Talabani In Denial Or…?
In Denial or Afraid of Losing Face?
A must read post by Juan Cole at Informed Comment:
AP also reports that President Jalal Talabani, Foreign Minister Barham Salih, and leader of the United Iraqi Alliance Abdul Aziz al-Hakim have all rejected United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s call for an international conference on Iraq. Talabani said, “We are an independent and a sovereign nation and it is we who decide the fate of the nation . . .”If Talabani can decide the fate of Iraq, he should please go ahead and do it. It looks pretty out of control to the rest of us, and we don’t think he’s in a position to turn down Annan’s offer of help. In fact there is something sinister about the top Kurdish and Shiite leaders rejecting an international conference that might help stop the Night of the Living Dead. Basically, they seem to be saying that they’ve come out on top and are happy with the status quo, and aren’t interested in compromise or negotiation.
My initial response was “Bush is not the only one who is in denial”. However, there could be something different to it. Arab culture is a culture of honor. What if Talabani’s refusal, is not based on the conviction that he can deal with it all, but that such an international conference would equal an admission that he cannot handle it well and that, as a result, he would ‘lose face’?
If this is the case, the international community should try to find a different way of helping Iraq, one that would not cause Iraq’s government to lose face.
4 Responses to “Talabani In Denial Or…?”
Or it could be the number of United Nations countries who will benefit if Iraq turns into a open field.
Talibani is Kurdish. That is important to remember.
Kurds are very suspicious of attempts by the U.N. to interpose itself in Iraq. To Kurds, the U.N. is at best unreliable and opportunistic in when and how it chooses to become involved and at worst malevolent. The U.N. displayed little concern over Saddam-era depredations against the Kurdish minority, for example.
Also, it is important to remember that the Kurds have it pretty good right now. The violence that plagues the Sunni-dominated center mostly does not affect Kurdish areas. Kurdish areas are the most peaceful and prosperous they have ever been. Talibani has good reason to wonder if the fanfare of a U.N. takeover of the situation may be a funeral dirge for Kurdish autonomy and prosperity.
One should not look upon Annan’s statements as disinterested analyses by a neutral observer. Kofi Annan has an agenda just like anyone else. That agenda is only at best intermittently friendly to U.S. interests (Annan had little tolerance even for the most direct and legitimate acts of U.S. self-defense after 9/11) and Talibani might have well-founded doubts about the degree to which Annan would sell the Kurds out as part of his drive to use the Iraq situation to advance his own agenda and the U.N.’s particular institutional interests.
Not to mention that right now one of the most likely possibilities is for us to pull back to Kurdish areas and therefore cut off any Turkish complaints if Iraq totally falls apart and Kurdistan declares independence.
That Latin machismo obviously isn’t just Latin.