How will history judge President Talabani?
This was the first thing I thought of after the so called democratic elections in Iraq brought us Talabani and gave him the honor of being named "His Highness, President Of Iraq". It was both a symbolic and a historical event. It was symbolic because the idea of transforming Iraq from a totalitarian, closed, exclusively Sunni Arab-dominated state to a pluralistic, open, and inclusive state could not have a better start than by electing a Kurd as president. Talabani will be however president only for a transitional period of less than eight months and no one can be sure as to what will happen after that period. It was also a historical moment because throughout of her history, and since being artificially created as a modern nation by the UK, Iraq has never been able to accommodate a separate Kurdish entity on what was agreed to be its territory.
Having said all that, and after spotting the above photo at "Baghdad Dweller", I see this is also a symbolic and historical scene. Symbolic of TWO countries, and that Kurds will never ever live in one united Iraq unless maybe they change 'Iraq Republic' to 'Kurdistan Republic' (God forbid). And historical because this scene will not be tolerated by Arabs in general. I see it as a starting signal for a new cycle of violence attacks and counter attacks.
Poor Iraq!!
{ 3 comments }
Regarding the Flags and so .. one reason that you see 2 Flags here is that the Iraqi flag is Sadam’s Flag, which to some degree represented his power, which could not be accepted by all Iraqis, and thus it doesn’t represent a “United” Iraq. There had been issues with this flag before, and a proposal to an ugly bluish flag as well. I am not sure where did this end though.
I agree that it doesn’t make sense to have 2 Flags raised for an Iraqi president, but put in mind that Nothern Iraq was until recently (a couple of years) a territory with it’s own parlament, flag, and local law inforcement, and changes toward reuniting Iraq are not some overnight changes, it will take time, and I really see it happening.
Yes, it might represent the old regime, but still it is the honor of the country. As you mentioned, they tried to change it and it didn’t work. What does that tell us? Either they honor the old flag, or they can’t make up their mind for a new flag at this time. In both cases, it’s the right of the people of the country to select their symbol.
However, if they conceder that the flag is a representation of Sadam, then why are they respecting it? So the conclusion is that it still represent Iraq, not a person. Now, one stupid opinion at Baghdad Dweller:
This is completely ignorant look. It seems that he don’t know that the second flag is of Kurdistan. Saying that it’s of a neighboring country suggest that Kurdistan is an independent state and ‘His Highness’ is on official visit to the neighboring country!!!
Pardon me, a citizen of Kurdistan is the president of Iraq and is on official visit to his neighboring country?! Isn’t that stupid and pathetic?
Haitham,
You show classic Arab opinion which demonstrate pessimism, optimism, arabism and confusion all at the same time. You try to say something good:
“transforming Iraq from a totalitarian, closed, exclusively Sunni Arab-dominated state to a pluralistic, open, and inclusive state could not have a better start than by electing a Kurd as president”
But then you also said:
– “after the so called democratic elections in Iraq”, the so called?
– “brought us Talabani”, brought you?
– “since being artificially created as a modern nation by the UK”, artificially created?
– “I see it as a starting signal for a new cycle of violence attacks and counter attacks”, how do you see that, from the flags?
Anyway, as for having to flags, I might as well copy what I said at Baghdad Dweller: