Resolving the Defacto Statehood Dilemma in Iraq: Evolving Sovereignty Norms and Post-Modern Federalism
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
RESOLVING THE DEFACTO STATEHOOD DILEMMA IN IRAQ: EVOLVING SOVEREIGNTY NORMS AND POST-MODERN FEDERALISM Natalie J. Hausknecht A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 2013 Full metadata for this item is available in St Andrews Research Repository at: http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/3623 This item is protected by original copyright Resolving the Defacto Statehood Dilemma in Iraq: Evolving Sovereignty Norms and Post-modern Federalism Natalie J Hausknecht 1. Candidate’s declarations: I, Natalie Hausknecht, hereby certify that this thesis, which is approximately 79,345 words in length, has been written by me, that it is the record of work carried out by me and that it has not been submitted in any previous application for a higher degree. I was admitted as a research student in September 2007 and as a candidate for the degree of D.Phil. in 2008; the higher study for which this is a record was carried out in the University of St Andrews between 2007 and 2009. Date 11/27/12 signature of candidate 2. Supervisor’s declaration: I hereby certify that the candidate has fulfilled the conditions of the Resolution and Regulations appropriate for the degree of D.Phil. in the University of St Andrews and that the candidate is qualified to submit this thesis in application for that degree. Date 27/11/12 signature of supervisor 3. Permission for electronic publication: (to be signed by both candidate and supervisor) In submitting this thesis to the University of St Andrews we understand that we are giving permission for it to be made available for use in accordance with the regulations of the University Library for the time being in force, subject to any copyright vested in the work not being affected thereby. We also understand that the title and the abstract will be published, and that a copy of the work may be made and supplied to any bona fide library or research worker, that my thesis will be electronically accessible for personal or research use unless exempt by award of an embargo as requested below, and that the library has the right to migrate my thesis into new electronic forms as required to ensure continued access to the thesis. We have obtained any third-party copyright permissions that may be required in order to allow such access and migration, or have requested the appropriate embargo below. The following is an agreed request by candidate and supervisor regarding the electronic publication of this thesis: (iii) Embargo on both [all or part] of printed copy and electronic copy for the same fixed period of 5 years (maximum five) on the following ground(s): publication would preclude future publication; publication would be in breach of law or ethics Date 11/27/12 signature of candidate signature of supervisor A supporting statement for a request for an embargo must be included with the submissions of the draft copy of the thesis. Where part of a thesis is to be embargoed, please specify the part and the reasons. Page 2 of 239 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1) Introduction: Evolving Sovereignty Norms and the Defacto State………………..…4 2) The Foundation and Norms of the Modern State System……………………….…...16 3) Historical Overview of the Defacto Kurdish State……………………………………65 4) Laying the Foundation for Resolution: Negotiation of a Decentralized, Asymmetrical, Federal State…………………..………………………………………………………...84 5) Going Astray: The Breakdown of Consensus on Post-Modern Federalism………..119 6) Getting Back on Track: A Federal Resolution to Conflict-Ridden State-building and the Foundation for Constructive Peace in Post-war Iraq…………………………..154 7) Conclusion: Re-building the Iraqi State……………………………………………..185 8) Addendum A-D………………………………………………………………………..196 9) Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………...200 Page 3 of 239 Abstract Through a case study of Iraq, this dissertation examines one manifestation of the increasingly prevalent phenomenon in struggling de jure states of the establishment of alternative forms of political sovereignty embodied by defacto states. Tracing Iraq's failed state-building endeavor to the adoption of an ill-suited Weberian model of state-building that idealized order and centralization to the exclusion of Iraq's Kurdish minority, it argues that much of the contestation and instability witnessed by the Iraqi state since its birth into modern statehood has stemmed from an effort to create a state inimical to the very real dispersal of social and political capital endemic to its society. The result has been continual coups, instability, and civil conflict that ultimately defined Iraq’s modern history. Using this framework, the contention is defended that democracy cannot survive in Iraq without the preservation of its federal character, which alone guarantees the social, economic, political, and coercive dispersal of power necessary to maintain a free expression of Iraq’s diverse interests. By restricting the responsibilities and obligations of the central state to more manageable tasks while dually creating a mechanism for a minority buy-in, federal institutions have pulled previously contentious social sources of power into legitimate state institutions and laid the foundation for a genuine, inclusive state-building process that will eventually benefit all Iraqis. While recognizing that this model is still contested by some leaders in Baghdad, the dissertation traces the path of the two key outstanding issues left unresolved --the exploitation of Iraq’s vast natural resources and the territorial delineation of its disputed internal boundaries -- to argue for a resolution that will bolster Iraqi federalism without sacrificing the hope of greater unity. Page 4 of 239 INTRODUCTION Evolving Sovereignty Norms in Post-War Iraq: Resolving the Defacto Statehood Dilemma The March 2003 invasion of Iraq by American-led international forces brought to more prominent attention one of the most pressing dilemmas in twenty-first century political science: the establishment of political order in large swathes of the globe. Garnering the international community’s increased attention due to evolving security concerns in the post-September 11th world, the challenge presented by the collapse or failure of states was revealed to only marginally brush the surface of a much larger problem presented by the disappointing outcome of over five decades of state-building in much of Asia and Africa. In fact, many ‘late developing’ nations have been unable to establish a sense of popular national identity, remain incapable of projecting authority throughout their territory, and still struggle to enact stable political turnovers.1 A significant number of states, possibly even a majority, have stagnated as “quasi-states,”2 recognized for their juridical right to rule over a given territory and granted sovereignty by international norms, yet incapable of performing some of the most basic functions attributed to the modern state internally. After almost a century, many have only briefly and sporadically exercised the sort of monopoly on legitimate force and universal control over territory envisioned by early European state-theorists. While never witnessing the catastrophic collapse seen in Somalia, Cambodia or Afghanistan, they have failed to project authority over their entire territory, often facing sustained resistance among important sub- sections of their own populations. Far removed from the unitary actors of classic Weberian state philosophy, this failure to create stable, authoritative states has been most vividly symbolized by the rise of what has variously been referred to as a ‘state-within-state,’3 “defacto state,”4 insurgent state,5 or, confusingly quasi-state. The inverse of Jacksonian quasi-states, these political entities maintain the ability to execute control over their territories and populations, but lack the juridical status of statehood granted through recognition by the international community of states. Given the 1 Kaplan, Coming Anarchy; Kaldor, New and Old Wars; Collapsing states are no longer isolated incidents. According to Fund for Peace’s 2010 Failed States Index, 37 countries are at “alert” for collapse, another 90 are at “warning.” Only 47, a minority, met the criteria for either a moderate or stable classification. 2Jackson, Quasi-States 3Kingston and Spears, States-Within-States 4 Pegg, International Society 5McColl, “Insurgent State,” 613-31. Page 5 of 239 underlying weakness of many juridical states and the concomitant failure to establish the legitimacy needed to bolster and define state capacity vis-a vis society, most exemplified by society's authorization of violence as “accepted within as a matter of law,”6 defacto states have unsurprisingly become more common. While many states have thus shown a remarkable ability to wield brutal overt force against dissent, this has often thinly masked a profound structural dissonance where the “basic need that human beings want units such as nation-states to satisfy: to give them a feeling of ‘belonging' and identity with the group”7 remained a theoretical construct for important segments of their populations who just as often found this through membership in resistance movements or counter-nationalisms. The Jacksonian quasi-state and the “defacto state” are thus closely intertwined. Defacto states rely on the political vacuum left by the state-building failure of Jacksonian quasi-states, in so doing, challenging the state through their claim to ultimately