“The future of Iraq should not be buried by the conflicts of the past”

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my interview with ambassador Hussain Sinjari, former representative of Iraq in Portugal and founder and president of Tolerancy International. The published interview, in Portuguese, can be read here. 

---

How important is this visit for Iraq and for the Iraqi state?

As everyone else, I do believe that this is a highly important visit. The Pope comes to Iraq after the first papal visit was cancelled for many and difficult reasons [in 2000] and now the Iraqis from different religious backgrounds are all waiting with great hope for this visit.

We do need not only the blessings from the Pope, but also to strengthen the moderate voices in Iraq. In fact, not only in Iraq but in the Middle East at large. We hope also that the visit will encourage the young Christians to stay home rather than to immigrate to Europe and to other places. 

This is a visit of hope and we do appreciate the Pope, at his old age, making this effort to come all the way to Iraq in these difficult times. 

Many people advised against the Pope's visit, for safety reasons and also because of the pandemic...

Probably for other reasons as well. Many people believe that the past will decide about our future and this visit shows that our future shouldn't be buried by the past and the conflicts of the past. This is the most important thing. We shouldn't allow our past to decide our future and to bury it in the sands of the Middle East. 

 The coexistence among faiths and the different religious and ethnic backgrounds in Iraq and beyond, in the Middle East, is very important for building a future for everyone to have a place in it. Myself, as founder and president of Tolerancy International (tolerancy.org), I have great hope that this will bear fruit, good fruit, and to plant seeds, this Spring, in the soil of the Middle East for brotherhood, fraternity and equality and human rights for individuals and communities.

 Do you have any doubts about the Government's ability to keep the Pope safe during this trip?

No! Everybody is concerned about this, including the two governments, in Baghdad, and the regional government in Erbil, in Kurdistan. I have seen myself that there are guards along the streets and everybody is making sure that the Pope returns to the Vatican safely, and in good shape. 

 One of the highlights of this visit will be the Pope's visit with Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. How important is this religious leader in Iraq? 

For the Shiites he is very important, he is the supreme religious leader and grand ayatollah among the Shiites, not only in Iraq but beyond as well, but also Ayatollah Sistani is important for other Iraqis because until now he has shown himself as a guardian of peaceful coexistence among different minorities and people from different backgrounds in Iraq and for peaceful solutions whenever there is a conflict or a problem, as well as being a moderate voice. 

The meeting with between these two great religious men is important to establish peace among people and understanding, and tolerance and building tolerance, the thing we most need in the Middle East.

There was a serious conflict between Baghdad and Erbil a few years ago. Have things been resolved?

The problem between Baghdad and Erbil is not resolved completely. We still have serious problems between the KRG and the Government in Baghdad. The issues of oil and gas, budgets and state employees are all very important issues for the living standards of the people, and are still not solved completely. There are still serious problems. 

But somehow, if this is what you mean, there is a better military and security coordination between the Kurdish forces and the federal forces of Baghdad. Any understanding will help, and we hope this Papal visit will also help to find common ground between Baghdad and the regional government.

 

ISIS destroyed the harmony of the society in Nineveh

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my conversation with Yezidi activist Mirza Dinnayi. It was recorded on the 14^th of March and used for a series of articles published a few days before the liberation of Mosul.

Esta é uma transcrição completa, no inglês original, da minha conversa com o activista yazidi Mirza Dinnayi. Foi gravada no dia 14 de Março e usada para uma série de artigos publicados dias antes da libertação de Mossul.

When Mosul is liberated, we can expect the situation between Kurdistan and Baghdad to come to the surface. Do you believe that it could turn into an armed conflict?

There are many conflicts that can happen after the liberation of Mosul. One of them that you mentioned is the conflict between the KRG and the central government about the future of the disputed area.

But what we saw in the last weeks also, because of the Turkish factor and pressure from Turkey, was a conflict between PKK and KDP which is also a very dangerous conflict which is taking place in Sinjar area. Just today some PKK civilian sympathizers, Yezidi people, were demonstrating in Sinjar and a 16 year old was killed by Peshmerga forces from KDP and about 20 people were injured. Two weeks ago, or one week ago, there was also a conflict between Rojava militia, which is supported by Turkey and KDP and PKK forces, and there were also more than 20 injured and at least four people were killed.

So the problem is that we have, in these disputed areas, two types of conflict. One is between KRG and the central government, about the future administration of this region, and the second is an inter-Kurdish conflict, with influence of Turkey and Iran. Some Kurdish forces are supported by Turkey and others are supported by Iran and they are fighting each other. This is more dangerous than the conflict between Iraq and Kurdistan.

I have read reports on heavy presence of PKK militants in and around Sinjar, and that many of these are actually Yezidi members of PKK. Is it true that there is a big presence of Yezidis in PKK?

The sympathy is more directly to the YBS [Sinjar Protection Units] and YPG, more than being members, there are actually very few members, among Iraqi Yezidis there are no members of the PKK, but we have members of these YPG or YBS militias, which are also armed forces, but supported by the Iraqi Government, and they have some relations with the PKK, but they are not direct members of the PKK because PKK is a forbidden organization in Iraq and Turkey, but also in Europe.

So these are people who have some sympathy for PKK, and one of the reasons why they joined YPG or YBS is because they were the ones who, in 2014, liberated more than 150 thousand Yezidis from the Mountain when ISIS attacked the Yezidis. At that time the Peshmerga forces collapsed, the Iraqi forces collapsed, and these people came and saved the lives of tens of thousands of Yezidis who were surrounded in the mountain, without food or water. So this is one of the reasons some of the people in the area have some sympathies for these forces and joined them.

We also have armed force which belongs to the Iraqi Hash al-Shabi Forces [Popular Mobilization Forces] who are Yezidis from one side, and which also have some relations with YPG or YBS. The problem is that KDP said that Sinjar should belong to them, and the Peshmerga say that these groups do not belong to the Peshmerga and they are not legal groups, so they should leave. But the problem is that these people are from Sinjar, not from outside. This is a problem that we have and we have tried to solve this conflict in a peaceful way, but unfortunately it has not been possible.

The Kurds seem set on independence. What is your position on this?

There is a wish for independence among the Kurdish people, we support this wish, but we think that these problems, especially in the disputed areas, because most of the Yezidi people and the minorities, Yezidi and Christian, in Iraq, are living in these disputed areas and we think the only way to declare independence is if it is peaceful, because a war will damage our community.

The Yezidis have some demands from Iraq and from Kurdistan, and our demands are to have some special autonomous areas, self-administered autonomous areas, for Yezidis, a province in Sinjar and Nineveh Plain, and these areas should be in cooperation between Bagdad and Kurdistan. This is the wish of the Yezidi people. Because there has been no referendum, we don't know what the people will decide, we think that it is the best way to find what the Yezidi people want. I think the Yezidis will agree, but not without conditions.

If Kurdistan does become independent, and an autonomous region for minorities were to be created, should it be linked to Bagdad or to Erbil?

After all the problems that we had, after the genocide, I think it is the full right of the Yezidis and the Christians to have some demands in order to be part of Kurdistan or not. This is the position of the Yezidis at the moment. Most of the Yezidis would like to be in Kurdistan, because we don't think that we have a future with Mosul, we think there is no future between Yezidis and Mosul, because all the attacks were planned in Mosul, Yezidis were sexually enslaved in Mosul by Sunni Arabs, so there is no way in the next generation to be integrated so smoothly with Mosul, but with the Kurds we have the same roots, we have ethnical roots, so it could be. But we have to have a democratic background and to save the lives and the future of Yezidi existence, their political and social entity, I don't think the Yezidis will agree without conditions.

When you speak of an autonomous region, you would be living side by side with other minorities, such as Christians, Shabaks, Turkmen, etc. Is this what the Yezidis want as well?

Yes, this is the idea, that all the minorities live together in peace.

The Kurds reserve places in their parliament for ethnic minorities, but this does not include Yezidis. They say Yezidis are Kurds with a different religion. What is your opinion on this?

The Yezidis are not united about this issue. Some of them say we are an independent nation, some say we are Kurds, and some say we are an ethno-religious entity and that this ethno-religious entity should be respected. So we have three versions, and my opinion is that the identity of the Yezidis has been established now as an identity after genocide, so the feeling of the Yezidis before and after 2014 is different. The politicians in Iraq and Kurdistan didn't realize this until now, unfortunately, but they should recognize it.

Christians seem very divided in this region, with more than a dozen political parties and at least six militias. The Kurds are also quite divided, although all seem to agree on independence. Does this problem affect the Yezidis as well?

Unfortunately yes.

The community is divided because of the genocide and the massacres, and the genocide has not stopped yet. So my community is also divided in membership among different parties. We have Yezidis who belong to the PKK, Yezidis who belong to the KDP, PUK, independent Yezidis, some small Yezidi parties which were useless in the last two years. Now the elections will come and there will be new political identities of Yezidis, so I think my community is also very divided, maybe not as badly as our Christian brothers, but also divided.

I see you used the term Christian brothers. If there is this autonomous region you would be living as brothers with the Christians, Shabaks, Turkmen... Are relations between Yezidis and Christians and these other minorities brotherly, would it be easy to live in this autonomous region in peace?

I think that between Yezidis and Christians there is no problem. With the Shabak Shias we have no problem. The Shabak Sunnis, unfortunately, joined ISIS. The Shabak themselves are divided. And for Turkmen it is also very difficult because we have Turkmen Shias and Turkmen Sunnis and these aggressively joined ISIS, and they were members and they attacked Yezidis, but we have very good relations with the Turkmen Shia, so you will find that the minorities are even divided among themselves and that ISIS destroyed the harmony of the societies, but in my opinion Yezidi, Christians, Shabak Shias and Turkmen Shia can understand each other. Any relationship with Sunni Muslims, because of ISIS, cannot be included in such projects, in my opinion.

For the creation of an autonomous region you would need support and allies. Bagdad and/or Erbil, but also international allies. Do you have allies for this plan at the moment?

Unfortunately we are trying to lobby at the European Union level and at the American level. Everybody, from the UN or different Western countries, they tell us that we are right, that we need an autonomous area, but everybody is asking us who will pay for it. And this is a problem which we have now. We have some solidarity from the Western countries, but nobody is ready, until now to establish a project... I think the international community as a whole is responsible for this.

"Nineveh is not a 'disputed area', it is our home"

Metin Rhawi

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my conversation with Metin Rhawi, of the European Syriac Union, about the situation in the Ninevah Plain and expectations for after the liberation of Mossul. The interview was used for several articles on the subject.

Esta é uma transcrição completa, no inglês original, da minha conversa com Metin Rhawi, da União Siríaca Europeia, sobre a situação na Planície de Nínive e as expectativas para depois da libertação de Mosul. A entrevista foi usada para uma série de artigos sobre o assunto.

Could you please introduce yourself and your organization?

I am head of Foreign Affairs for the European Syriac Union. What we do basically is advocacy for the Chaldean/Syriac/Assyrian people in our homeland, Old Mesopotamia, or Bet-Nahrain, as we call it, today Iraq, Turkey, Syria, parts of Lebanon and parts of Iran.

Our work is basically trying to raise the issue and the situation for this minority who have been the indigenous people of this region for the past 8.000 years or something. The situation for Christians is currently very crucial, losing almost everything they had, many having gone abroad.

Originally I was born in the Southeast of Turkey, in Midyat, and I belong to the Syriac Orthodox Church. But among our people we also have the Chaldean Church, the Apostolic Chuch of the Assyrians, the Maronite, the Melkite Church and the Orthodox... So there are many denominations.

How familiar are you with the situation in Iraq? Do you travel there frequently?

I have been in Iraq four times in the past one and a half years, and once to Syria. Unfortunately I couldn't make more trips to Syria because they closed the border from Iraq, so we need to go through the regime controlled airports in Syria, and that is not possible for me because I have taken a stance against the regime in Syria.

So I am well informed and I have seen with my own eyes and I have a network of political parties, NGOs, different associations and military militias in Iraq.

Why is there so much division among Christians? I counted 12 political parties and several militias.

I don't know if you could necessarily call this division, these are political views of the current situation, or at least how to solve the current situation, and as within any country or nationality you have many political views, many parties, among our community we have also many parties, at least 13 or 14 parties, so even more than the ones you discovered, and five of them have their own militias. I think this is due to the fact that you have the Baghdad regime on one side and the Kurdistan Regional Government controlled by Kurdistan Democratic Party on the other. These local politics are benefiting from the situation when you have political groups which are split, rather than joining forces.

In this case they can, at any time, play the situation against each other and this is what we are facing, unfortunately they are giving us some kind of hope from different sides, and at the same time our community, and the political parties, are in really great need of doing something for the people who have been tossed around in different directions, in order to reach their goal, to give something to the people, some kind of security and hope for the future in their homeland.

Then you see the big policies between these big nations who are interfering, Iran with the Shia concept, Turkey with the Sunni concept, and the Syrian regime and the United States and Russia, so it is quite puzzling situation and you need to have all the facts, trying to understand why these communities are so divided.

But you would agree that it is negative for the aspirations of the community to have so much political division?

It is, in one sense, if you don't have a common strategy and agenda, of course it is. Today what we can see with these political parties, different members of the European Parliament, different political associations and foundations, and us, we have reached an agreement between all of them among the community to have some common demands for the Nineveh Plain.

For instance, we are starting to have the same agenda in some very important and common issues, and that is the positive thing today that I would like to focus on. But of course it is quite frustrating that there are so many different factions within a small community like ours, because from two million ten years ago, we are today close to 400 thousand. So we can understand that we should not be so divided, because we are losing the grip, while discussing among ourselves what to do as the next step.

After the liberation of Mosul, do you expect to see conflict between Baghdad and Kurdistan over the disputed areas?

As for the “disputed areas”, that is their term, but we don't agree with it... The Nineveh Plain is not a disputed area, even though Baghdad and Erbil many times tried to make it appear so, this is the land of our ancestors since many thousands of years back. Bartella city has been home to Syriacs since about 5,000 years before Christianity, so how can it be a disputed area?

But, having said that, what is actually happening on the ground today is that you can see the regime trying to take the Northeastern part of the Nineveh plain, and the Peshmerga controlling the Southeastern part, so they have already, more or less, in practice, split the region, so now for us as Christians it is very important to really make it obvious that the Nineveh Plain is not open to be divided by these two political powers of Baghdad and Erbil.

As for the future, whether they are going to have an armed fight, I don't know, that is difficult for us to say. Until now they have been quite good at talking, they respect each other, but you never know... They have had ISIS in their faces for two years, what will happen in the future is very difficult to say. But for us, at least, we know that they are interfering on the ground, in a region which belongs to us and which they call a disputed area.

However, you can also say this is a totally disputed area, because even Turkey talks about being involved, so it is quite a difficult situation...

Miliciana cristã acende velas numa igreja no Iraque

So can I gather that you would prefer to see the Nineveh Plains not directly under the control of Baghdad or Erbil, but autonomous?

The situation in all of Iraq and also in Kurdistan is a great lack of democratic process. It is still the strong people who make decisions, there is empowerment of powers which are already quite strong and the local minorities are more or less powerless. So what we need to do is work to empower the local minorities, like the Yezidis, like the Shabaks, the Turkmen and the Assyrians, in order to have this autonomous region together, with different provinces within it. Whether it is going to be connected to Baghdad or to Erbil… I think this is a question of what the law says in Iraq today. Obviously it should be closer to Baghdad, but with very good relations with Erbil.

In our opinion we should have an open book with each other as a province or autonomous region both with Erbil and Baghdad and explain that this region can be an autonomous region. The ministers’ council of Baghdad, two years ago, declared that the Nineveh Plain can be an autonomous region for the Chaldean/Assyrian/Syriac community, but we have not seen anything more than talk. Erbil shows the same willingness: "If the community want their freedom and self-government in an autonomous region in the Nineveh plain, we will help them”, but still we cannot see more than one autonomous region and that is Kurdistan, and the rest is Iraq.

So we hope, really, that all this talk becomes real policy and for this we need the support of the United States and the European Parliament to support this region becoming an autonomous region, with the good help of Kurdistan and the very, very good help of Baghdad.

In the future, how it develops, I truly don't know, because you never know, in this region, what is going to happen a year from now, it is very difficult to say.

This scenario you described only seems to work if Kurdistan remains in Iraq. If Kurdistan becomes independent and the Christians are forced to choose between joining an independent Kurdistan or remaining in Iraq, what do you think the majority would choose?

I think it is very difficult today to say, and it would not be good for me to do that.

I think it is quite obvious that the Chaldean/Assyrian/Syriac people are in great need of support from both places. Even if Kurdistan declare themselves an independent country and sovereign state, for us the issue is to have good relations with Kurdistan, as a country, and also with Iraq, as a country. In that case we would have borders with both Erbil and Baghdad, so for us that is the big policy of the local strong powers today, what they decide to do and how they decide to do it, unfortunately there is a risk that could go to civil war, of course, because it would be a civil war, Kurdistan is an autonomous region in Iraq.

So it is quite difficult. I don't know which side people would like to choose, because unfortunately we have bad experience today from both sides.

Many people tend to think of the time when Saddam was ruling the country as a more peaceful time than today, although they knew he was a dictator. So you are familiar with the situation in Iraq and you can understand that the situation today is not good. Everybody was treated very badly under Saddam, but today it is not everybody, but certain groups are treated worse than others, certain groups are not given democratic rights, certain groups are not being defended the right way, certain groups have to rely on themselves even if they are not powerful enough. And if you take their powers from them, more and more, their situation is going to be very frustrating.

The more recent waves of persecution of Christians in Iraq have come from the Islamic State, but I remember at the time the people said that the ones who had taken their houses, were not IS, they were their Arabic neighbours. So it would seem that in the more recent years the more severe persecution came from the Sunni majority, whether Islamic State or the local Arabs. But I have also spoken many Christians from the region, many of whom off the record, and I asked them if they trust the Kurds, despite the fact that they fled to Kurdistan and the Kurds were the only ones who seemed determined to fight IS on the ground. And many of them answered saying that they remember that the Kurds also persecuted them in the past, so they are cautious. Is this your feeling as well, is there a feeling of suspicion between the Christians and the Kurds, or is this something of the past...

When you are looking forward to the future and to establish something you have trust in, and believe in for the future, you calculate with the past and your accumulated knowledge of what happened.

Of course we have very, very bad experience from each other. Both Arabs, Sunni and Shia or Kurds. In the Ottoman Empire, when Iraq was part of it, there were also Kurds persecuting us, as well as Arab Sunnis and Arab Shia. So I don't know today if we need to bring all those fears with us into the future, but at least we should know that this happened, not forget it, but we should forgive and continue to build a future together, along with the people living there, because obviously we cannot expel the people from there, the majority living there are Arab Sunni or Arab Shia or Kurds, so what we have to do is reconciliation.

Igreja vandalizada no Iraque

This is really important and we are working with that as the European Syriac Union also, along with other communities there, it is important to trust in the future, to trust in each other, what the Kurds and the Peshmerga did during the Islamic State invasion of the Nineveh Plain… Of course without them we would probably have lost everything, so we have to be thankful for that. But at the same time we know that they could obviously have done more for us, they could be standing there in the frontline, they could have given us weapons to defend ourselves along with them and probably, together, we could have fought ISIS before they became stronger, but to go into that issue of how and for what reason did ISIS become stronger and have the possibility to become stronger, as they have been for the past two years, that is a question which will take us too long to answer... And there are many conspiracy theories to look into of course...

Obviously people on the ground, whether Sunni or Shia, have also hurt us and whether Kurds or Arabs, they have also hurt us, but we need to trust in each other in some way, because we will be neighbours anyway, we need to build a common future together and that can be done with respect and democracy. And that quality type of living today does not exist in Iraq, nor in Kurdistan, really, because you can feel the tension, I have been in Kurdistan many times, and you can feel the tension, where you feel that you are not a first rate citizen, because you are not Kurd, because you are Chaldean, Syriac or Assyrian. And because you don't feel you belong to a strong party, because parties dominate Kurdistan today. More than the government dominating Kurdistan, it is the KDP that dominates Kurdistan. And that is also an issue...

What we would like to have is Mr. Barzani should stand up and say OK, if this is what the Chaldean/Syriac/Assyrians want, this is not a disputed area, this is your area, we give it over to you, we can help you, in what way do you need help from us?

And the same thing from Baghdad, because they have a decision from their ministers’ council from two years ago, they should say the thing: This is what you want, tell us how we can help you.

And then, I think the European Parliament, the United States Government and even the Russians would understand that this is ok, this is a good situation where we can also be supportive and find common solutions.

Of the five different militias that I found in my research, the Nineveh Plain Forces, the Nineveh Plain Protection Units, Dwekh Nawsha, Qaraqosh Protection Committee and the Tiger Guards... Are some of these considered pro-Kurd and others Pro-Baghdad?

In the end, whether they like to say that or not, some of us must be more pro-the side that gives us the permission to be a military militia.

The Nineveh Plain Units answer to the Government of Baghdad, the Ninevah Plain Forces are from Peshmerga ministry, from the Kurdistan region. This is why we operate in different places. If we belong to Peshmerga, obviously we cannot move in the areas where Baghdad moves, and vice versa.

Dwekh Nawsha is unfortunately a very, very small group and there are also the Nineveh Plain Guards Protection Units from Barzani's side also, the Chaldean Syriac Assyrian Popular Council. That is pro-Kurdistan, more obviously than the others.

Then you have the Syriac Falcons, newly established, by Salwon Momika, of the Syriac Democratic Union who was held hostage for almost two weeks recently, in fights. He established himself as a political party and also militia. The first movement within the Syriac Chaldean Assyrian group established in the liberated areas, and he faced problems, of course, and he was held captive, but now he was released.

But what is not working there, what we are obviously being stopped from, we made it clear to our militias, on behalf of the Syriac European Union, and along with Mr. Lars Adaktusson, that we need to find a common agenda for the military unification also, in order to become an army for the Nineveh Plain in the future. But of course neither Baghdad nor Erbil like this, and that is obvious. Maybe they don't like me to say that, but I will do it anyway.

Related: "Kurdish independence is necessary to avoid further atrocities"

"Kurdish independence is necessary to avoid further atrocities"

Mohammedali Taha is a member of parliament in the autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan for the Kurdistan Democratic Party, and spokesman for the KDP fraction in parliament. This interview was recorded in January, in Lisbon, and used in a series of articles about the situation in Iraq published at the end of June. This is an edited transcript of the conversation, in the original English.

Mohammedali Taha é deputado do Parlamento da região autónoma do Curdistão Iraquiano pelo Partido Democrático do Curdistão e porta-voz da bancada parlamentar. Esta entrevista foi gravada em Janeiro, em Lisboa, e usada numa série de artigos sobre a situação no Iraque, publicadas no final de Junho. Esta é uma transcrição editada e no inglês original, dessa conversa.

Could you tell us about the history that has led up to this point?

Since 1992 we have been able to run a semi-autonomous region, because before that there was the no-fly zone status which applied to the Kurdistan region, so we started a form of self-government. That continued until 2003 and in 2003 the US led coalition intervened in Iraq, toppled Saddam's Ba’ath regime and after that the Kurds of Iraq decided to be a part of the so-called democratization of Iraq. We took part in drafting the Constitution, which included the status of regional government within the federal Iraq, so we have that, but we were supposed to have our rights according to the constitution that we voted for, more than 90% of the people in the Kurdistan region voted for this constitution, so that means they want to be a part of this so-called democratization.

But unfortunately that never happened and we had problems with the Central Government of Iraq since the beginning. Our budget share was supposed to be 17% of the whole revenue of Iraq, but it never arrived, and since January 2014 they have cut our budget share, our employees’ wages and salaries... So this decision was taken by Iraq and it was also complemented by some threats from the central government. The prime-minister Maliki bluntly uttered, both as PM and as Commander in Chief of the army in Iraq – this is a threat – that they were not sending any budget to the Kurdistan region.

So after that we had no more choice. We are an oil rich region and we were sending all the oil to be sold out through the Iraqi part, but they were not going to give us our budget share. So we took our decision to sell our own oil by ourselves, and we have some constitutional and legal basis to do so and have international oil companies and friends who deal with us in the oil business.

But in 2014 another crisis started in Iraq, the rise of ISIS, which began in 2010, but in 2014, after the fall of Mosul in June it brought with it many other problems, like IDPs, the safest place in all of Iraq is Kurdistan, so all these IDPs from the surrounding region started to head towards the Kurdistan region, besides the fact that the budget is cut from Iraq, we are facing a wave of about two million IDPs and at the same time already had around 300 thousand refugees from the Syrian crisis. All the crises in these areas bring the IDPs and refugees to Kurdistan, because it is the safest place.

And all of a sudden the only income that we have, which is the oil revenues, the oil prices also went down.

Yet it still seems to be one of the only stable zones in the neighbourhood…

Fortunately we managed to keep this stability and this security until now and I hope that we continue. The institutions are working, but the people themselves care, they care about the stability of the place and they cooperate with the security institutions.

Almost 15 years after the fall of Saddam, is there a future for Iraqi Kurdistan within Iraq, or is independence inevitable?

Well, I would say the second. Independence has been the dream of every Kurd and it has been the slogan of the Kurdish movements in all four parts, but the part in Iraq had more advances since the beginning, until now, and more opportunities to reach where we are today.

I always give this example. We have many Kurds in the diaspora, I have cousins in the US. They probably say they are US citizens, but originally Kurdish. And I know people in Europe who say the same. But you will not find a single Kurd, in Turkey, Iran, Iraq or Syria, saying they are proudly Syrian, or Iraqi or Iranian or Turkish. They are not proud to be part of these states simply because they do not have their basic rights.

We, as a party in Iraq, have never been able to have our rights when we were united to Baghdad. Before 2005, you know what happened in this region, all these atrocities, the massacres, the genocides, the mass graves, the chemical weapons... Everything has been tried against the people of Kurdistan by successive governments of Iraq.

From the Monarchy to the Republic, and to Saddam. Even after 2005 we tried our best to tell them that we were ready to cooperate and try our best to be a part of this democratic federation. We entered the federation after 2005, but we never had the opportunity to get our basic rights. So it seems that to avoid any other atrocity, to avoid other mass killings, bloodshed and conflict, another position for Kurds is necessary.

Is this the position of your party, or is it the position of most of the mainstream Iraqi Kurdish parties?

I would say of most of the mainstream. Let’s talk about the election campaign, one of their main programs is to do everything towards an independent Kurdistan. And in the bylaws of the political parties, if you go to them, most of them are nationalist based.

Turkey is often portrayed as being hostile to anything related to Kurdish autonomy, anywhere... Will Ankara put pressure to stop the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan?

The position of Turkey has changed recently. I'd say within the past five years we have been dealing with Turkey... A huge deal in terms of trade, and at the same time Turkey is only dealing with the Kurdistan region when it comes to oil. We are selling our oil using the Turkish harbours, our main route to reach the international oil market.

The position of Turkey regarding the autonomous Kurdish region is totally changed. Once, in Turkey, of course, it was forbidden to say Kurd. They called them the Turks of the mountains. And the Kurdish language was forbidden. Meanwhile they had 20 million Kurds. Of course they are scared of having these 20 million Kurds, and their national movement is a rebellion movement which is going on in Turkey, that is something different, but when it comes to Iraq our leaders are being received in Turkey with the Kurdish flag behind them. For example, our president, when he goes to Turkey, is received as other Heads of State, the same goes for our Prime-minister and our delegations.

Not only that, but Turkey's position nowadays has totally changed and the main factor behind that is the economy. There are a couple of thousand Turkish companies working in the Kurdistan region, and that is not the case in other parts of Iraq.

We often hear about the dream of a United Kurdistan. How does your independence and your drawing closer to Turkey affect this and is it even a dream still?

We have been separated for a century. So we are now four different parts, and we have differences, and those differences are deep. In terms of the states we are divided between and in terms of the opportunities that the people have.

In Iraq we are more advanced towards self-determination. But that is not the case in other parts of Kurdistan. So we are very clear that when we speak of independence it is the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Has that led to conflicts with other Kurdish groups? I know things are difficult between Iraqi Kurdistan and the PKK.

We have different takes... PKK, which is nowadays considered the main political Kurdish party which fights for the Turkish part – although they have fighters from other parts also – but their main goal is not Kurdish independence, and they do not even call for any Kurdish entity.

They have different goals, which are their own, and I don't agree with them, but we have been in conflict with the PKK. The first bullet against the Kurdish Government in 1993 was fired by the PKK. That conflict, whether cold or warm, is ongoing until today. And it is not over our position to declare independence. There are many other differences, many other powers. For example, the PKK, as a political party, is supported by some regional powers to be against certain politics in the region.

What are your relations with Kurds from Syria and Iran?

After the situation in Syria – the Arab Spring and what happened in 2011 – we have a good relation with Syria. Syria borders the Kurdistan region, when the Kurdish administration, in the Kurdish parts of Syria started for the first time we had two parts of Kurdistan that were administered by Kurds, sharing the same border.

But the situation now is different, because the PKK started taking over the situation in Syria, and PKK does not accept any other Kurdish political power in Syria. So as a result all these political powers are nowadays in Erbil because they can't breathe there, they can't be there. That is why the situation nowadays with the administration in Syria, when it comes to politics, is a bit... We have ups and downs.

But in terms of humanitarian aid, our region regularly provides medicine and health facilities. We have always been open to the Syrian Kurds. There are 300 thousand Syrian refugees, most of them are Kurdish, in the Kurdistan region. But when it comes to politics, the methods they are applying in the Syrian part of Kurdistan, we don't really accept, we don't go with it.

And in Iran?

The Kurdish opposition in Iran is also divided. One part goes with the ones that are real opposition and they are in Erbil, of course. Politically they are not accepted in Iran, and so they are in Iraqi Kurdistan. We have very good relations with them. But another part are sister parties with PKK and they do other stuff.

There were a few Kurdish militants who joined ISIS, but mostly the Kurds became famous as the only force which stood up to ISIS on the ground. That generated a lot of sympathy for the Kurds...

When ISIS came in Iraq, in June 9th 2014, the second largest city of Iraq, Mosul was controlled by ISIS in a couple of hours. Of course we were not expecting ISIS to attack the Kurdistan region, because at the beginning what defined ISIS was a Sunni/Shia conflict, because the Sunnis in Iraq feel that they are not being included, that the Shiite majority government is not giving the Sunni population their rights.

The majority of the ISIS leaders were Sunni tribal leaders, that was clear. And it was seen as part of the Sunni/Shia conflict.

And specifically a Sunni/Shia Arab conflict...

In Iraq we have three main entities. Sunnis, Shias and Kurds. Kurds are Kurds: We have Shia Kurds, we have Sunni Kurds, we have Christian, Yezidi, all these differences of ideology and of religion, but they are all considered Kurds.

But when it comes to Arabs, Sunni or Shia is the difference, their sect is the difference. So we were considering it as a conflict between these two sectarian groups, the two main sectarian groups.

But two months later, when ISIS changed their war policy and began attacking Kurdistan, we were shocked. We were not ready in terms of military and all of a sudden we shared a border with ISIS which was more than 1.000 kilometers long. The only thing we had were brave Peshmerga. Their rifles were from the 70's, Russian Kalashnikovs, and their weaponry was really outdated, so we had difficult times, but the international allies against ISIS started to see that the only real fighters against ISIS on the ground were us and they started to support us in terms of military training, supplying weaponry, all these things. Hopefully we will continue to keep on defeating ISIS, and control our borders.

Previously we have had a problem with disputed areas with the Iraqi part, and now, after ISIS we don't have it any more, we have controlled the so-called disputed area between Kurdistan and Iraq and we believe that they are part of the Kurdistan region. Politically speaking, in Kurdistan region, we say there are no disputed areas, we have controlled everything.

Baghdad might disagree...

Baghdad does disagree, continuously, but so far that is the reality.

Before we go there, we tend to see, especially here in the West, that the Middle East has a serious problem with radical Islam. But it seems that Iraqi Kurdistan has seemed, so far, to avoid this problem. So is it correct to say that this is more of an Arab problem than a regional problem?

It is a regional problem. The Turks, for example, are not Arabs, but radicalism is a trend in Turkey. In the Kurdistan region the major political parties tend to be more secular than based on religious ideology, so the form of government in the Kurdistan region goes against the line of radicalism. And we have fought against it, we have fought against radicalism in the Kurdistan region and we continue to fight it. We are a Muslim majority society, and the mosques play a huge role in this issue of radicalism. We had people that joined ISIS from the Kurdistan region, and their main education base were mosques under the supervision of these radical Islamists.

We still have political parties in Parliament which are very radical, no different in terms of the basis of their ideology from ISIS and other political parties.

You had said that the main parties are secular, but the problem with radicalism is when it gains roots in the ground and amongst the people. So among the Kurdish people, all over Iraqi Kurdistan, is there much extremist influence?

Not much, but it depends on the area. We are influenced by the geography. The areas which border Arab fanatics, of course they are influenced. There are areas in the Kurdistan region where people listen to ISIS radio. For a couple of months the waves were received in those areas. Imagine that! It does influence. So it depends on that and also the movement is not a joke... It is going on in the region and it has its roots, but it is not that powerful in the Kurdistan region, thankfully.

When Mosul falls, then this problem of the disputed areas will probably rise again politically. Could it also become a military issue between Kurdistan and Baghdad?

I hope not, but it is very likely. Because it is not easy for Baghdad to abide by this constitution that they helped draft.

According to the constitution we should have a referendum in those areas no later than December 2007. That never happened, because the Iraqi part did not allow it. We would have loved to have it and we would love for the people of these areas to decide their own destiny.

Will you still promote a referendum?

We are still promoting a referendum, because we believe that the people of these regions should decide their destiny, they should decide where to go, what to do, how to be governed.

Is there a risk of persecution of Arab communities which live there?

There is a risk of that.

As a politician, is there anything the Government of Kurdistan is trying to do to protect them and allow them to remain there if they want to?

The main issue of the people in those areas is security. Not only for Arabs, also for Kurds, Christians, Turkmen, all these ethnicities, the main issue is security. But the majority of the population in these areas, including Arabs, and perhaps especially the Arabs, are happier with the security provided by the Kurdistan Regional Government than by the security provided by Bagdad.

You mentioned the minorities, how might this affect them? You say their main concern is security, do you think they will accept and support the Kurds against Baghdad?

Well, all those Iraqi communities, Turkmen, Christians, Assyrians, Arabs, Armenians, Kurds, everyone from any part of Iraq, if anything happens to them they seek refuge in Kurdistan. So I think that answers your question.

You were talking about the ethnic minorities, but I saw you did not mention the Yezidis.

Yezidis also...

But some Yezidis complain that they are being called Kurds when they feel they are a distinct community.

They have a religion, they are a religious group in Kurdistan. Their language is Kurdish, they live in this area, it is the only religion on Earth that practices in Kurdish, they pray to God in Kurdish, if they say they are not Kurdish, I don't know what else to say. It's their decision... If they are not Kurdish, fine, but they practice in Kurdish, they speak Kurdish, they're holy book is written in Kurdish. It is the only Kurdish religion on Earth. Their basis is religious, and it is obvious to everyone in the region. If they say they are Arabs, or that they are Yezidis, and this is different, then they should have some scientific basis...

In terms of Christians, I have spoken to many over the past years and more recently I have been asking them about the relationship with the Kurds. Most of them will say they are very grateful because the Kurds took them in and gave them refuge and protection, but there are also complaints and fears. Some of them say they do not forget that the Kurds helped the Turks massacre them in 1915, in Simile in 1933, and some, more recently, say they don't forget that the Peshmerga promised to protect their villages, but then fled and left them there when ISIS advanced... Is it possible to regain the trust of the Christians?

Well, starting with the Armenian genocide, and the genocide that happened in the areas, like Simele... At that time it was the Ottoman Empire which was committing these genocides against them. Those who were soldiers, were forced to serve the army in the Ottoman Empire, there was Mandatory Military Service, some people served for up to 20 years.

But there were also civilians who took part, they say...

They say... But the history writers don't confirm this. I don't know, it belongs to history, that is history and say we are a part of it? Ok. But talking about nowadays, that their villages were destroyed by ISIS... Its war! Ok, I promise that I will do my best to protect a village which is under the control of ISIS and we also control parts of the village or the town, then all of a sudden the war changes the whole situation... It is not about the promises you make. Then ISIS takes control and starts to blow up all the buildings... The basis of that argument is weak, I'd say.

If they don't trust... Nobody trusts the security in that region. Every night, when we sleep, we are very brave to sleep there. Because 20 km from the city where I live there used to be ISIS. Nowadays it is between 50 and 60 km, it is a bit cleaner, but nowhere in Iraq is secure. I am not trying to defend the Kurdistan Region's position, but they should honestly look at the past 20 years, go back and see the difference in the way they were treated by the Kurds and in the other parts.

You were saying your city is 20 km from ISIS front lines. Do you have any military training?

Not really, no.

Was your father also a guerrilla in the mountains?

My family, the majority of them were and are military, including my sisters.

The position of women within Kurdish society is very different from what we see in most Arabic societies around them...

Well, again, they are influenced as well. It is different when it comes to the openness of the Kurdish culture, it is quite open, compared to other cultures in the region. For example, it is very well known that the Kurdish women are also fighters, and they fight alongside with men. That is not something new for us, it has been like this for centuries. They are better fighters, sometimes, than men, and there are no differences there.

And there is some other stuff... It relates to the culture, what is different in our culture and in the culture of others in the region, because we are a different nation.

You mentioned the instability in the whole region, with Kurdistan trying to remain stable amongst the instability, is there one thing necessary to bring stability to the region? Is there one factor which is destabilizing the region?

This is a very important question... One factor? There are many factors for instability. But of course, not talking to each other, not coming together around a table, not accepting each other as we are, is the main factor for instability.

I am asking this because many times we see... And I have begun to think this is a regional issue, I won't say Arab, because I get it from Christians too... They will say this is all because of Israel, all because of America, all because of Russia... A tendency to blame others for local problems.

We are to blame. Nobody but us. Everybody is responsible for what happens to him or to her. So we are to be blamed and if we don't find a solution for how to get together, we should not blame anybody else.