Alwaght- The leaders of Iraq’s Kurdistan region finally held their controversial independence referendum on September 25 after several months of campaigning. The Iraqi Kurds will certainly need to garner support of the international powers after their vote of independence to pursue their separatist goals amid vehement opposition to their measures by the neighboring countries and the resultant consequences.
During the past two decades, the US has been the key international supporter and ally of the Kurds of Iraq. The Washington-established no-fly zone over the northern Iraq during the first (Persian) Gulf War in the early 1990s effectively contributed to establishment of the autonomous region of Kurdistan. Leaders of Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) are now expecting the same support. In fact, amid resounding waves of objections from various sides to the separatist campaign, the KRG officials are especially counting on the help from Washington.
In the meantime, the Department of State on the day of poll issued a statement, maintaining that “the United States is deeply disappointed that the Kurdistan Regional Government decided to conduct today a unilateral referendum on independence, including in areas outside of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region.”
“The unilateral referendum will greatly complicate the Kurdistan Regional Government's relationship with both the Government of Iraq and neighboring states. The fight against ISIS is not over, and extremist groups are seeking to exploit instability and discord”, the statement went on saying, adding that the US backed a “united, federal, democratic and prosperous Iraq.”
A question looks convenient at the time: Why is the US ostensibly showing no support for the Kurdistan region's breakaway measures in the present time while the Washington cooperation with the Iraqi Kurds is growing more and more?
To understand the US stance on the Monday plebiscite, the place of the Iraqi Kurds in the American strategy for the West Asia region and especially Iraq needs to be brought into spotlight.
Since 2003, the year that the US along with its allies within a military coalition invaded Saddam Hussein's Iraq and occupied it, the White House has been continuously working on securing long-term presence in Iraq through various ways. US presence is aimed at curbing the Iranian influence in Iraq and producing an allied government in the neighboring Iraq as part of a broader strategy for limiting Tehran's regional sway.
The Iraqi Kurds happen to serve a significant part of this scenario as they are set for use as tools for implementation policy and pursuit of American interests. In fact, the US for short and mid-term plans needs contacts and work with two sides of the dispute, namely Baghdad and Erbil. When it came to referendum stance, the US leaders took such a conservative standing and relatively expressed advocacy for a united Iraq for the aim of contentment of the central Iraqi government. But the pro-union statement was carefully written in a style not to make the Kurds totally disappointed with the future support of Washington for them in next challenges.
The statement read that the nonbinding referendum will not affect the “historic” relations with the Iraqi Kurdistan region and “the United States opposes violence and unilateral moves by any party to alter boundaries.” But the White House has pushed ahead its indirect backing for the separation poll through the role played by the Israeli regime.
Despite talk of Iraq cohesion support, the certain long-term American strategy in relation to Iraq lies in split of the country and aiding formation of a Kurdish state in the region. The US has reasons for and interests in an independent Kurdistan, including:
1. Setting up more military bases in the region: Struggling to guarantee its stay in West Asia, the US is pursuing establishing further military bases, especially next to the Iranian borders. It now has a military base in the autonomous region in Ankawa, a suburb city of Erbil the capital. Formation of a Kurdistan state and signing military and security pacts with Erbil leaders allows the Americans to set up additional bases and enjoy more freedom in their administration. This is helpful as it to a large extent cuts Washington’s reliance on the Turkish Incirlic airbase and thus opens Washington hand to bargain more powerfully and put more strains on Ankara when it comes to discussing bilateral issues.
2. Kurdish region’s gas and oil reserves: Kurdistan of Iraq is an oil and gas-rich region. This suits the core of the US interests in West Asia which is bringing under control the outflow of energy to the global markets for its significance to a US-dominated global economy.
3. Kurdistan as a market and investment place for American companies: Kurdistan region can provide the US companies with a convenient market and investment opportunities thanks to its high oil exports income and consumptive markets. Washington will benefit from these privileges offered by the Kurdish leaders in case of engagement in an alliance with an independent state of Kurdistan.
4. Continued destabilization of the region: The central government in Iraq has strongly opposed the split steps, and officials asserted that Baghdad will firmly respond to the move. Furthermore, given the regional ethnic diversity and distribution of the Kurds in Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Iran, foundation of a Kurdish state will definitely unleash an array of additional crises to the region that largely serve the American interests and its closest ally, i.e. Israeli regime.
