University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 1-1-2012 Democratic Transitions in Divided States: The Case of Iraq Kara Leigh Kingma University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, Islamic World and Near East History Commons, and the Political History Commons Recommended Citation Kingma, Kara Leigh, "Democratic Transitions in Divided States: The Case of Iraq" (2012). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 848. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/848 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DEMOCRATIC TRANSITIONS IN DIVIDED STATES: THE CASE OF IRAQ __________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Josef Korbel School of International Studies University of Denver __________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts __________ by Kara L. Kingma June 2012 Advisor: Nader Hashemi ©Copyright by Kara L. Kingma 2012 All Rights Reserved Author: Kara L. Kingma Title: DEMOCRATIC TRANSITIONS IN DIVIDED STATES: THE CASE OF IRAQ Advisor: Nader Hashemi Degree Date: June 2012 Abstract Many theorists have posited that democratic transitions in states divided along ethnic, racial, or religious lines are accompanied by violent conflict and thus unlikely to succeed. The end of authoritarian rule in Iraq and the introduction of democracy by the United States has been followed by many such challenges, and it has been argued that the artificial Iraqi state and its Kurdish, Sunni, and Shia communities does not possess the unity as required by democratic government. However, an informed analysis of Iraqi democracy requires attention to the role of its authoritarian leaders and war and economic hardships in making Iraq’s ethnosectarian communities largely competitive and conflictual. Furthermore, it is possible that continued participation in democratic institutions and processes, though imperfect, may build support for the system and legitimize it as the means to make political decisions. As a consequence, Iraqis may increasingly identify with the state and its democratic system rather than their more rigid, and at times conflicting, ethnosectarian identities. ii Table of Contents Chapter One: Introduction to the Analysis ......................................................................... 1 Chapter Two: Conflict During Democratization – A General Summary ......................... 10 Chapter Three: Identity in Iraq – A Historical Overview ................................................. 30 Chapter Four: U.S. Mistakes Post-2003 ........................................................................... 57 Chapter Five: The Kurdish Issue ...................................................................................... 84 Chapter Six: Toward Consolidation? .............................................................................. 107 Chapter Seven: Conclusion ............................................................................................. 124 References ....................................................................................................................... 131 iii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE ANALYSIS The issue of identity and its effect on statehood and governance is important, especially in those countries whose populations are divided along ethnic, religious, or tribal lines. This matter is particularly relevant in the Middle East, given that many of its states were formed relatively arbitrarily by European leaders after World War I, with little regard to how communities were divided or combined within new territorial boundaries. The fledgling democracy in Iraq is currently facing challenges related to this issue as its leaders attempt to fashion a more equitable and functioning government out of distinct and sometimes conflicting groups. It is the hope of these leaders and of American policymakers that democracy will offer representation to all Iraqis while also promoting loyalty to the state rather than to more divisive subidentities. I will argue that although American policymakers overestimated Iraqi national unity in their initial attempts to introduce democracy, the democratization process may itself offer the means by which a unified state is formed. In doing so, I look at the nature of coalition building and cooperation among Iraqi political groupings and the pressing economic and security issues that have forced such compromise. Furthermore, I will contend that the successful “doing” of democracy may lead the Iraqi people to place trust in the democratic system and see it as offering the political means to conflict resolution and economic and social progress. Though Iraqis may be critical of the government in terms of efficiency and responsiveness, it is possible to argue that most have come to 1 understand that their political and economic futures, both as individuals and communities, are tied to participation in the democratic process. In “Beyond Identity,” Rogers Brubaker and Frederick Cooper assert: …identity denotes a fundamental and consequential sameness among members of a group or a category. This may be understood objectively (as a sameness ‘in itself’) or subjectively (as an experienced, felt, or perceived sameness).1 Their statement captures the fluid nature of identity, as it can change over time depending upon individuals’ perceptions under various circumstances that call forth their identification with one group or another. Brubaker and Cooper see identity as the basis on which collective action can take place, and a product of that very action.2 Individuals who view themselves as part of an ethnic community or as citizens of the larger state will thus act with other members of the particular group while simultaneously strengthening the concept of the very group within which they are acting. A number of influential political theorists have set forth ideas as to how identity, whether based on the state or otherwise, affects state building and the formation of democratic government. As Robert A. Dahl notes: …the democratic process presupposes a unity. The criteria of the democratic process presuppose the rightfulness of the unit itself. If the unit itself is not considered proper or rightful – if its scope or domain is not justifiable – then it cannot be made rightful simply by democratic procedures.3 In his famous work, “Transitions to Democracy,” Dankwart A. Rustow asserts that rather than economic or cultural explanations, what matters most for the process of democratization is the single background condition of national unity. In explaining this unity, he writes, “It simply means that the vast majority of citizens in a democracy-to-be 1 Rogers Brubaker and Frederick Cooper, “Beyond ‘Identity’”, Theory and Society 29 (2000): 7. 2 Brubaker and Cooper, 7. 3 Robert A. Dahl, Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 207. 2 must have no doubt or mental reservations as to which political community they belong to.”4 It seems both authors contend that a successful democratic government requires, at the least, a defined territorial state that is agreed upon by all of its members as fitting and legitimate. This is a salient issue for Iraq, and not only for the Kurds, as many Sunnis and Shia also seem to question whether they owe their allegiance to the larger Iraqi nation or to their smaller respective communities. Iraq is a particularly interesting case given its history as a tenuous political entity created out of distinct and at times conflicting former provinces of the Ottoman Empire. After its independence from Great Britain in 1932, successive leaders worked to foster a common nationalism among Iraq’s citizens. As early as 1933, however, King Faisal lamented: …there is still…no Iraqi people but unimaginable masses of human beings, devoid of any patriotic idea, imbued with religious traditions and absurdities, connected by no common tie, giving ear to evil, prone to anarchy, and perpetually ready to rise against any government whatsoever.5 This situation seemed to have changed little after six decades of national independence, for in 1982 a member of the Baathist inner cadre echoed King Faisal’s sentiments, writing as reported by Adeed Dawisha that “secessionism, sectarianism and tribalism…are tearing the unity of [Iraqi] society to pieces.”6 Perhaps most notable in Iraq’s modern, pre-democratic history was Saddam Hussein’s manipulation of identity for personal and political gain. Saddam’s Baathist Party initially offered hope to Iraqis as it promised “a progressive, nationalist, and anti- 4 Dankwart A. Rustow, “Transitions to Democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model,” Comparative Politics 2.3 (1970): 350. 5 Adeed Dawisha, “Identity and Political Survival in Saddam’s Iraq,” Middle East Journal 53 (1999): 554. 6 Dawisha, 554. 3 imperialist future,” 7 as well as equality between the various religious communities. However, Saddam used Baathism to create a nationalism that was, above all, loyal to himself. He then went on to emphasize different aspects of Iraqi identity at different points in time depending on which was most politically expedient. For example, he stressed Arab identity during the Iran-Iraq war, Islamic identity during the first