Yes, All I Want, you hit one of the nails on the head. That is a very likely scenario. But even without such developments, there are other issues that could tick Turkey off. (Turkiye? What's the correct spelling? I like the second better--if I were Turkish I'd be ticked off at my country's name!)
I finally got the chance to read the Constitution (rough draft) last night. It's one of the most confusing things I've ever read. I've deliberately not read any commentary on it either. In addition to such doosies as the "region" laws, there's the potentially expolsive matter of languages.
Here are some of my faves:
Article 66: A presidential candidate should:
1. Be Iraq and the offspring of 2 Iraqi parents. ....
3. Have a good reputation and political experience, and be known as honest and faithful to the nation.
In the US, no foreign-born is permitted to run for or serve as President. We don't care about the parents though. You can be President and have one or both parents born elsewhere, as long as you were born here it's OK.(There have been 5 attempts in the 20th century alone to change this law, and there may be a 6th...many Republicans woukd like to see Arnold Schwartznaegger run for Pres..though it's unlikely the law will ever be overturned if all the others failed.) Why the emphasis on Iraqi parents? And political experience? How do you define that? Personally, I'd rather elect a guy with 25 yrs yrs as a mere county judge and a rep for being a well-respected figure liked by everybody in his community, than a guy who was a despised general or provincial president who the other party was grooming for the top job. Technically, anyone can run for President here. Look again, at Arnold....he was an actor! And by many counts, he has not done half-bad in California.) And show me an honest politican and I'll convert to Islam ...
Article 114:
2.A province or more has the the right to set a region according to a referendum called for in one of two ways:.......
--b. A demand by one tenth of the voters of the provinces that aim to set up a region.
You may as well hold up a giant sign saying: THOU SHALT SECEDE! No wonder the Kurds are dancing in the streets!!
As for the term "region"....there should be NO LANGUAGE in the constitution about "regions" at all. "Region" is a wonderfully ambiguous term that could mean anything from a semi-autonomous province with a weak local gov't that reports to a string central gov't with ultimate control over its sovereignity, to an American-style "state" with its own capital, flag, governor etc but functions just like an American state...it's "nationality" being in name only; to a fully fledged mini-country or secede state ovber which the weak central gov't is in name only. And that's the whole issue here: just what IS a region? If you ask me, the writers of this thing do not envsion a single Iraq at all, but are only adhering to their own personal agendas. Maybe the reason why we're still togehter is that there's no language about "states rights" and the country has just had to f#$&g well live with that!
The language laws are the most interesting. It's the kind of "fine print" issue that nobody looks much at, at the time; and it's snuck in without much comment, but down the road it could turn into the biggest pain in the rear of all.
Article 2:
...4:
b. The language used orally in offical institutions such as the Parliament and the Cabinet as well as official conventions should be one of the 2 languages (Arabic or Kurdish).
c. Recognising the offical documents in the 2 languages.
d. Opening the schools with 2 languages.
Right now, in the U.S, bilingual education is an explosive issue in areas such as California, Florida and other places where Spanish-speakers have displaced whites as the dominamt polulation demographic. There is heavy pressue by Republican governors and educators, and even some Democrats, to outlaw bilingual education in the primnary schools and replace it with English-only instruction. Here, it is a mere academic issue; an issue of whether or not having students learn in English helps them to assimilate into American society and move up the educational and income ladder faster. Those who are for it, argue that students learn faster if they have a right to use their home language in schools.
In Iraq, this would be a different story. The prohibition of certain languages from schools and government places could turn into a nationalistic issue...esp if a territory has voted itself into a "region." I am sure that there would be many ethnic Turks (I assume these are the "Turkomens") who would object (to put it mildly) at Turkish being benend from the schools and the halls of power. The step to assimilation is a kind of cultural genocide by the ruling powers at destroying "inferior languages" of others. The Irish in 19th-century Ireland knew this well, even before the Famine. Hence, the "hedge-row teachers" back then; and hence, the new law that road signs in non-"touristy" areas shoulld be in Gaelic only.Even though there is no immindent threatof national breakup (as there may have been during the Famine), 150 yrs later it is STILL an important enough issue to merit such a law. And consider what is happening to Welsh. In a few yrs, Welsh will dosppear as a spoken language. And that's the end of Wales as a politcal entity, isn't it? As for Scotland..it's east to think of it is "part of Britain" b/c nobody speaks Gaelic in Scotland anymore.
Language is not just the spoken tongue; it is the preserver of cultural identity. The national history of stories, poems, songs,etc is a part of this. Kill the language and you kill the culture; and thus, your grandchildren's identity as being the same thing you are.
Make Turkish outlawed outside the home in Kurdistan, (or Armenian anywhere else in Iraq, for example--every System of a Down fan knows that a sizeable percentage of the Christian population is of that ethnic group)
and efventually, children would nolt be taught in lessons that there were ever Turks or Kurds or any other group ever inhabited that stretch of land. Therefore, any claim to territory could be disputed a few generations down the line. This sounds reidiculous, but consdier the explosive issue of Kurdish-language TV stations fomenting the activities of the PKK. Language is the catalyist from which all popular movments spring.
As for the halls of power, banning, say, Turkish or English is follw...I suppose English is exempted from this law? But as any call center operator in Banglaore can tel you, slaving away for $500 a month, it is VERY imporant. I'm sure English is not on the list. It;s the language of business too.
As as for women's rights....the 25% law is transitional..this is "transitional".....a disaster.