(The representative Bjørn Jacobsen from the Socialist Left Party posed a question to the Minister for Foreign affairs regarding the Iraqi Kurds´ legitimate right to a political solution)

Bjørn Jacobsen (SV (Sosialistic Left Party)). I permit myself to ask the following question:

“ How can Norway put the Kurds´ legitimate right to a political solution within the borders of Iraq on the agenda in the Security Council and is the Government willing to propose that the Security Council appoints an independent Expert Commission which elaborates on the situation in Iraqi Kurdistan and puts forward different recommendations for a political solution?”

Foreign Minister Jan Petersen: “The Kurds in northern Iraq are in a very difficult position. They have been exposed to injustices from neighbouring countries and to great suffering after extensive use of violence and power- also weapons of mass destruction- by the regime in Bagdad.

The situation in northern Iraq is relatively stable today. Both the security and the economic situation is better than it has been for a long time. This is not the least due to the presence of the United Nations and the support to international humanitarian organisations in the area. Of special importance for the security situation is the no-fly-zone north of the 36th parallel-patrolled by American and British air planes- and the Kurdish Self- Rule in northern Iraq. Also the earmarking of 13 per cent of the income from the Oil-for-Food Programme in Iraq to the Kurdish areas has improved the humanitarian situation, which today is much better than in the rest of Iraq. The UN emphasises that the Kurdish Self-Rule must not change the territorial integrity of Iraq. This is the basis of all UN Security Council Resolutions on Iraq. A long-term solution for the Kurds in Iraq must therefore be found in co-operation with the authorities that at any time are present in Bagdad. The possibilities for such a solution appears to be very small as long as Saddam Hussein remains in power. Any political solution for the Kurds must in addition be based on an agreement amongst the Kurds themselves on how the area is to be governed and the resources to be distributed. Today there is a disagreement about this. An independent Expert Commission will not contribute to any solution as long as the Kurds themselves do not agree. Moreover, a commission might be perceived as a direct intervention in domestic affairs in Iraq, something which violates the UN-charter and which might encourage other groups in Iraq to break away from Bagdad. This will be in the interest of neither the Kurds nor the international community.

Bjørn Jacobsen (SV): “ I thank the Foreign Minister for his reply. Norway has put itself in a special situation because we deserve credit for the elaboration of smart sanctions, sanctions that are meant to target the regime in Bagdad instead of the civilian population. And not the least does the foreign minister deserve credit for his clear opinion that one should not resort to military operations against Iraq. But does not the Foreign Minister see a possibility for increasing the international consensus on what is happening in Iraq . What we have seen after the withdrawal of Hussein is that there is a Kurdish Self-Rule which includes the presence of 70 different newspapers and teaching in the language of the Kurds in schools. In a few words: The civil society is flourishing. Does the Foreign Minister see other possibilities for supporting the positive forces, which after all exist in a major part of Iraqi Kurdistan?

Foreign Minister Jan Petersen: Thank you for your nice words. In at least one of the instances it is a bit unjust since it is my predecessor, Torbjørn Jagland, who not the least deserve credit for the fact that the sanction regime will be different from May 30 this year and onwards.

Concerning the question of use of military means, I accept the credit given. I would, however, like to underline that there is a clear message to the Iraqi authorities that the UN Sanctions must be respected. The UN demands must be complied with-Full stop. There can be no discussion about that. Therefore the message cannot be one-sided. It means that we have the responsibility to make sure that it happens.

Concerning the specific question that was asked, I must say that we have found the tracks as far as it is possible to find them now. Our priority concerning Iraq must be to get the regime in Bagdad to do what the UN has told it to do.”

Bjørn Jacobsen: “I thank the Foreign Minister for his reply. Last night the Security Council demonstrated, with its resolution on a Palestinian State, that it is possible to increase the international consensus. When talking about Iraq, we are not talking about a Kurdish state-some of course do, but here in Parliament we are not talking about a Kurdish state- but rather about increasing the possibility of a joint rule. If the democratic rights in northern Iraq increase, this can be transferred to the rest of Iraq as well, so that we can avoid a development where military operations become necessary, as the Foreign Minister so well has stressed. I would like to ask once more: Is it possible to improve the rights of the minorities and general rights so that the civil society is strengthened and new injustices prevented?

The Foreign Minister Jan Petersen: “ I agree with the deputy Jacobsen that one must safeguard the territorial integrity of Iraq. I do, in many ways, understand it so that many of the questions asked here, have to do with getting the regime in Bagdad to accept this and use this as a basis. This is the first condition in order to get further. The present regime in Bagdad is also in this connection a very, very negative regime. It is one out of many reasons that make it necessary to maintain a very strong pressure on the regime in Bagdad. If it turns out that that the regime will change concerning this, there may be openings, but I hope that also the deputy Jacobsen agrees about putting a very strong pressure on Iraq . And as said before, that the Iraqi regime does not misunderstand what we have said about using military means and think that it has more leeway than it had before because that is not the case. 

http://www.npaid.org/