JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 17, 2020 IRAQI KURDS, PERSECUTION AND STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE Pasar Abdulkareem Fendi1, Salawati Mat Basir2, Span Jameel Mustafa3 and Sarsam Khaleel Shwani4 1 Faculty of Law, The National University of Malaysia. And Scientific Research and Development Center- Nawroz University-Kurdistan Regional, Iraq 2 Faculty of Law, The National University of Malaysia 3 Department of Law, College of Law and political science, Nawroz University, Iraq 4 Department of Media Techniques, Erbil Technical Administrative College, Erbil Polytechnic University, Kurdistan region of Iraq Received: 10 April 2020 Revised and Accepted: 26 June 2020 Abstract: The present paper contextualises the discussion by examining the case of the Iraqi Kurds. The discussion begins with an overview of the origin of the Kurds and Kurdistan on the other hand Other major developments torch-lighted in this paper include the Kurdish elections of 1992, the establishment of a Kurdistan regional government and the adoption of a new Iraqi constitution in 2005, which recognises the Kurdistan Region as a federal entity within the Republic of Iraq. Key constitutional disputes between the Kurdistan region and the Iraqi federal government are also discussed. On the other hand, a highpoint of the paper is the 2017 referendum for independence held in the Kurdistan region in which the Kurds voted overwhelmingly to separate from Iraq. The rest of the paper examines after the referendum. The paper ends with a summary of the situation in the Kurdistan region after the 2017 independence referendum. Keywords: Kurdish, Uprising, Parliament Election, establishment government, federalism, independence referendum, referendum Sanctions. I. INTRODUCTION Following the Kurdish elections of 1992, an autonomous government was established for the region, which is recognised by the new Iraqi constitution of 2005 as a federal unit of Iraq. The end of the Saddam regime in 2003 was expected to improve the region’s condition. Unfortunately, the Kurds have continued to suffer marginalisation and neglect of their constitutional rights by the Iraqi government, despite their contributions to national building, even in the face of extreme repression. The continuing oppression compelled the Kurdistan region to hold a referendum in September of 2017. The Kurds voted overwhelmingly to secede from Iraq, with mixed international reaction. In response, the Iraqi government dispatched military troops to the region, banned all international flights and withheld oil revenues, as well as workers’ salaries, weakening the region’s economy. Today, with persistent tension between the KRG and their Iraqi federal counterpart over the status of disputed territories, allocation of federal budget, as well as ownership and commercialisation of the country’s oil resources, among other issues, prospects for a political solution to the present crisis look dim. II. KURDS AND KURDISTAN: AN OVERVIEW The Kurds and the Kurdistan territory have historically been dominated by different imperial powers. An example is the Ottoman Empire. Ottoman sultans ruled over what was previously known as Mesopotamia, and in recent times called Iraq and Kurdistan. Some scholars, indeed, trace the modern history of the Kurds to the rise of the Ottoman Empire. Geopolitically, it is believed that the Kurdish territory was once under the control of both the Ottoman and the Persian Empires. 662 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 17, 2020 According to some historical accounts, the Kurds are an ancient people, who, at different eras, suffered invasion and domination from numerous foreign groups, such as the Armenians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, Hittites, Mongols, Parthians and Persians, forcing them into constant migration. This broad area is referred to as Kurdistan, which is believed to have first emerged in the 12th century. The word, “Kurdistan,” itself, is the subject of controversy. For some, it means the land of the Kurds, with “Kurd” representing the ethnic inhabitants and “istan” standing for “the land of” (McDowall, 2004). III. KURDISH UPRINSING, ESTABLISHMENT OF SAFE HAVENS AND FORMATION OF A REGIONAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE KURDS 2.1 Kurdistan Region from 1990 to 2003 Kurdish uprising began in Raniyah, a town close to Sulaymaniyah on 5 March of 1991. The Kurds mounted assaults on the establishments of the much dreaded state security police and dislodged the Iraqi government in Kurdish areas such as Dohok, Erbil, Kirkuk and Sulaymaniyah. Attacks then spread to other key Kurdish cities. Through the coalition provided by the IKF, the Kurdish military force, Peshmerga, meaning those who face death, effectively managed the uprising. As a result of their brave efforts, the Kurds eventually gained control over Kurdistan on 19 March of 1991(John Bulloch and Harvey Morris, 1993). In the course of the uprising and even before it started, a good number of mustashars, as well as Jash forces, who were Kurdish militias fighting for the Iraqi government, switched allegiance and joined the IKF-controlled Peshmerga. They became sure that the Saddam regime had been incapacitated, even though some of them still remained with the Iraqi forces (Graham Brown, 1999). From 28 March of 1990 onwards, after Saddam deployed Iraqi troops into Kurdish areas, the Kurds were forcefully removed from key cities and sent to mountain areas on Iranian and Turkish borders. Reminded of the rein of terror suffered from the Iraqi regime during the 1988 Anfal campaign and concerned about their personal survival, about 2 million civilian Kurds escaped to mountains covered in snow (M. Malone, 2006). As the international community began to receive news of Kurdish refugees battling with cold and hunger in the mountains, there was global outcry. Foreign governments came under pressure to take military and humanitarian measures to alleviate their plight and possibly set up a “safe haven” for refugees in the northern part of Iraq (Thomashausen, 2002). On 28 April of 1991, aid started to arrive, catering for about a million Kurds left in extreme conditions at the border with Turkey (Nicholas J. Wheeler, 1992). Foreign aid agencies embarked on a large-scale assistance programme to improve the plight of Kurdish refugees. In view of the intolerable state of affairs described above, Western powers, led by the U.S., the UK and France, set up a safe area under their control, the so-called “Operation Provide Comfort” (David M. Malone). The allied powers eventually forced Iraqi forces to pull out of Kurdish areas, which they declared a safe haven in April of 1991. It can be said that the international intervention was successful as it ensured access to food, clothing and shelter for Kurdish refugees, as well as safe passage to their abodes in the north of Iraq. (W. Rudd, 2004) Surely, it was in a bid to end the brutal treatment of the Iraqi Kurds and their deplorable conditions that the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 688 on 5 April of 1991 (M. Malone, 2006). The resolution decried the violent repression of Iraqi civilians, particularly in Kurdish areas, which posed a unique humanitarian dilemma to the international community. The cross-border military operations of the Iraqi government and massive outflow of Kurdish refugees, were viewed as endangering international security. Thus, the resolution also called on the Iraqi regime to end its threat to global peace and security by putting a stop to its repressive activities in the Kurdish region and permitting the entry of international humanitarian agencies to areas in need of aid throughout Iraq (S/RES/0688, 1991). Nonetheless, even though that resolution facilitated access to aid for the Kurds, the overall situation continued to be of concern as the number of refugees continued to increase. That compelled the U.S. and the UK to create “no- fly- zones” close to Duhok to shield the Kurds against air attacks from Iraqi military planes in the north (Gareth R. V. Stansfield, 2003). In other words, with the continuing suppression and large scale departure of Kurds from the north of Iraq, the coalition forces deemed it necessary to protect them (McDowall, 2004). The safe haven was, therefore, an international humanitarian response to the threat of starvation and death to which the Kurds, particularly those in the mountains, were exposed by the Iraqi government. It gave the Kurds the rare opportunity of establishing a de facto administration for self-rule and the determination of how they were to continue their relations with the Iraqi government. 663 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 17, 2020 As it turned out, Resolution 688 marked one of the turning points in the lives of people in the Kurdistan region. McDowall adds that it made some historic highlights in the field of international law. For the first time since the League of Nation’s arbitration on the Mosul province in 1925, an international instrument made express reference to the Kurds, thereby enhancing their international status. The resolution is also unprecedented in authorising foreign intervention in the domestic affairs of a UN member state. Moreover, in defining international peace and security, the resolution referred to the Iraqi government’s acts of internal repression provoking “an outflow of refugees towards and across international borders” (Kerim Yildiz, 2004). Even after the pull out of coalition forces, the no-fly zones in northern Iraq were to be maintained under the surveillance