Experts: UK May be Losing Out in Kurdistan Over Baghdad Ties / Gareth Stansfied & Charles Tripp
MESOP SOUTH KURDISTAN (IRAQ)
By Harvey Morris – RUDAW – 9.5.2014 – LONDON – Britain is being over-cautious in its relationship with the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) for fear of offending Baghdad, British parliamentarians were told this week. The assessment came in evidence to the UK’s House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, which is currently reviewing government policy towards the KRG.
The first experts to appear before the all-party committee warned that British companies could, as a result of official caution, be missing out on trade deals with the KRG, despite Britain being regarded as a partner of choice by the government in Erbil. Gareth Stansfield, professor of Gulf studies at Britain’s Exeter University, said: “There is a cautiousness about the UK’s engagement with the Kurdistan region and…the level of UK engagement economically has been really quite slim.”He said the government attitude reflected a policy of not acting against the territorial integrity of Iraq or against the Iraqi constitution.
His fellow witness Charles Tripp, professor at the London School of Oriental and African Studies, said the policy of maintaining a balance in the British approach towards Erbil and Baghdad could be described as over-cautious.
“So far they haven’t brought down on themselves the wrath of Baghdad,” he said of the British government. “There is a sense in which they have played it cautiously, over-cautious one might argue. Iraq looms very large, and by Iraq I mean Baghdad.”The result was that Britain could be seen to have underplayed its hand in fostering closer ties with the KRG, Tripp said. Professor Stansfield said that other European countries had taken greater advantage of the business opportunities offered by the KRG. “The result is that other countries in some cases have stolen a march. We’re behind the curve in what we’re doing now and how we’re doing it,” he said. The two academics agreed that the policy of caution reflected Britain’s past history in Iraq, where it is remembered as a meddler in the country’s affairs.“From the perspective of Baghdad, you can never displease people by casting the British as some kind of sinister force in Iraq,” Professor Tripp said. “Any move that looks as if it’s going to confer legitimacy on a separatist region would of course be seized upon in Iraq.”
Professor Stansfield said that Britain had played a positive role in supporting the Kurdish leadership in its recent history. However, he added: “There has been a tendency at times not to take the Kurds and their positions terribly seriously. There’s been a dismissive attitude at times towards the Kurdish position.”
He said the British government had focused firmly on a rigid interpretation of the Iraqi constitution. Its policy of maintaining Iraqi territorial integrity at all costs had led to a failure to act as a neutral arbiter between Baghdad and Erbil.The experts said British caution extended to the government not officially recognising Saddam Hussein’s Anfal campaign as genocide, despite the UK parliament voting to do so. Professor Stansfield said the government’s failure to acknowledge the genocide was very upsetting to the people of Kurdistan. But Professor Tripp noted that the government was reluctant to single out the suffering of the Kurds for fear of being seen as overlooking the suffering of other Iraqis during the Saddam regime.
The Foreign Affairs Committee, which is appointed by parliament to examine UK foreign policy, will be questioning other expert witnesses before issuing a report.It chooses its own topics for investigation and its decision to examine government policy towards the KRG is seen as an indication of the growing importance of the region to European policymakers. – See more at: http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/080520141#sthash.fx8bMujj.dpuf