter how rich and valuable they appear, the research approach of “anything goes” should not be associated with mixed methods research that always maintains scholarly rigor in case the researcher is adequately trained and qualified (Denscombe, 2014, p 161).
Ethical Considerations
No matter what research design, method of sampling, and data collection/analysis methods are selected, there is always a need for the researcher to take proper care about ethics of research, which means that research should be socially and morally acceptable. Though this study does not involve vulnerable subjects (such as children, pregnant women, prisoners, etc.), and generally does not involve any experimentation with human subjects, it still has to comply with the ethical standards of ethical research such as voluntary participation, informed consent, and participant confidentiality/privacy protection (Gratton and Jones, 2010, p 121). Hence, the survey designed for primary data collection in this study was made specifically with concern towards the first two ethical issues. At the beginning of the survey, before the first question is asked, the researcher included an introductory paragraph making the respondents familiar with purposes of research and the voluntary nature of participation.
Moreover, the researcher informed participants that once they return their completed surveys, this act is considered an informed consent, and equals the procedure of formal signature of the informed consent form. Hence, the survey form considered ethical issues such as voluntary participation and informed consent. As for confidentiality and privacy issues, the survey did not ask participants to indicate their names, which makes the survey initially anonymous. Further on, all data collected from study participants were stored in a password-protected folder on the researcher’s personal computer, and were used for research purposes only, never being published in other sources or shared with other people. Hence, respondent confidentiality was fully maintained throughout the entire process of research.
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS
The present chapter contains results of the survey conducted with UN officials staying in Kurdistan at present, and their correlation with the secondary data analysis derived from literature research and document analysis. The socio-demographic characteristics of UN officials and their missions are presented first, and the general information about UN Offices is given in the opening sections of the results analysis. Next, the data on UN officials’ types of activities in Kurdistan and their perceived efficiency of those activities are presented. The following data includes assessment of the overall UN role in the development of Kurdistan, barriers to Kurdistan’s development and UN assistance with it, and the contribution of the UN to some key problems of Kurdistan – the PKK, negotiations with Iraq, and establishment of security in the region in the face of hostility of neighboring countries and the ISIS. Final sections relate to the UN officials’ estimates of the need for the UN to stay in the region and continue assistance to Kurdistan, as well as information about successes and failures of the UN in the region in 2011-2014. The UN officials also offered their personal recommendations for making UN should more effective in Kurdistan in the near future. The chapter ends with a short summary of key research findings obtained in the process of data analysis.
Socio-Demographic Information about Respondents
The survey was disseminated to 50 UN officials and one week of time was given for them to complete the surveys. After the time passed, 25 completed surveys were returned to the researcher, which constitutes a 50% response rate. Though 50% is quite a low response rate, the sample of 25 respondents may be considered efficient for this type of academic work, and it is highly probable that 25 UN officials are able to provide a clear, comprehensive, and objective evaluation of the UN role in Kurdistan within the past four years.
Out of the 25 surveys returned to the researcher, four respondents were female and twenty-one respondents were male (16% and 84% correspondingly). The mean age of participants was 44.2 years old, which shows that young and middle-aged people are scarcely represented in the UN Offices in Kurdistan. The most representative part of the sample belonged to the UNAMI – 23 persons reported working in Kurdistan within this UN, while two belonged to UNHCR, and one respondent stated that he belonged both to the UNAMI and the WFP.
The present findings on the representation of UN Offices in the region is consistent with the case study findings – such as a plenty of information on active operations of UNAMI in Kurdistan, and the presence of UNHCR and WFP representatives who produced a Joint Assessment report in 2014 about assistance to Syrian refugees and the activities of the Joint Assessment Mission (JAM) (WFP & UNHCR, 2014). UNAMI, in its turn, is regarded as the most fully represented and effective UN Office in Kurdistan, acting in the region of Iraq since 2003. UNAMI is a political mission directing its operations towards strengthening of political institutions in Iraq, promotion of democracy, and assistance to Iraqi people with their humanitarian needs (UN Peacekeeping, 2015).
Table 1 Socio-Demographic Information about Respondents
| Age | 18-25 years old
26-35 years old 36-45 years old Over 45 years old |
0 persons (0%)
3 persons (12%) 11 persons (44%) 11 persons (44%) |
| Gender | Male
Female |
21 persons (84%)
4 persons (16%) |
| Mission | UNAMI
WFP UNHCR |
13 persons (88%)
2 persons (8%) 1 person (4%) |
| Length of stay | Less than 1 month
1-6 months 7-12 months 1-5 years 6-10 years Over 10 years Kurdish |
3 persons (12%)
4 persons (16%) 8 persons (32%) 6 persons (24%) ——————- 1 person (4%) 2 persons (8%) |
The duration of respondents’ stay in Kurdistan also varied widely, with three respondents reporting their stay of less than one month, four persons staying in Kurdistan from one to six months, and eight persons reporting that their duration of stay was larger than six months but did not exceed one year. Six respondents from the sample reported staying in Kurdistan for less than 5 years, while one respondent stayed there for more than 10 years. Interestingly, two UN representatives reported that they were Kurds, so they stayed in the region for their entire lifetime, working for the UN on a collaborative basis. More detailed socio-demographic information about the respondents may be found in Table 1.
Information about Respondents’ UN Offices
In the following set of questions, respondents were asked to provide some basic information about their missions and other missions that they know. Analysis of their answers showed that UNAMI has a wide variety of purposes and activities in Kurdistan, and is equally interested in provision of humanitarian assistance to Kurds, military security maintenance, children’s issues, economic development, diplomatic assistance, healthcare and social help, and assistance with construction and housing. However, the most frequently named functions of the UN Offices were addressing the humanitarian needs, helping with establishment of diplomatic relations, and children’s issues/economic development counted for an equal number of responses – see Figure 1. As it comes from Figure 1, the least frequently named fields of UN assistance that the respondents confirmed were military security, healthcare/social care, and construction/housing.
Figure 1 Activities of UN Offices in Kurdistan
However, UNAMI appeared not the only mission of the UN that assisted Kurds with the issues and problems named above. Analysis of responses for the question about other missions doing the same things as their mission does, 16 respondents (which is 64% of the total study sample) responded affirmatively, which means that UNAMI, UNHCR, and WFP are complemented with other UN Offices as well, targeted towards the completion of the economic, diplomatic, social, healthcare, humanitarian, and other developments. Interestingly, seven respondents stated that no other UN Office did the same with their mission, while two respondents confessed they did not know exactly.
According to the estimates of both the UN Security Council and the Iraqi government, UNAMI has been instrumental in supporting regional stability and addressing the destabilization forces affecting Iraq since the overturn of the Saddam regime, especially in terms of self-establishment and development of Kurdistan as an autonomous administrative unit in the territory of Iraq. UNAMI has been an intermediary between Iraq and KRG since 2009, helping both parties to reach a consensus through a productive and inclusive political dialogue. Moreover, UNAMI’s participation in Iraq-KRG negotiations may serve as a potential source of added strength in opposition to the ISIS forces, taking into account the recent successes of Kurdish Peshmerga forces against ISIS terrorists (UN Peacekeeping, 2014).
Finally, the respondents were proposed to evaluate the efficiency of their UN Offices in Kurdistan in terms of the activities and functions it was officially designated with. The answers varied considerably, but the overwhelming majority of respondents still assessed their mission’s effectiveness quite highly. Nonody from the sample characterized his or her mission as ineffective, while only three respondents gave unclear estimates (one respondent stated that his mission is “quite efficient,” while two others selected “don’t know”). All other respondents answered that their mission is either moderately efficient, or very efficient – see Figure 2.
Figure 2 Perceived Efficiency of Respondents’ Mission
Thus, the presented analysis of data about UN Offices’ representatives and activities that their missions perform shows that only UNAMI was adequately represented in this sample, but still representatives of UNHCR and WFP took part in the survey as well. The UN Offices are now involved in a variety of aspects of assistance for Kurds, including humanitarian problems, children’s issues, maintenance of military security, help with housing and healthcare development, and other aspects. Moreover, the overhwelming majority of the respondents assess the contribution of their missions as valuable and feasible, which shows that the UN has managed to make a real difference to the state of affairs in the Kurdistan region within the past couple of years. More information on the perceived efficiency of the UN in various aspects of Kurdistan’s functioning will be presented in the following sections.
Assessment of UN Efficiency in Resolving Kurdistan’s Problems
The next portion of survey questions dealt specifically with the estimates of UN Offices’ efficiency on a range of designated activities and aspects of influence. The general question on whether the UN is efficient in its mission in Kurdistan was answered mostly positively, with 20 respondents (80% of the overall study sample) stating that it is efficient. Only two respondents claimed that the UN mission in Kurdistan is inefficient, while three respondents refrained from giving a definite answer to this question by selecting the “don’t know” option of response.
In line with that question, the next one related to sufficiency of UN’s representation in the region, which was also answered positively by the majority of respondents. Only three respondents claimed that there should be fewer UN officials in Kurdistan, and two respondents claimed that they could identify sufficiency of UN representation. All in all, these results constituted 20% of the total sample, while six respondents indicated that more UN officials are necessary for effective assistance for Kurdistan and accomplishment of UN’s objectives in the region. In addition, 14 representatives (52% of the sample) claimed that the number of UN Offices and officials is sufficient for the completion of its goals in the region. Hence, the result of this brief account of UN sufficiency and efficiency showed that the overwhelming number of respondents considered UN effective, and almost all respondents considered the number of UN officials either enough or too small for the completion of UN aims on Kurdistan’s development, humanitarian reconstruction, and establishment of viable diplomatic relations with other political entities.
So far, UNAMI performs a wide variety of activities in Kurdistan; since 2009, it has become an intermediary boosting KRG-Iraq negotiations, and promoted the political dialogue for all sects and ethnic minorities in the region to deescalate the conflicts. Kurds’ successes in struggle against ISIS have also provided a positive basis for continuation of diplomatic negotiations between KRG and Iraq, as well as Turkey that has initiated a series of contracts on creation of oil and gas pipelines on Kurdistan’s territory. Such gains in the diplomatic domain are obviously a huge feasible advantage of UNAMI’s representatives in the region, while their number is still insufficient for targeting the problems of humanitarian relief for increasing numbers of refugees, and assistance to the KRG in this turbulent period to pursue their path towards establishing a democratic state through public education, electoral security provision, voter registration, and other relevant issues of the democratic process (UN Peacekeeping, 2014).
Further on during the survey, the respondents were offered to evaluate the most and least successful fields of UN’s impact in Kurdistan. Detailed results of these estimates may be seen in Figure 3.
Figure 3 Most and Least Efficient Fields of UN Activity in Kurdistan
As findings from Figure 3 suggest, the majority of respondents evaluated the UN’s achievements in the fields of addressing the humanitarian needs of the Kurdish population (and refugees coming from Syria to the Kurdistan region) and assistance in establishment of proper diplomatic relations very highly. The fields in which the prevailing number of respondents acknowledged a lack of UN Offices’ efficiency included military security and economic development. Other issues of concern may be seen in sectors of children’s issues and health/social care, since these categories accounted for a roughly equal number of positive and negative estimates. Thus, it may be inferred that humanitarian needs and diplomatic relations may be regarded as the UN successes in the regions, military security and economic development are so far failures of the UN, and aspects of addressing social care, healthcare, children’s issues, and construction/housing are yet of undetermined impact from the side of the UN.
If these findings are correlated with the case study data, one may see that there was a sound basis for humanitarian assistance in Kurdistan for the UN Offices. Since the establishment of the UN Security Council’s resolution 688 in 1991, Iraqi government was precluded to ban or restrict access to humanitarian organizations providing assistance and addressing the critical needs of refugees (Meho, 2004, p 126). Moreover, KRG is now strongly credited for assisting the displaced Iraqi and Syrian refugees running to the Kurdistan region from ISIS terrorists and the horrors of civil war. The UN assisted KRG to build a sufficient network of diplomatic connections with the European countries, such as Italy, for instance, with the Minister of KRG now involving in a partnership with the Pope of Rome in terms of addressing the ISIS terrorist threat in the region (The Kurdish Globe, 2015).
Military security is indeed a continuing challenge for the UN in the Kurdistan region, since ISIS continues to represent a serious source of violence, armed conflict, and danger for human rights. In the context of ISIS continuing expansion in the Northwest of the region, UN forces (especially taking into account that there is no UN Offices specifically designated and authorized for military security) have a limited capacity for Kurds’ protection. Continuing violence in the region, with ISIS and Syrian civil war aggravating the situation, makes Kurdistan experience accompanying challenges with economic development as well, addressing the urgent issues of housing the mounting numbers of refugees, protecting its territories from ISIS attacks, and managing the humanitarian crisis in the area (UN Peacekeeping, 2014). Hence, these fields may indeed be considered as witnessing little impact of UN’s efforts, while the contribution of UN to non-aggravation of the economic, humanitarian, and political situation in the area is still highly valuable.
Addressing children’ and women’s issues is also much more profound than the survey has revealed. There are several UN Offices and initiatives addressing specifically children’s issues in Kurdistan. In addition to UNAMI and other missions’ activities, the UN Volunteers (UNV) organization collaborates with UNDP to protect the rights and dignity of women and girls fleeing to Iraq’s Kurdistan region from Syria. UNV provides legal protection and advice, protects women against gender-based violence, secures women and girls from human trafficking and underage marriage, and oversees other instances of human rights violations (UN Volunteers, 2014). Furthermore, the UN children’s agency unleashed a special program in September 2013 to help refugee children and their families in the Kurdistan region with basic sources of survival, such as water tanks, school materials, temporary schools, etc. (UN News Center, 2013).
Figure 4 UN’s Role in KRG-Iraq, KRG-PKK, and KRG-IRAN, Syria, Turkey, and ISIS Interactions
The survey also aimed at providing a closer snapshot of UN’s efficiency in specific fields of Kurdistan’s diplomatic, political, and security challenges, such as negotiations of the KRG with Iraq, relations of KRG with PKK, and provision of security for Kurds in the context of hostility towards them from the side of neighboring countries and ISIS terrorist activities. The comparative analysis of perceived efficiency and importance of the role that the UN played in each of these aspects is presented in Figure 4. According to the data presented in Figure 4, maximum importance of the UN was identified in assistance to establish productive relationships between Kurdistan’s government and the Iraqi government. In this aspect, 17 respondents (68% of the total sample) characterized the role of the UN as important or very imprtant, while only three persons stated it was not important of or little importance.
Overall, the survey findings on UN’s sufficiency and effectiveness in Kurdistan is substantiated by secondary data findings; according to one of the recent UN Security Council reports, the present-day amount of UNAMI officials in Iraq is more than 352 troops, accounting for 380 international civilian representatives and 463 national civil staff. One of the most troubling issues remaining a serious barrier in diplomatic relations of Kurdistan and Iraq is the uncertain status of Kirkuk; the UN has also achieved no feasible progress in helping any of the parties in this aspect. Moreover, despite the overall improvement of Iraq-KRG relations, Kurdish authorities still pursue their political path of greater autonomy, which complicates further negotiations (Chitalkar and Malone, 2013, p 7).
Signing of an oil agreement in 2014 was a signfiicant step forward in the relations of KRG and the Iraqi government, done with assistance of UN diplomats (Bradley, Kent, and Adnan, 2014). However, the recently seized territories of debated belonging, such as Kirkuk, pose new diplomatic challenges for the improvement of KRG-Iraq diplomatic relations. Another point of debate is the upcoming referendum about Kurdistan’s independence pursued by some political leaders of the region, which is also contrary to Iraq’s territorial integrity plans and worsens the diplomatic climate between these two parties (BBC, 2015). Consequently, despite a considerable progress of the UN in moving KRG-Iraq negotiations to a peaceful and productive domain, there are many problematic aspects of their relationship that are yet to be resolved.
As for the PKK-KRG negotiations, the overwhelming number of respondents stated that they do not know about the UN’s role in that process. The reason for which 13 persons (52% of the sample) refrained from answering this question was explained by one of the respondents who stated that the UN never interfered with the PKK issue in Kurdistan, since the UN does not recognize PKK. Therefore, the divided answers in this field seem reasonable, as few respondents can estimate the role of UN in this aspect of Kurdistan’s political development.
The issue of PKK activity is serious for Kurdistan, since PKK activists have been troubling not only Kurds but neighboring regions – for istance, Turkish territories. In 2007, both Turkish and American authorities conducted pressure on KRG to manage the issue of PKK to avoid Turkish cross-border operations on PKK annihilation (UNPO, 2007). In 2015, the situation has not changed much; PKK militants assisted Peshmerga forces in August and September 2014 in their struggle with ISIS, in the territories of Iraq and the Levant (Solomon and Dombey, 2014; Today’s Zaman, 2014). However, in 2015, the General Secretary of Peshmerga and the UNAMI Erbil Regional Office Head Sokol Kondi discussed the pullout of PKK forces from Turkey for the sake of fulfilling the agreement between Ankara and the jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan (Kurd Press, 2015). This step is seen as the only possible resolution to stop Turkish bombardments of the PKK bases in Kurdistan that cause much damage and civilian death toll for Kurds. Nevertheless, the UN Offices’ representatives have not so far assumed any active role or intermediary position in this aspect of Kurdistan’s diplomatic negotiations, and the UN role in this field remains limited.
Finally, the participation of UN in provision of military security from hostility of neighboring countries such as Turkey, Syria, Iran, and the overall terrorist activity of ISIS in the region. Ten participants (40% of the overall sample) characterized the role of UN in this aspect as either having no importance or being of little importance. Only seven respondents (28% of the sample) stated that the role of the UN was important or very important in this field, while five other respondentds estimated it as fairly important. Overall, as one can see, opinions split here, with the importance of UN’s activities for guaranteeing security of Kurds and refugees fleeing their countries tormented by civil war or ISIS terrorism stil remaining unclear.
The present findings are not supported by case study results, since the majority of publications and recent news releases speak about a fundamentally important role of the UN in the local military conflict, though it is realized not through military assistance but through humanitarian aid. There are a plenty of programs to bring humanitarian relief to the Kurdistan region flooded with disaplaced victims of the Syrian war and ISIS, among them the WFP initiatives distributing food and basic life supplies to displaced refugees, and FAO overseeing the distribution of funds from Saudi Arabia’s $14.7 million grant for assisting vulnerable rural households in Iraq, UNOPS and UNHCR distributing solar-powered lamps and mobile phone charging kits to the refugees in Kurdistan (UN News Center, 2014a).
Estimates of UN’s Successes and Failures
The respondents were offered several open-ended questions to evaluate the UN’s more pronounced successes and failures in their objectives regarding Kurdistan progress and development. As for successes, all respondents unanimously agreed that the UN succeeded most in assistance to IDPs and refugees, and in electoral issues that Kurdistan faced in 2014, including Kurdistan’s status and rights in the Iraqi constitution. Other responses on this subject included advice on budgeting decisions and security situations, and added value in solving the most critical issues faced by Kurdistan. One of the respondents praised the UN for its assistance with reaching and signing an oil agreement with the Iraqi central government, while another one turned attention to the progress in effective communication between Baghdad and Erbil, and efficient, productive decisions to solve the 2014 security crisis. Among UN’s successes, the UN officials’ contribution to granting Kurdistan access to the international community was also noted, and overseeing the maintenance of diplomatic ties between Baghdad and KRG during the formation of the cabinet. Furthermore, some respondents credited the UN Offices for humanitarian assistance and formation of efficient Iraqi government in 2014.
As for failures of the UN in Kurdistan, the respondents also voiced a variety of opinions by naming the weakest aspects of UN assistance in the region. Four respondents stated that there were no failures in the UN assistance efforts, while three other respondents named the UN failure in addressing the conflict between Baghdad and Erbil on the issue of disputed territories that each of the parties claims to belong to its territory. One respondent spoke about this issue generally as a failure of “reconciliation”. Three respondents also noted the weak UN response on helping IDPs and solving the humanitarian crisis that unleashed in Kurdistan after the refugee influx to its territories. One of the UN officials claimed that the UN did not accomplish its mission on helping to draft the oil agreement between Kurdistan and Baghdad in an effective way, so that Kurdistan received fair conditions in the national revenue sharing plan. Furthermore, the respondents accused the UN of ineffective assistance to KRG in drafting the region’s political ambitions, and reflecting them in Article 140 of the Iraqi constitution, which means that the UN failed to secure the political status of Kurdistan in the 2014 constitutional and electoral process.
Barriers to UN Efficiency in Kurdistan
Two questions were directed specifically to estimate the perceived barriers that UN officials meet on their way towards assisting Kurdistan in its economic, social, and political development. First, the respondents were asked about whether they believe that their UN Offices can work more effectively in the region. Surprisingly, though the majority of respondents previously praised their mission’s efficiency in Kurdistan, still 23 persons (92% of the total sample) agreed that the UN could act more effectively in assisting Kurdistan. Only one person stated that he did not know whether it was possible, and one person stated that the UN cannot work more effectively than it does now. However, the prevalent majority of the study sample supported an opinion that some specific barriers exist, halting the progress of Kurdistan and diminishing the outcomes of UN activities towards achievement of Kurdistan’s development and reconstruction objectives.
The second question then aimed at specific identification of gravity of each factor associated with stagnation of Kurdistan’s development – the set of barriers was preliminarily identified on the basis of secondary literature analysis and expert observers’ opinions. Responses to this question may be found in Figure 5. As the data from this figure suggests, the major hindrances to UN efficiency in the region are the security situation, Kurdistan’s diplomatic challenges with Iraq, and the problematic ISIS activity in the region.
Barriers to UN efficiency of moderate importance included inability of the UN to resolve the most pressing issues that Kurdistan is facing nowadays, KRG’s wish for independent representation in international affairs, and problems in Kurdistan’s diplomatic relations with neighboring countries of Turkey, Syria, and Iran. Interestingly, none of the respondents regarded PKK activities in the region as a barrier to UN efficiency in Kurdistan, while still, nobody stated that there were no barriers to UN activities in the region. The present findings suggest that Kurdistan faces a number of political, economic, social, and humanitarian crises connected with a number of armed conflicts in this geographical region, which overall complicate Kurdistan’s progress and hinder UN assistance efforts to Kurds on that path.
Figure 5 Factors Reducing UN’s Efficiency
The present estimate of challenges faced by UN officials assisting Kurdistan’s progress towards development as an autonomous state is consistent with the UN peacekeeping site’s accounts that name renewed violence in Iraq and Syria and new waves of refugees and displaced persons from these countries to Kurdistan as persistent challenges for both the KRG and the UN authorities on the way towards improvement of social, healthcare, political, and economic domains of Kurds’ lives (UN Peacekeeping, 2014). The findings of this survey part on challenges of internal political inconsistencies in the KRG are also substantiated by the estimates of Cordesman, Mausner, and Derby (2010) who pointed out the long-standing opposition between key political forces in Kurdistan that led to a civil war inside this region and are still looming as a potential source of disagreement on the issue of Kurdistan’s independence from Iraq (The Economist, 2014). The KRG now repeatedly expresses ambitions about its independent representation in international affairs, separately from Iraqi political forces, which poses additional diplomatic challenges for KRG-Iraq relations. Hence, all named barriers are indeed of serious threat to the UN successes and progresses in the diplomatic domain of Kurdistan’s ties with other parties in the region.
Future Prospects of UN’s Role in Kurdistan
The survey also aimed at identifying the attitudes and projections that UN officials have about the future of UN in Kurdistan, and the role that it should assume for achieving a real progress and granting feasible assistance to this administrative unit. The first question asked about whether the role of UN should reduce in Kurdistan in the near future, to which 14 respondents (56% of the sample) answered that it should not, while only three respondents stated that it should reduce. Six respondents (which is 24% of the total sample) could not give any definite answer to that question, which shows that the majority of the surveyed UN officials support pursuing the same UN Offices and objectives in Kurdistan in future, while this opinion is not exclusively dominant among all UN representatives.
Next, the respondents were asked to evaluate the change of the UN’s role in Kurdistan’s affairs that should be made for both UN and Kurdistan to accomplish their objectives. The opinions split almost evenly, with 10 respondents (40%) stating that the UN should pursue the same goals, and 11 respondents (44%) claiming that the UN should maintain the same focus but add new issues into the scope of its assistance measures for Kurdistan’s population and political structures. More detailed findings on this question may be seen in Figure 6.
Figure 6 Kurdish Issues to Be Addressed by the UN in Future
The reasons for such estimates of the UN role in future may be different; alongside with recognizing the need for the UN to preserve its strong presence in Kurdistan, UN officials recognized that the region (and entities assisting it) is facing a set of new, unprecedented and grave issues threatening its stability, welfare of its citizens, and the democratic future both in Kurdistan and in the rest of the Middle East region. Hence, the UN should remain present in Kurdistan, should tailor the intensity of its involvement in Kurdish issues to the desired degree of intrusion that the KRG striving towards independence and self-governance may have, and should design new efficient strategies for assisting Kurds to deal with new threats and problems, such as ISIS, refugees, IDPs, and the overall humanitarian crisis in the district.
The final question in this field of interest concerned recommendations that the UN officials in terms of overcoming barriers they encounter in Kurdistan, and becoming more efficient in their operations. Here, respondents named such aspects for improvement as “oil and gas law with Baghdad,” “continue to help Kurdistan,” and “to put more wholehearted efforts in providing effective assistance in resolving issues for the Kurdistan Region including the humanitarian and political areas.” One of the respondents also recommended the UN to alter its mandate and tailor it to the specific needs of the region, and to make the UN more directly involved in negotiations of Kurdistan with other parties of regional conflicts to resolve pressing political and diplomatic issues more efficiently. Another respondent also supported that recommendation by suggesting that the UN has to play a bigger role in the KRG to resolve regional challenges, and should participate directly in resolution of Iraq-Turkey tensions.
The topic of disputed territories was also raised by several respondents who recommended to the UN to develop a clear, concise, and transparent vision and strategy to assist Kurdistan and Iraq in reaching a consensus over those territories. Another point of concern was the need to hire more professionals from different corners of the world to become a diverse, competent, and culturally flexible force for resolution of conflicts in Kurdistan. Additional suggestions related to development and economic housing, as well as appointment of officials who would work jointly with Kurdish and Baghdadi authorities to build a better and stronger state of Iraq. Respondents saw the future of effective UN assistance in demolishing ISIS and providing more efficient assistance in Kurdistan’s development and humanitarian aid. It was also seen that only diplomatic mediation of the UN may help Iraq and Kurdistan settle all problematic issues in political and economic fields through UN’s support and encouragement.
Other respondents were more concerned about UN officials’ personal freedom of movement and action, and recommended reducing security requirement for UN officials. Among additional recommendations for UN’s increasing efficiency in Kurdistan, solving the refugee problem and addressing healthcare challenges and concerns was also among top priorities. Capacity-building, political assistance, help with diplomatic negotiations, humanitarian needs’ assistance, economic development help have also been regarded as vital tenets for UN empowerment and effective work in the region.
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the discussion of findings that have been made from the survey conducted with UN officials staying in Kurdistan Region at present. It also highlights the close correlation of survey results with the secondary data analysis derived from document analysis and literature review conducted within the overall case study approach of this dissertation. The researcher emphasized the crucial role of the UN Offices in Iraqi Kurdistan and discussed the barriers to efficient cooperation between the UN officials, Kurdistan representatives, and Iraqi government in Baghdad. Based on the evidence gathered through the case study analysis, the author presented conclusions concerning the effectiveness of UN Offices in the Kurdistan territories and Iraq, their future prospects, and challenges. The chapter ends with recommendations that underline the possible strategies for improving UN assistance in the region. It also acknowledges the necessity for further research in this area, and outlines directions for expanding the body of knowledge in this research field.
Discussion of Findings
As the presented research findings suggest, the UNAMI and other UN Offices have developed a strong presence in Iraq, and correspondingly, in Kurdistan, since the 1990s when the Allied Forced undertook unprecedented assistance steps to protect the region’s Kurds from outrageous violations of their basic human rights. Hence, since that period, and further after the 2003 overturn of the Saddam regime in Iraq by the US military troops, Kurds have been witnessing strong international assistance from the side of both the USA and the UN in many aspects, including political, economic, and social development, as well as military security (provided by US militaries). This case study’s findings prove the point of Elliassi (2014) who pointed out that since the physical security measures of the 1990s, the UN assistance shifted towards protection of Kurds’ political, social, and cultural rights in the 2000s and 2010s.
The role of UNAMI in the Kurdistan region changed profoundly since 2010, when the USA made a decision to reduce its presence in the country and withdrew its military troops from Iraq and Kurdistan. Thus, alongside with a gradual decline of US presence, UNAMI assumed more responsibilities and expanded its outreach to various aspects of security, protection, and political/economic/humanitarian assistance to the region’s population (“Mission reviews,” 2011, p 83). At present, the UN provides active and multi-faceted assistance to Kurdistan in a variety of challenges it currently faces, including provision of basic humanitarian assistance with the influx of refugees from Syria and Iraq (UN News Centre, 2013; 2014a; 2014b; 2014c), addressing violence against women and children (UN Volunteers, International Rescue Committee), and helping Kurds with protection of their geographical integrity and cultural heritage.
UNAMI is a powerful, abundantly represented mission in the region that assists Kurdistan specifically with maintenance of a proactive political dialogue with Baghdad, national reconciliation of Kurds and Iraqis (as well as other hostile neighboring entities), supports democratic and legal electoral processes, ensures a deserved place of Kurdistan within the overall process of Iraq’s reconstruction, and provides humanitarian relief both to Kurds and to displaced refugees fleeing from violence in their countries to the comparatively stable and protected Kurdish region (UN Peacekeeping, 2014). Other UNAMI fields of activity involve strengthening the rule of law, improving the justice system, reforming Iraqi and Kurdish economy, developing strong mechanisms for ensuring protection of human rights, and assisting the reintegration of former members of illegal armed groups (UN Peacekeeping, 2014).
As noted by Kugel (2011) and substantiated by the findings of this study, political missions have traditionally been instrumental in management of civilian conflict, and the political mission of the UN in Iraq has been highly effective in mediating the Arab-Kurdish relations within the past couple of decades. However, the present-day challenges faced by the region dictate other focuses for UNAMI presence, and make economic and social initiatives ineffective. Though the initial purposes of UNAMI assistance to Kurdistan mainly included boosting a constructive political and diplomatic dialogue with Iraq and neighboring countries, and helping Kurds with social, cultural, economic, and political development, the activation of ISIS in the region and persistent struggle between PKK and neighboring Turkish militaries all pose a threat to stability and peace in the region.
Besides military threats of ISIS and the dangers of civil war in the neighboring Syria, Kurdistan has become a safe haven for thousands of refugees from the regions tormented by sectarian and civil war violence. Hence, instead of focusing on Kurdistan’s independent development and solving the relevant social, economic, and political issues towards its progress, UNAMI and other missions now face an urgent necessity to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Kurdistan by satisfying the basic living needs of refugees and IDPs (UN Peacekeeping, 2014; UN News Centre, 2013; 2014a; 2014c). These are the pressing issues that the UN Offices have to take into account when assessing their contribution to the development of Kurdistan, since peacetime objectives included into the UN mandate in the region gradually lose their relevance at the face of new pressing issues of security and stability in the region.
Another essential aspect of concern nowadays that affects UN efficiency in Kurdistan is the uncertainty regarding UN’s desired degree of involvement in the political processes of this administrative unit. In the times of US troops’ presence in Kurdistan, UNAMI used to operate within the security framework established by the militaries. At present, UNAMI representatives have lost security support of American troops and have to operate in an unstable, uncertain, and tense political environment aggravated by the political deadlock inside the Iraqi government (that lasted after 2010 disputable parliamentary elections), and a political divide inside the KRG, with the KDP headed by Barzani establishing friendly relations with Turkey and seeking total independence from Iraq, while PUK is more focused on establishing fruitful and proactive diplomatic relationships with Iraq (“Mission reviews,” 2011; The Economist, 2014; Cordesman, Mausner, and Derby, 2010).
In this environment of KRG’s indecisiveness about Kurdistan’s political status, and the escalating tension in the region connected with neighboring countries’ hostility and ISIS expansion, UNAMI may serve as an effective mediator of political and diplomatic processes in Kurdistan. However, UNAMI representatives face increasing unwillingness of KRG authorities for their interference with KRG’s political process, and are allocated only an auxiliary function in Kurdistan’s political development and selection of political direction. Consequently, UN Offices have only a limited role in political assistance to Kurdistan, and unfortunately, a number of deadlock problems remain in the diplomatic context that preclude further stabilization of the region and UN’s effective promotion of Kurds’ development in the majority of vital human life domains.
Conclusion
The Kurds, geographically located at the intersection in the territories of Iran, Iraq, and Turkey, have never had a state of their own. Kurdistan enjoyed independence only for three years, from 1920 to 1923, but was later divided between Iraq and Turkey, which left Kurds no other option but to live as ethnic minorities in four different countries. Because of the ongoing cultural and ethnic pressure that Kurdish people suffered, they have been induced to struggle relentlessly for their independence. Evidence suggests that the Kurdish minority in Iraq appeared to be the most successful in this fight. In 1960, the regional stability of Iraq was undermined with a rebellion led by the Kurdistan Democratic Party. Later on, in 1983, the Iraqi Kurds rose up yet again, inspired by Massoud Barzani from the Kurdish Democratic Party and Jalal Talabani from the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. Although this war led to great casualties, its only result was the Iraqi–Kurdish Autonomy Agreement of 1970 that brought no significant changes to political and economic life of the region.
Kurdistan’s struggle towards autonomy and independence would be impossible without massive US assistance and unprecedented, multi-faceted UN support, which helped the Kurds to survive crises and strengthen their infrastructure. One should note that actual UN assistance in Kurdistan began in 1991 with Resolution 688 condemning repression of Kurds. Moreover, that same year, the USA, the UK, France, and Turkey established a no-fly zone in northern Iraq to prevent Iraqi militants from bombing the civil citizens of the Kurdistan Region. Moreover, the UN Secretariat established an innovative stop-gap arrangement stationing UN Guards in northern Iraq that helped thousands of Kurdish refugees to get vital international assistance provided by the UN agencies. However, the most significant document coming from UN diplomatic relations with Kurdistan by far is the UN Resolution 986 known as the Oil-for-Food Program. It helped the UN representatives to deliver significant supplies of food, medicaments, and other humanitarian goods to those in need.
Cooperation between Kurdistan and UN agencies gradually changed its focus towards wider protection of Kurds’ political, social, and cultural rights in the Middle East. Currently, assistance of the UN continues through the work of UNAMI, WHO, UNHCR, UNESCO, WFP, and many other agencies, each having its own objectives and spheres of influence. Undoubtedly, UNAMI is the most important and wide-ranging mission of the UN in the Kurdistan Region and Iraq, as it assists in advancing the political dialogue and reconciliation between opposing Iraqi parties, facilitates regional dialogue, coordinates humanitarian assistance, and supports economic reforms. Since its establishment in 2003, this mission assisted in six elections, coordinated UN humanitarian efforts and the financial assistance, and facilitated a political dialogue towards a resolution of issues related to disputed internal territories of Iraq. Humanitarian and social needs of the Kurdish population in Iraq have been supported by WHO, WFD, UNESCO, UNHCR, and several other agencies. Their assistance helped the Kurdish population to overcome the consequences of Saddam’s rule, eliminate hunger, avoid dangerous epidemics, and provide education for displaced children.
In 2011-2014, the UN has continued to help Iraqi Kurdistan by providing diplomatic and politic support, humanitarian assistance, and healthcare aid. UNAMI, for example, has worked hard to facilitate discussions between the Iraqi and Kurdish regional governments, as well as to promote inclusive political dialogue for all groups and minorities. Taking into account the key role that Kurdish Peshmerga forces have played in the fight against the Islamic State terrorists, UNAMI-promoted dialogues between Baghdad and Kurds help the country to battle against the Islamic State. Besides providing domestic support, UNAMI representatives promote regional dialogues between Iraq and Kuwait, Iraq and Iran, and Iraq and Turkey, which subsequently leads to broader regional stability. UNAMI is also actively involved into the development of effective social and civil services, as well as economic prosperity of the region. In general, as the survey has clearly shown, UNAMI is regarded as the most fully represented and effective UN mission in Kurdistan so far.
This study has also shown that addressing humanitarian needs was the most significant UN achievement for the past several years. Literature proves that the WHO mission in Kurdistan has made the biggest contribution to humanitarian support and health promotion and provision in particular. In 2014, WHO representatives initiated a plan to fight measles, pneumonia, and acute respiratory infections by training healthcare workers in the region, providing sufficient equipment and supplies to health facilities, delivering antibiotics, and initiating immunization. With the campaign still in progress, the World Health Organization expects to eradicate these dangerous epidemics in the overcrowded refugee camps and help the KRG to rebuild the region’s healthcare system.
Humanitarian support is also provided by the World Food Program, which aims to assist millions of Kurdish people and refugees under its Emergency Operation. In 2014, WFP representatives reported a humanitarian crisis in Kurdish territories due to the lack of coordination and huge gaps in humanitarian assistance. Therefore, WFP decided that the Kurdistan Region in Iraq should get both short-term and long-term assistance to support the local people and a growing number of refugees. In addition, WFP is targeting unemployment in some Kurdistan areas most vulnerable to violence and insecurity. It is important to emphasize that analysis of responses in the survey revealed the mission of UNAMI, WHO, and WFP is complemented with other UN operations as well, which target towards the completion of economic, diplomatic, social, healthcare, humanitarian, and other developments.
Although the UN has provided immense assistance and security protection in the region for several decades, there are still many challenges to overcome. In 2014-2015, new threats to economic and political stability of the region emerged, with ISIS militants fighting on Iraqi territories and killing thousands of civilians. Ongoing battles created an immense influx of refugees to the Kurdistan Region, which in turn complicated the work of the UN humanitarian agencies. Furthermore, dispute with Turkey about the PKK activity intensified after Iraqi Kurds embraced PKK fighters as heroes in the war against ISIS. When ISIS terrorists were defeated in Iraq, more and more Iraqi Kurds joined PKK forces that are considered separatists in the neighbouring Turkey. Obviously, this situation fuels political fragmentation and creates additional challenges to regional stability and UN assistance.
Moreover, the Iraq-Kurdistan conflict over disputed territories, autonomy, and oil revenues aggravates after Kurdish Peshmerga forces seized the historical town of Kirkuk to prevent its control by ISIS terrorists. These events contributed to certain failures of the UN in Kurdistan, as one can conclude from the survey. Several respondents admitted that addressing the conflict between Baghdad and Erbil in terms of disputed territories and independence remains the pressing issue for both UN officials and Iraq-KRG conflict parties. UN officials also claimed that the UN did not accomplish its mission on helping to achieve the oil agreement between Erbil and Baghdad effectively, so that Kurdistan could receive fair revenues. Therefore, it can be concluded that the aforementioned challenges need to be addressed by UN Offices in the near future, as they prevent the region from attaining steady economic growth and fruitful international cooperation.
Recommendations for Policy Change
To become more effective in Kurdistan, the UN Offices have to focus on a set of vitally important and relevant aspects of the regional context that Kurdistan and neighbouring countries are facing nowadays. There are three major aspects that this study revealed as highly significant: effectively addressing the security and humanitarian needs in the region (ISIS activities, IDP and refugee influx to Kurdistan, and need to provide for their basic survival needs); further assistance with diplomatic relations of Iraq and KRG; and assistance through technical support and consultations in Kurdistan’s electoral processes and movement towards political self-determination. Each of them is discussed in some detail below.
The humanitarian crisis evident in the region in connection with Syrian civil war and ISIS terrorism is a huge challenge for the UN at present, since Kurdistan is pressured by hundreds of refugees coming for safe haven in its territory every day. Hence, the funds and efforts initially aimed at reconstruction and development of Kurdistan are directed at provision of basic humanitarian needs of refugees right now. Hence, it is vitally necessary to increase presence of UN Offices and representatives whose efforts will be specifically targeted at managing the humanitarian crisis in Kurdistan, so that Kurdistan’s development may be resumed on the planned path (BBC News, 2015; UN Peacekeeping, 2014). Moreover, ISIS is a persistent, real threat for the region, so UN should reconsider the presence of security and peacekeeping personnel in the region, especially taking into account that the US military who used to be responsible for maintenance of security in the region have left it (“Mission reviews,” 2011, p 85). So far, the UN Security Council has viewed military presence of UN troops in Iraq and Kurdistan as inappropriate; however, the realities of today’s escalating violence and military aggression in the region urge the UN to reconsider that point, at least for protection and maintenance of security in Kurdistan.
Second, the Iraq-KRG relations require additional insights from UN Offices nowadays; it is true that UN diplomatic efforts have been highly successful within the past decade, and the UN has managed to boost a political dialogue between Baghdad and Erbil. However, the recent seizure of the town of Kirkuk by Kurdish Peshmerga forces and the continuing violence in Ninewa are the points of dispute that UN Offices are still unable to resolve. The 2014 oil agreement served as a good starting point for Erbil-Bagdad collaboration and fair sharing of Iraq’s oil resources. Nevertheless, the internal divide in the KRG political forces and the absence of clarity of the political direction in which Kurdistan aims to move add tension and uncertainty to the overall Iraq-KRG diplomatic environment (BBC News, 2015; “Mission reviews,” 2011; Bradley, Kent, and Adnan, 2014). These issues may be effectively addressed by UN diplomatic missions of they assume more direct participation in the Kurdish political and diplomatic affairs, and offer Kurdistan the many decades of UN’s diplomatic experience, resources, and influence in the international diplomatic circles.
Finally, the UN may improve its efficiency through fostering a democratic electoral process in Kurdistan. UNAMI already provided technical support and consultations to Iraqi government during the 2010 elections, and assisted Kurdish authorities during the 2014 governate council elections (“Mission reviews,” 2011; UNIEAT, 2014). However, establishing a stable and coherent political power in Kurdistan through legal elections may be possible only if the internal political tensions in KRG are resolved. UNAMI may become a strong partner for the KRG in resolving its inner crises and selecting a well-defined, proactive direction of political development, which may become an additional contribution to resolution of current political and diplomatic tensions in the region.
Recommendations for Further Research
The present study has offered an evaluative perspective on effectiveness of UN Offices in Iraq and Kurdistan. It has analysed major spheres in which UN agencies achieved considerable results, and discussed challenges that prevented the missions to solve some humanitarian and diplomatic issues. However, this research only begins to reveal the implications and propriety of UN assistance in Iraq. Several other questions remain to be addressed, one of which is how the Kurdish population assesses the effectiveness of UN support in the region. Because of current security situation in Kurdistan Region in Iraq, the present study did not examine the Kurds’ attitude towards international assistance, it would be logical to suggest that further research involving representatives from various social backgrounds and territories is highly advisable. A survey including refugees, KRG representatives, and Kurdish civilians could help to obtain impartial and objective information on the effectiveness of UN agencies, and to plan strategies that would be more efficient in future assistance.
Further research on the UN Offices’ effectiveness and pathways towards improvement should comprise more longitudinal survey. The present study evaluated the UN contribution to Iraqi politics, healthcare, and economic development made primarily from 2011 to the present time. Obviously, four years is a relatively short period to make definite conclusions about the effectiveness or failure of UN’s long-term plans and strategies. Therefore, it would be informative to conduct an extensive, longitudinal study including information for the past decade since the end of Saddam’s regime in Iraq. This longitudinal research should also comprise data on the Iraq-Kurdistan relations, as well as KRG relations with Turkey, Iran, and Syria, and the way this political cooperation or opposition influences the work of UN representatives on Kurds’ territories. In addition, the research could analyse how Kurdistan’s movement for independence either facilitated or hindered the UN assistance. Results obtained through this research could help to get an extensive overview of trends in the international assistance and determine the most efficient approaches that proved to be valuable over a long period.
Finally, continuing research on the principles of UN funds’ allocations appears fully justified. For the past years, the United Nations spent millions of dollars on the development of Kurdistan’s political, social, and economic sectors. Thus, an economic analysis perspective for further research may help to analyse what allocations were the most successful and which ones made no significant difference to the overall situation in the country. This information will definitely help UN officials to avoid unnecessary expenditure and allocate funding to the most distressed populations and sectors. As it has been mentioned above, the involvement of Kurdistan’s citizens and authorities in the survey can help to obtain more detailed and independent answers. Summing up the results, one can emphasize that close cooperation between UN agencies, Iraq, Kurdish population, and KRG authorities could simplify and enrich research that would in turn increase UN efficiency in the region.
References
Abu-Nasr, D. 2014. Horrors of war haunt Kurds as weapons trickle into Erbil. BloombergBusiness. [online] 20 October 2014. Available at <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-10-20/horrors-of-war-haunt-kurds-as-weapons-trickle-into-erbil> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
ACTED, 2014. Rapid assessment of child protection needs of internally displaced persons in Ainkawa, Erbil. [online] 17 August 2014. Available at: <http://www.rwlabs.org/report/iraq/rapid-assessment-child-protection-needs-internally-displaced-persons-ainkawa-erbil> [Accessed 8 April 2105].
Agence France Presse, 2015. Kurds blocking return of Arabs to disputed Iraq areas: watchdog. The Daily Star. [online] 26 February 2015. Available at: <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Feb-26/288863-kurds-blocking-return-of-arabs-to-disputed-iraq-areas-watchdog.ashx> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Ahmad, B. 2004. The Kurdish future. National Review [online] 24 June 2004. Available at: <http://www.nationalreview.com/article/211263/kurdish-future-bilal-ahmad> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Alaaldin, R. 2014. A dangerous rivalry for the Kurds. The New York Times. [online] 16 December 2014. Available at: <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/opinion/a-dangerous-rivalry-for-the-kurds.html?_r=0> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Amnesty International. 2014. Iraq: Dire winter conditions expose shocking gaps in humanitarian assistance for thousands displaced. [online] 19 December 2014. Available at: <https://www.amnesty.org/en/articles/news/2014/12/iraq-dire-winter-conditions-expose-shocking-gaps-humanitarian-assistance-thousands-displaced/> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Andrew, D. P. S., Pedersen, P. M., & McEvoy, C. D., 2011. Research methods and design in sport management. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Aras, D. 2011. Similar strategies, dissimilar outcomes: An appraisal of the efficacy of Turkey’s coercive diplomacy with Syria and in Northern Iraq. Journal of Strategic Studies, 34(4), 587-618.
Atlantic Council, 2014. The Kurdish question and US-Turkish relations in a changing Middle East. [online] 13 March 2014. Available at: <http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/publications/issue-briefs/the-kurdish-question-and-us-turkish-relations-in-a-changing-middle-east> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Austin, E. 2014. Iraq’s instability offers Kurdistan an opportunity. International Policy Digest. [online] 8 April 2014. Available at: <http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2014/08/04/iraq-instablity-kurdistan-independence/> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Barzani, N., 2014. Kurdish diplomacy: A success story. Rudaw. [online] 11 August 2014. Available at <http://rudaw.net/english/opinion/11082014> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
BBC. 2014. Iraq government reaches deal with Kurds on oil exports. [online] 2 December 2014. Available at: <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30289955> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
BBC. 2015. Iraqi Kurdistan profile – timeline. [online] 20 January 2015. Available at: <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-15467672> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
BBC News, 2015. Iraqi Kurdistan profile – overview. BBC [online] 20 January 2015. Available at: <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28147263> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Benz, C. R., and Newman, I., 2008. Mixed methods research: exploring the interactive continuum. Chicago, IL: SIU Press.
Blaikie, N., 2009. Designing social research. Malden, MA: Polity.
Bradley, M., Kent, S., and Adnan, G., 2014. Iraq and Kurdistan agree on oil deal. The Wall Street Journal [online]2 Dec. 2014. Available at: <http://www.wsj.com/articles/iraq-agrees-kurdistan-oil-deal-1417513949> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Charountaki, M. 2010. The Kurds and US foreign policy: International relations in the Middle East since 1945. London, UK: Routledge.
Chitalkar, P., & Malone, D. M. 2013. The UN Security Council and Iraq. United Nations University.
Chomani, K. 2013. Turkey, Iran influence Iraqi Kurdistan politics. Al-Monitor. [online] 22 November 2013. Available at: <http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/11/kurdistan-iran-turkey-rivalry-krg-election-cabinet.html#> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Chomani, K. 2014. Push for Kurdish independence divides Iraqi Kurds. Al-Monitor. [online] 9 July 2014. Available at: <http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/07/iraq-kurdistan-barzani-puk-division-independence-iran-turkey.html#> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Chulov, M. 2015. Kurdish Peshmerga call for heavy weaponry to take their fight to Isis. The Guardian. [online] 22 February 2015. Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/22/kurdish-peshmerga-call-for-heavy-weaponry-to-take-their-fight-to-isis> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Clarry, S. 2005. Boost to Kurdistan regional government-UN relations. Ekurd Daily. [online] 31 May 2005. Available at: <http://www.ekurd.net/mismas/articles/misc2005/5/independentstate176.htm> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Cogan, J. 2014. Relations collapse between Iraqi government and Kurdish region. World Socialist Web Site. [online] 12 July 2014. Available at: <http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/07/12/iraq-j12.html> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Cordesman, A. H. 2010. Barriers to reconciliation in Iraq. Center for Strategic & International Studies. [online] 23 February 2010. Available at: <http://www.offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/CSIS_BarriersToReconciliation_Iraq.pdf> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Cordesman, A. H., Mausner, A., and Derby, E., 2010. Iraq and the United States: Creating a strategic partnership. Washington, DC: CSIS.
Cordoba, A., 2013. Dindar Zebari on Kurdistan region’s UN and multilateral relations. Rudaw [online]30 Oct. 2013. Available at: <http://rudaw.net/english/interview/30102013> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Cortright, D., Lopez, G. A., & Gerber, L. 2002. Sanctions and the search for security: Challenges to UN action. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Council on Foreign Relations Press, 2012. Renewed violence in Iraq. [online] August 2012. Available at: <http://www.cfr.org/iraq/renewed-violence-iraq/p28808> [Accessed 10 April 2015].
Daloglu, T. 2013. Turkey seeks ‘interdependence’ with Iraqi Kurdistan. Al-Monitor. [online] 23 January 2013. Available at: <http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/01/turkey-iraq-kurdistan.html#> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Daragahi, B., Solomon, E. & Raval, A. 2014. Baghdad and Erbil end months-long dispute over oil revenues. The Financial Times. [online] 2 December 2014. Available at: <http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/79cc4bae-7a32-11e4-9b34-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3WoJzWuuL> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Denscombe, M., 2014. The good research guide: for small-scale social research projects. 5th edn. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Department of Foreign Relations, 2015. KRG Policies. [online] 10 April 2015. Available at: <http://dfr.gov.krd/p/p.aspx?p=29&l=12&s=010000&r=336> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Di Stefano Pironti, A. 2014. Kurdistan’s health system in a globalized world. Rudaw. [online] 16 February 2014. Available at: <http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/16022014> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Elbakyan, E. 2014. The Kurdish Factor in Turkey-Syria Relations (2012-2013). Proceedings of INTCESS14-International Conference on Education and Social Sciences, 3-5 February 2014- Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 708-716.
Elfenbein, M. 2007. The Kurdish question. The American Prospect. [online] 16 July 2007. Available at: <https://prospect.org/article/kurdish-question> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Eliassi, B., 2013. Contesting Kurdish identities in Sweden: quest for belonging among Middle Eastern youth. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Every Culture, 2015. Kurds. [online] Available at: <http://www.everyculture.com/wc/Tajikistan-to-Zimbabwe/Kurds.html> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Faucon, B. 2014. Iraq threatens Kurds with U.N. action. The Wall Street Journal. [online] 9 June 2014. Available at: <http://www.wsj.com/articles/iraqs-semiautonomous-kurdish-region-ships-2nd-tanker-of-oil-1402332052> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Foreign & Commonwealth Office, 2015. Iraq – Country of concern. [online] 21 January 2105. Available at: <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/iraq-country-of-concern/iraq-country-of-concern> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Gedda, G. 1992. Kurds ask U. N. for partial lifting of economic blockade. Associated Press News Archive. [online] 14 August 1992. Available at: <http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1992/Kurds-Ask-U-N-for-Partial-Lifting-of-Economic-Blockade/id-71c5747c662ec592250984b6334fa5ed> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Ghabra, S. N. 2001. Iraq’s culture of violence. Middle East Quarterly, 8(3), 39-49.
Goldman, O. S. 2013. Between self-interest and international norms: legitimizing the PLO. Israel Affairs, 19(2), 364-378.
Gratton, C., and Jones, I., 2010. Research methods for sports studies. Oxon: Taylor & Francis.
Gravetter, F., and Forzano, L.-A., 2011. Research methods for the behavioral sciences. 4th edn. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
Grinnell, R. M., and Unrau, Y. A., 2010. Social work research and evaluation: foundations of evidence-based practice. 9th edn. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Gulmohamad, Z. 2014. Report: Iraqi Kurdistan’s rise on the international scene amid the expansion of the Islamic State. Your Middle East. [online] 30 November 2014. Available at: <http://www.yourmiddleeast.com/culture/report-iraqi-kurdistans-rise-on-the-international-scene-amid-the-expansion-of-the-islamic-state_28218> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Gunter, M. M. 2010. Historical dictionary of the Kurds. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Harris, W. 2014. Chaos in Iraq: Are the Kurds truly set to win? Small Wars Journal. [online] Available at: <http://smallwarsjournal.com/printpdf/16055> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Hashem, A. 2014. Iran helps Iraq’s Kurds but Baghdad still priority. Al-Monitor. [online] 31 August 2014. Available at: <http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/08/kurdistan-autonomy-isis-mosul-kirkuk-barzani-referendum.html#> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Hassanpour, A. 1994. The Kurdish experience. Middle East Report, 24(4), 2-7, 23.
Hesse-Biber, S. N. & Leavy, P. 2010. Handbook of emergent methods. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hough, P. 2014. Understanding global security. United Kingdom: Routledge.
Human Rights Watch, 2002. World Report 2002: The Events of 2001. New York: Human Rights Watch.
Humanitarian Response, 2015. Immediate Response Plan Phase II (IRP2) 15 November 2014 – 31 March 2015. [online] 15 November 2014. Available at: <https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/operations/iraq/document/immediate-response-plan-phase-ii-irp2-15-november-2014-31-march-2015> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Hunt, C. 2005. The history of Iraq. Greenwood Publishing Group, Santa Barbara, CA.
Hurriyet DailyNews. 2008. UN to launch report on Iraq’s disputed territories to avert clashes. [online] Available at: <http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/world/11484669.asp?scr=1> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Ibrahim, S. Q. F. 2015. Iraqi Kurds and state-building. The Washington Review. [online] March 2015. Available at: <http://www.thewashingtonreview.org/articles/iraqi-kurds-and-state-building.html> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
ICRC, 2015. Doubling the emergency response to the Syria crisis. [online] 31 March 2015. Available at: <https://www.icrc.org/en/document/syria-statement-movement-maurer-double-emergency-response> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Ilgit, A., & Ozkececi-Taner, B. 2013. Turkey at the United Nations Security Council:‘Rhythmic Diplomacy’and a Quest for Global Influence. Mediterranean Politics, 1-20.
INFRA Iraq, 2015. Delivering reproductive health services to Syrians refugees living in Domiz camps in Iraq. [online] Available at: <http://iraq.unfpa.org/programmes/humanitarian-project> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
International Crisis Group. 2012. Iraq and the Kurds: The high-stakes hydrocarbons gambit. [online] 19 April 2012. Available at: <http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/middle-east-north-africa/iraq-iran-gulf/iraq/120-iraq-and-the-kurds-the-high-stakes-hydrocarbons-gambit.aspx> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Iranian Diplomacy, 2015. Effect of the Iraq nuclear weapons in the Middle East. [online] 24 March 2015. Available at: <http://www.irdiplomacy.ir/en/page/1945675/Effect+of+the+Iraq+Nuclear+Weapons+in+the+Middle+East.html> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Ismael, T. Y., & Ismael, J. S. 2015. Iraq in the twenty-first century: Regime change and the making of a failed state. London, UK: Routledge.
Katzman, K. 2015. Iraq: Politics, security, and U.S. policy. Congressional Research Service. [online] 27 February 2015. Available at: <https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS21968.pdf> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Klenke, K., 2008. Qualitative research in the study of leadership. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Knights, M. 2014. Here’s what the big Iraqi-Kurdish oil deal really means. Business Insider UK. [online] 4 December 2014. Available at: <http://uk.businessinsider.com/what-the-big-iraqi-kurdish-oil-deal-really-means-2014-12?r=US> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Koivunen, K. 2011. Kurdistan develops towards nationhood. Diplomaatia. [online] April 2011. Available at: <http://www.diplomaatia.ee/en/article/kurdistan-develops-towards-nationhood/> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Kugel, A., 2011. ‘No helmets, just suits: Political missions as an instrument for the UN Security Council for civilian conflict management.” UN Security Council [online]. Available at: <http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/07899.pdf> [Accessed 17 April 2015].
Kurd Press, 2015. Peshmerga and UN officials discuss PKK withdrawal. [online]. Available at: <http://www.kurdpress.com/En/NSite/FullStory/News/?Id=4558#Title=%0A%09%09%09%09%09%09%09%09Peshmarga and UN officials discuss PKK withdrawal%0A%09%09%09%09%09%09%09> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
Kurda, K. 2015. Bad blood between brothers. [online] 3 August 2015. Available at: <http://ru.scribd.com/doc/258074667/Bad-Blood-Between-Brothers-The-KDP-PUK-PKK-Conflict#scribd> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Kurdistan Parliament, 2015. In a meeting with UN representative to Erbil, Speaker of the Kurdistan Parliament: Having a high commission of elections is Kurdistan Region’s constitutional right [online]1 January 2015. Available at: <http://www.perlemanikurdistan.com/Default.aspx?page=article&id=21459&l=1> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Langer, A. 2014. A brief history of the Kurdish struggle for independence. The Atlantic Council of Canada. [online] 14 august 2104. Available at: <http://natocouncil.ca/a-brief-history-of-the-kurdish-struggle-for-independence/> [Accessed 6 April 2105].
Londoño, E. 2009. Kurds, Arabs maneuver ahead of U.N. report on N. Iraq. Washington Post Foreign Service. [online] 17 April 2009. Available at: <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/16/AR2009041604007.html> [Accessed (April 2015].
Maggiolini, P., 2013. Iraq’s foreign policy directions and regional developments. Where does Iraqi foreign policy starts. ISPI. [online] September 2013. Available at <http://www.ispionline.it/sites/default/files/pubblicazioni/analysis_199_2013.pdf> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Mahmoud, N., 2013. Gun control in Kurdistan divides lawmakers and security officials. Rudaw. [online] 7 July 2013. Available at: <http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/070720131> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Malanczuk, P., 1991. The Kurdish crisis and allied intervention in the aftermath of the second Gulf War. European Journal of International Law, 2, pp.114-132.
Martin, B., and Hanington, B. M., 2012. Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Beverly, MA: Rockport Publishers.
McDowall, D. 2004. A modern history of the Kurds. United Kingdom: I.B.Tauris.
Meho, L. I., 2004. The Kurdish question in U. S. foreign policy: a documentary sourcebook. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Meric, A. B., & Hacaoglu, S., 2014. Iraqi Kurds, Turkey to double oil export pipeline capacity. BloombergBusiness. [online] 20 August 2014. Available at: <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-08-20/iraqi-kurds-turkey-to-double-oil-export-pipeline-capacity-1-> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Mikhin, V. 2014. Iraqi Kurdistan on a difficult road towards independence. New Eastern Outlook. [online] 10 July 2014. Available at: <http://journal-neo.org/2014/07/10/rus-irakskij-kurdistan-nelegkij-put-k-nezavisimosti/> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
“Mission reviews,” 2011. Iraq. [online]. Available at: <http://cic.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/mr_iraq.pdf> [Accessed 17 April 2015].
Muftuler-Bac, M. 2014. Changing Turkish foreign policy towards Iraq: new tools of engagement. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 1-15.
Natali, D. 2013. The Kurdistan region of Iraq: Stabilizer or spoiler? Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 14(2), 71-79.
Natali, D. 2015. Iraqi Kurdish land grabs anger Sunni Arabs. Al-Monitor. [online] 29 January 2015. Available at: <http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/01/iraq-kurdistan-land-grab-resentment-sunni.html#> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Nezan, K. 2015. A brief survey of the history of the Kurds. The Kurdish Institute of Paris. [online] Available at: <http://www.institutkurde.org/en/institute/who_are_the_kurds.php> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Nnadi-Okolo, E., 1990. Health research design and methodology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Office of the Iraq Programme, 2015. Oil-for-Food. [online] 10 April 2015. Available at: <http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/background/> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Osmańczyk, E. J. & Mango, A., 2003. Encyclopedia of the United Nations and international agreements: G to M. London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
Ottaway, M., & Ottaway, D., 2014. How the Kurds got their way. Foreign Affairs. [online] Available at: <http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141216/marina-ottaway-and-david-ottaway/how-the-kurds-got-their-way> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Pawlak, M., 2011. Extending the boundaries of research on second language learning and teaching. Kalisz, Poland: Springer Science & Business Media.
Policy Analysis Unit-ACRPS. 2014. How the Kurdish Regional Government is adapting to new realities. [online] 20 July 2014. Available at: <http://english.dohainstitute.org/release/36a43b9e-006c-4eaf-8a7f-051555ed17f9> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Radio Free Europe. 2015. Report: Kurds prevent Arabs from returning to disputed Iraq areas. [online] 10 April 2105. Available at: <http://www.rferl.org/content/report-kurds-prevent-arabs-from-returning-to-disputed-areas/26870711.html> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
RAND, 2014. The future of health care in the Kurdistan Region—Iraq. [online] Available at: <http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/MG1100/MG1148-1/RAND_MG1148-1.pdf> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Rarick, C., Winter, G., Barczyk, C., & Merkt, E. 2014. Iraqi and Kurdish cultural values in the semi-autonomous state of Kurdistan. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 14(3), 59-65.
Reinl, J. 2014a. Iraqi president: Kurdish state will take ‘very long time.’ Rudaw. [online] 26 September 2014. Available at: <http://rudaw.net/english/middleeast/iraq/260920143> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Reinl, J. 2014b. UN Warns of Breakdown in Erbil-Baghdad Relations. Rudaw. [online] 23 July 2104. Available at: <http://rudaw.net/english/middleeast/iraq/230720141> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Reuters, 2014. Iraq’s Kurdistan seeks to strengthen relationship with Iran. Al-Akhbar English. [online] 17 December 2014. Available at: <http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/22923> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Richards, G. 2013. Across the Zagros: Iranian influence in Iraqi Kurdistan. The Guardian. [online] 21 November 2013. Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/iran-influence-iraqi-kurdistan> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
Richelson, J. 2004. Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 80. [online] 11 February 2004. Available at: <http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Rifkind, M., 1996. The work of the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq. The Guardian. [online] 28 June 1996. Available at: <http://fas.org/news/iraq/1997/01/9701-fco-unscom.htm> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Rogg, I., & Rimscha, H. 2007. The Kurds as parties to and victims of conflicts in Iraq. International Review of the Red Cross. [online] Available at: <https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/irrc-868_rogg.pdf> [Accessed 6 April 2105].
Rudaw, 2014. Kurdish official: Baghdad impeding weapons supplies to Kurds. [online] 27 November 2014. Available at: <http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/27112014> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Russell, M., 2014. The Middle East and South Asia 2014. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Salih, C., 2014. Kurdistan isn’t about to leave Iraq amid ISIS fighting. TIME [online]6 August 2014. Available at: <http://time.com/3083172/iraq-kurdistan-independence/> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Scherrer, C. P. 2014. Iraq: Genocide by sanctions (Penerbit USM). Penerbit USM. [online] 23 May 2015. Available at: <http://www.openbooke.com/ebook/iraq-genocide-by-sanctions-penerbit-usm.html> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Shareef, M., & Janroj, Y. K. 2014. Why an independent Kurdistan makes sense. OpenDemocracy. [online] Available at: <http://search.proquest.com/docview/1537883265?accountid=35812> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Sinclair, C., & Smets, K. 2014. Media freedoms and covert diplomacy: Turkey challenges Europe over Kurdish broadcasts. Global Media and Communication, 10(3), 319-331.
Solomon, E., and Dombey, D., 2014. PKK ‘terrorists’ crucial to fight against ISIS. FT [online] 15 August 2014. Available at: <http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4a6e5b90-2460-11e4-be8e-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3XTaFKXX0> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
Spyer, J. 2013. Say it again. Kurdish independence now. The Tower Magazine. [online] September 2013. Available at: <http://www.thetower.org/article/freedom-for-the-kurds-now/> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
Stansfield, G. R. V. 2003. Iraqi Kurdistan. Political development and emergent democracy. USA: RoutledgeCurzon.
Tawfik-Shukor, A. & Khoshnaw, H. 2010. The impact of health system governance and policy processes on health services in Iraqi Kurdistan. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 10, 14.
Terry, A. J. 2011. Clinical research for the doctor of nursing practice. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Today’s Zaman, 2014. Turkish security forces clash with Kurds as PKK sends aid to Kobani. [online] 21 September 2014. Available at: <http://www.todayszaman.com/anasayfa_turkish-security-forces-clash-with-kurds-as-pkk-sends-aid-to-kobani_359364.html> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
Traub, J. 2007. The UN and Iraq: moving forward? The Stanley Foundation [policy analysis brief]. Available at: <http://www.stanleyfoundation.org/publications/pab/Traub_PAB_1007.pdf> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
The Economist, 2012. A tortuous triangle. [online] 19 December 2012. Available at: <http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21568760-governments-turkey-iraq-and-iraqi-kurdistan-play-dangerous-game> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
The Economist, 2014. The Kurds and Iraq: a winning hand [online] 21 June 2014. Available at: <http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21604628-kurds-are-benefiting-mess-iraq-will-independence-follow> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
The Kurdish Globe, 2014. International Media see Kurdistan stepping toward independence. [online] 30 June 2014. Available at: http://search.proquest.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/docview/1541553646?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=35812 [Accessed 10 April 2015].
The Kurdish Globe, 2015. Iraqi Kurdistan: Pope and Italy’s Prime Minister pledge further assistance. [online] 9 March 2015. Available at: <http://unpo.org/article/18026> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
Tokmajyak, A. 2012. Turkey, Syria, and the Kurds. The Washington Review of Turkish and Eurasian Affairs. [online] April 2012. Available at: <http://www.thewashingtonreview.org/articles/turkey-syria-and-the-kurds.html> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
UN Assistance Mission for Iraq, 2014. UN calls for urgent cooperation between Baghdad and Erbil in the wake of Sinjar tragedy. [online] 3 August 2014. Available at: <http://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/un-calls-urgent-cooperation-between-baghdad-and-erbil-wake-sinjar-tragedy> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
UN News Centre, 2013. Iraq: UN agency airlifts supplies for Syrian refugee children, families in Erbil. [online] 2 September 2013. Available at: <http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=45752#.VSTVN_msXDY> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
UN News Centre, 2014a. UN agencies ramp up much-needed aid in Iraq amid ‘alarming rate’ or displacement. [online] 4 September 2014. Available at: <http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=48640#.VS-mLfysUgg> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
UN News Centre, 2014b. UN envoy welcomes deal between Iraqi, Kurdish region on oil, finances. [online] 2 December 2014. Available at: <http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49491#.VSUXiPmsXDZ> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
UN News Centre, 2014c. Ban welcomes deal between Iraq, Kurdish region on resolving budget, oil export issues. [online] 13 November 2014. Available at: <http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49329#.VSZrB_msXDY> [Accessed 9 April 2015].
UN Peacekeeping, 2014. The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq. [online] Available at: <http://www.betterworldcampaign.org/un-peacekeeping/missions/iraq.html> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
UN Volunteers. 2014. World Humanitarian Day: UN volunteers advance humanitarian work around the world. [online] 19 August 2014. Available at: <http://www.unv.org/en/news-resources/news/doc/world-humanitarian-day-un.html> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
UNDP, 2015. About UNDP in Iraq. [online] Available at: <http://www.iq.undp.org/content/iraq/en/home/operations/about_undp.html> [Accessed 6 April 2015].
UNESCO Office for Iraq, 2013. The United Nations launches campaign to bring Syrian refugee children back to school. [online] 13 November 2013. Available at <http://www.unesco.org/new/en/iraq-office/about-this-office/single-view/news/the_united_nations_launches_campaign_to_bring_syrian_refugee_children_back_to_school/#.VSTVPvmsXDY> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
UNESCO Office for Iraq, 2015. UNESCO opens new secondary school at Baharka Camp in Kurdistan. [online] 17 March 2015. Available at: <http://www.unesco.org/new/en/iraq-office/about-this-office/single-view/news/unesco_opens_new_secondary_school_at_baharka_camp_in_kurdistan/#.VSTkoPmsXDY> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
UNHCR, 2015. UNHCR warns of bleaker future for refugees as Syrian conflict enters 5th year [online]12 March 2015. Available at: <http://www.unhcr.org/55016fff6.html> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
UNIEAT, 2014. 2014 governate council elections in the Kurdistan region. Developed by the UN Integrated Electoral Assistance Team.
United Nations Iraq, 2014. UN calls for urgent cooperation between Baghdad and Erbil in the wake of Sinjar tragedy. [online] 3 August 2014. Available at: <http://uniraq.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2305:un-calls-for-urgent-cooperation-between-baghdad-and-erbil-in-the-wake-of-sinjar-tragedy&Itemid=605&lang=en> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
United Nations Iraq, 2015. DSRSG Bursztin welcomes continued commitment of the government of Iraq and the Kurdistan regional government to the oil agreement [online] 20 March 2015. Available at: <http://www.uniraq.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3492:dsrsg-busztin-welcomes-continued-commitment-of-the-government-of-iraq-and-the-kurdistan-regional-government-to-the-oil-agreement&Itemid=605&lang=en> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
United Nations Iraq, 2015a. Integrated Coordination Office for Development & Humanitarian Affairs (ICODHA). [online] Available at: <http://www.uniraq.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=951:development-and-humanitarian-support&Itemid=619&lang=en> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
United Nations Iraq, 2015b. Launching of the “HUMANITARIAN SUPPORT TO IDPS IN IRAQ THROUGH PROVISION OF DURABLE SHELTER” Project funded by the Government of Japan. [online] 30 March 2015. Available at <http://www.uniraq.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3549:launching-of-the-humanitarian-support-to-idps-in-iraq-through-provision-of-durable-shelter-project-funded-by-the-government-of-japan&Itemid=605&lang=en> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
United Nations Iraq, 2015c. Reaching for one year polio free: National polio vaccination campaigns continue. [online] 4 March 2015. Available at: <http://www.uniraq.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3364:reaching-for-one-year-polio-free-national-polio-vaccination-campaigns-continue&Itemid=605&lang=en> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
United Nations Iraq, 2015d. After fleeing violence, Iraq’s displaced children face a deadly winter. [online] Available at: <http://www.uniraq.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2828:after-fleeing-violence-iraq-s-displaced-children-face-a-deadly-winter&Itemid=606&lang=en> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
UNPO, 2007. Iraqi Kurdistan: peaceful Kurds pressured from all sides. [online] 25 October 2007. Available at: <http://unpo.org/article/7276> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
USAID, 2014. Iraq complex emergency fact sheet #3. [online] 28 August 2014. Available at: <http://www.usaid.gov/crisis/iraq/fy14/fs03> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Van den Berghe, A. 2014. Schools open in Iraqi Kurdistan … But for refugees not students. Global Issues. [online] 7 October 2014. Available at: <http://www.globalissues.org/news/2014/10/07/20130> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Voller, Y. 2014. The Kurdish liberation movement in Iraq: From insurgency to statehood. London, UK: Routledge.
Walker, J. 2010. Service, satisfaction, and climate: perspectives on management in English language learning. Bingley: BRILL.
WFP, 2014. Emergency Food Assistance for Iraqi IDPs. [online] 5 September 2014. Available at: <http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ep/wfp267771.pdf> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
WFP and UNHCR, 2014. WFP UNHCR Joint Assessment mission: Kurdistan region – Iraq. [online]. Available at: <http://www.unhcr.org/54f81d079.pdf> [Accessed 16 April 2015].
Whitman, R. G., & Juncos, A. E. 2014. Challenging Events, Diminishing Influence? Relations with the Wider Europe. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(S1), 157-169.
World Health Organization, 2014. WHO accelerates preparedness plans to cover winterization which will impact health needs of the internally displaced population in Iraq. ReliefWeb. [online] 10 November 2014. Available at: <http://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/who-accelerates-preparedness-plans-cover-winterization-which-will-impact-health-needs> [Accessed 7 April 2015].
Zebari, A. H. 2013. Child-protection laws on table in Iraqi Kurdistan. Al-Monitor. [online] 23 April 2013. Available at: <http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/04/child-protection-laws-iraqi-kurdistan.html#> [Accessed 8 April 2015].
Appendices
Appendix A Questionnaire: UN Diplomacy in Kurdistan 2011-2014
Dear Colleagues!
You are requested to participate in research dedicated to determining the role of UN diplomacy in Kurdistan Region in Iraq in 2011-2014, efficiency of UN Offices in a variety of aspects of Kurdistan’s social, political, and economic development. Participation is voluntary and confidential; you may withdraw from research at any moment. Data provided by you in this survey will be used for research purposes only, and will not be disseminated to anyone except the researcher. Handing in the completed questionnaire is regarded as an informed consent for participation in research. Please answer all questions below by ticking the right answer, and give textual responses to three open-ended questions at the end of the questionnaire.
Information about you:
- Your age: _______
- Your gender:
- Male
- Female
- Name of your UN mission: __________________________
- How long have you been staying in Kurdistan so far? _____________________
Information about your UN mission diplomatic role in Kurdistan
- What is the purpose of your mission in Kurdistan (you may indicate several responses):
- Humanitarian needs assistance
- Military security assistance
- Children’s issues
- Economic development
- Diplomatic negotiations
- Health and social care
- Construction/housing/infrastructure assistance
- Are there other missions working on the same purpose as you do?
- Yes
- No
- I do not know
- How would you assess your mission’s effectiveness in accomplishing its goal in helping Kurdistan?
- Not efficient
- Quite efficient
- Moderate
- Very efficient
- I do not know
Information about UN’s role in Kurdistan’s development:
- Do you think the UN is overall effective in helping Kurdistan to develop?
- Yes
- No
- I do not know
- Do you think UN Offices are sufficient for the established purposes?
- Yes, there are enough UN officials here
- No, there should be fewer UN officials
- No, there should be more UN officials
- I do not know
- In which fields do you think the UN was most efficient in 2011-2014?
- Humanitarian needs assistance
- Military security assistance
- Children’s issues
- Economic development
- Diplomatic negotiations
- Health and social care
- Construction/housing/infrastructure assistance
- In which fields do you think the UN was least efficient in 2011-2014?
- Humanitarian needs assistance
- Military security assistance
- Children’s issues
- Economic development
- Diplomatic negotiations
- Health and social care
- Construction/housing/infrastructure assistance
- Do you think the UN could work more efficiently in Kurdistan?
- Yes
- No
- I do not know
- If yes for question 12 – please name the factors that reduce UN efficiency in Kurdistan (if no for question 12 – skip this question)
- Security situation
- Inconsistencies in KRG’s vision of the country’s development
- Iraq-Kurdistan diplomacy problems
- Kurdistan’s diplomatic problems with Turkey, Syria, and Iran
- KRG’s wish for independent representation in international negotiations
- PKK’s terrorist activities
- ISIS spread in the region
- Inability of the UN to solve pressing problems of Kurdistan (e.g., healthcare, social needs)
- Other _____________________________________
- There are no problems
- I do not know
- Do you agree that the role of the UN should reduce, and KRG should represent itself in international negotiations?
- Yes
- No
- I do not know
- Do you think the role of the UN was important in Iraq-KRG negotiations?
- Not important
- Of little importance
- Fairly important
- Important
- Very important
- I do not know
- What was the role of the UN on PKK negotiations with KRG?
- Not important
- Of little importance
- Fairly important
- Important
- Very important
- I do not know
- What was the role of the UN in establishing security and protection for Kurds from military aggression of neighboring countries, Iraq, and ISIS?
- Not important
- Of little importance
- Fairly important
- Important
- Very important
- I do not know
- Do you believe that the UN should continue working in Kurdistan on the same issues?
- Yes, I think the direction is right
- No, I think we should focus on different issues
- We should preserve focus on the same issues, but should add new issues
- I do not know
- What diplomatic achievements did, in your opinion, the UN achieve in Kurdistan in 2011-2014?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
- What did the UN, in your opinion, fail to achieve in Kurdistan in 2011-2014?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
- What would you recommend to the UN Offices to do to become more effective in the next couple of years, and to solve Kurdish issues more productively?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for your attention!
Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.