The governor says that he does not mind how Kirkuk’s oil gets to the market—whether through Iraq or Kurdistan Region—as long as they get their share of petrodollars for public services and is done transparently. He also believes the time has come for Kirkuk to break away from Baghdad and form an independent region of its own, which he argues would eventually bring the province closer to the Kurdistan Region. But, he says, it can only be decided by the people of Kirkuk themselves.
Rudaw: It is said that the economic situation in Kirkuk is poor.
Najmaldin Karim: Since 2014 our economic situation has been deteriorating because in that year Iraq’s budget was not approved followed by the arrival of ISIS. We have not received one single dinar from Baghdad since the start of this year except 200 million dinars sent twice for the city’s garbage collection expenses.
We have not received one single dinar from Baghdad 
Does the Kurdistan Region give you any assistance?
Yes, the Peshmerga who are serving in Kirkuk are paid by the Kurdistan Region. Most Kurdish civil servants in Kirkuk get their pay from the Kurdistan Region. More than 8,000 employees of the Kurdish education department here get their salaries from the Kurdistan Region. The security forces, veteran Peshmerga and martyr families get paid by the Kurdistan Region.
What does Kurdistan Region gain from Kirkuk in return?
The Kurdistan Region has been overseeing 60 percent of Kirkuk’s oil since 2014 through Kar Company. This oil is exported or given to refineries and the Region has benefited that way, and we have received our share of what is known as petrodollar but that hasn’t come through since April.
Would it be better for Kirkuk to send out its oil through the Kurdistan Region or through Iraq?
Since 2014 we have not received a penny of petrodollar from Baghdad, so we have an agreement with the Kurdistan Region which has been handling Kirkuk’s oil 100 percent since July 2015. Our agreement is that we get our petrodollar, and in March Baghdad cut the 40% portion that was exported through the Kurdistan Region, arguing that they had a deal that obliged the Kurdistan Region to give Baghdad money made from selling oil through SOMO.
Is Baghdad right in this?
No, Baghdad shouldn’t have done that. It is damaging in three ways. First: Kirkuk lost its petrodollar. Second: some oil extracted in order to strip it of its gas and then dumped back into the well which is harmful for our wells. Third: Baghdad knows very well that the Kurdistan Region today is dealing with a financial crisis and this type of act would damage its ties with Erbil.
What is the best deal for Kirkuk, to export its oil through the Kurdistan Region or Iraq?
The Peshmerga who are defending Kirkuk are paid by the Kurdistan Region. The best for Kirkuk is to extract and sell its oil through whoever it might be. Baghdad cannot do that. It has not been able to export Kirkuk’s oil since March 2014 because terrorists had blown up the Kirkuk pipeline in Tikrit. And since ISIS the only route for Kirkuk’s oil has been the Kurdistan Region.
You’ve dealt with both parties (Erbil and Baghdad). Which one is more transparent and has a more organized system?
A lot is being said in the international media about Kurdistan Region’s oil, and as for Baghdad, corruption is rife there. We all saw what was published on the works of Unaoil company, on how money was embezzled and how it ran its affairs. But here we mean to stress that they should honor the deal we have with the Kurdistan Region and we’ve been reassured at the highest level such as the Kurdish presidency, cabinet of ministers, and ministry of natural resources. We know they have financial crisis and therefore it is understandable if the petrodollar payments are laid a month. We haven’t got anything from Baghdad for a year and a half.
What is the public opinion in Kirkuk? Do they want stronger dealing with the Kurdistan Region or with Baghdad?
We have plenty of administrational issues with Baghdad. The people of Kirkuk want good relations with Baghdad. So do we. But they also understand the importance of good relations with the Kurdistan Region because at the moment it is the Kurdish Peshmerga protecting Kirkuk.
You seem disappointed with Baghdad that’s why you’ve been speaking of an autonomous region for Kirkuk most recently.
I believe in federalism and devolution of power for provinces to run their own affairs except sovereign matters.
But you are asking for more than that?
The best for Kirkuk is to extract and sell its oil through whoever it might be.
Baghdad is still acting on the decrees of the revolutionary command council of the Baath era. Eight ministries have decided to transfer their authority to Kirkuk but the cabinet of ministers is stopping it under the excuse that provincial elections haven’t been held in Kirkuk. Employment opportunities in Kirkuk, especially for Kurds, is close to none. At our provincial council we have a law that stipulates no one should be employed whose name is not in the 1957 census. But when we stop such employments Baghdad immediately summons the heads of departments and punishes them. For instance, in 2013 nearly 1000 teachers were employed and none of them was a Kurd or Turkmen. For budget and finances we are at Baghdad’s mercy and we haven’t got a penny from it this year. We cannot go on this way.
So, is your project just a reaction or seeking a real solution for what the Kurds have been dealing with for years?
No, it is not just a reaction. It comes from experience. The Kurds went to Baghdad and partook in writing a constitution that would guarantee a federal system. Basra seeks its own federal region so are Anbar and Salahaddin, but Baghdad does not let them.
Who do you pin your hopes on for this project? The people of Kirkuk, the Kurdish presidency or political parties?
We count on the people of Kirkuk because if they don’t vote for it no political party, group or region can make it happen. Let’s also be realistic. 12 years have passed and Article 140 hasn’t been implemented yet. People who returned to Kirkuk and got plots of land of 200 square meters haven’t been given ownership papers and those who were paid loads of money to return to their areas are still here. On top of that, lands designated for Kurds and Turkmen haven’t been abandoned.
So that means an independent region is the solution?
Baghdad is still acting on the decrees of the revolutionary command council of the Baath era I believe keeping Baghdad away from Kirkuk will bring Kirkuk closer to the Kurdistan Region.
Why don’t you focus these efforts and energy on annexing Kirkuk to the Kurdistan Region instead, if you are so sure that people are with you?
For me Kirkuk is Kurdistan and I would rather that happen today than tomorrow. But is it possible?
Have you tried?
I have spoken at length with all parties, with the US, UN, EU, Turkey and even Iran. But if you want to do that today, you will have no support. But there will be support for it to become an independent region.
How about your own party leaders? What do they think?
If they see how Baghdad is changing the demographics of Kirkuk in the name of law and constitution and Baghdad’s attitude towards us, they will be convinced to keep Kirkuk away from Baghdad.
Why are they not convinced then?
I have convinced them but I won’t name names.
Where do Turkey, Iran and US stand on this issue?
I was in Turkey with Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani and Qubad Talabani [his deputy] and we spoke with [then] Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and President Erdogan. They asked openly that Kirkuk becomes an independent region. As regards the US, UN, the EU and even Baghdad, I have not seen any opposition from them to this suggestion and it has been raised with them.
Did you ask for Kirkuk to become part of the Kurdistan Region?
Yes, I did but it was not successful.
This idea of Kirkuk becoming an independent region of its own is whose brainchild?
Baghdad is changing the demographics of Kirkuk It has been my idea for 3-4 years and I am hoping to sell it to the people of Kirkuk, to the Kirkuk provincial council and political parties in Kurdistan, because that is the only way to protect the rights of the people of Kirkuk and be able to serve them.
Would you be able to get President Masoud Barzani’s backing?
I have spoken with him and he says it doesn’t matter who runs it and how, what is important is for Kirkuk to keep its Kurdistani identity.
There is talk of a suggestion to export Kirkuk’s oil through Iran.
Where is the pipeline for that?
It is said that work is being done to make that happen in the future.
There is such talk, but I am not aware of its details. Practically it will take two years to build a pipeline.
Whose idea is it?
It has been raised by some, but I don’t find it practical. It is normal to have two pipelines, but at the moment there is only one and while waiting for a second one to be built we still have to export our oil on the exiting one and would not be logical to wait for one to be built through Iran.
Have you tried recently to restart the sale of Kirkuk oil through Kurdistan Region’s pipeline?
Recently there was a delegation from Iraq’s oil ministry here who had been to the Kurdistan Region, too, and there was talk of trying to reach an agreement to start exporting the oil again.
