Resolving Kirkuk

Tensions among Arabs, Kurds, and Turkomen in northern Iraq — particularly regarding the city of Kirkuk — have the potential to escalate into intercommunal violence that would greatly destabilize Iraq. The city's status is tied up in political, legal, and constitutional disputes over disputed territories, Iraq's oil and gas resources, and the power of Iraq's regions vis-à-vis Baghdad. Past efforts to resolve ethno-territorial conflicts, whether successful or not, offer insights that may facilitate a negotiated solution to the status of Kirkuk. An examination of agreements and negotiations regarding Brčko, Mostar, Northern Ireland, and Jerusalem demonstrates the importance of separating local disputes from national-level politics, emphasizing practical governance structures over symbols of sovereignty, developing adaptable power-sharing mechanisms and multi-ethnic security forces that protect the rights of current and potential future minorities, empowering local leaders, and marginalizing nationalistic spoilers who amplify ethnic tensions to consolidate their power. Confidence-building measures and successful resolution of local problems could demonstrate that meaningful inter-ethnic collaboration is possible and, by alleviating local tensions, provide "breathing space" for national-level officials to resolve strategic challenges. The negotiation process may be facilitated by considering whether a "grand bargain" can mitigate the zero-sum nature of the dispute, temporarily deferring especially contentious issues, and involving an impartial yet influential third party to bridge gaps and encourage compromise. The U.S. record of constructive engagement on Arab-Kurd issues, combined with its ability to influence debates on such unresolved national issues as federalism and hydrocarbons, suggests that active American diplomacy regarding Kirkuk could both eliminate a potential flashpoint and pave the way for Iraqi leaders to resolve broader political and economic disputes.