Tikrit, that was considered a stronghold of Saddam Hussein’s Baath-party whose members played a major role in the rise of ISIS, has been liberated over a year ago, with other towns in the Sunni heartland ISIS was feeding on following suit, yet the battle for Mosul has been delayed over and over again.
The reason given was mostly military: the Iraqi army and the Kurdish Peshmerga troops were not ready for the big job, or they needed their back secured before moving on Mosul.
The large numbers of refugees that would result from the operation were another reason for delay, as nobody wanted to repeat the situation in Fallujah, where refugees poured out without refugee camps having been prepared for them.
For Mosul, that hurdle is being taken. The UN’s refugee organization, UNHCR, is working with both the Iraqi and the Kurdish governments to set up not only camps but also make arrangements for out-of-camp housing.
Already, thousands of inhabitants of villages and towns that were taken from ISIS have found refuge, with some even returning home again after the explosives ISIS left behind were cleared.
But Mosul is still waiting. And now another reason for delay is on the table: there is no political solution for after the liberation that is acceptable for all players involved.
And yet, the situation in the city is getting worse all the time.
The city has swelled due to all the refugees that fled from other cities ISIS lost, some of them because of their affiliation with the group, others because they were more scared of the Shiite militias involved in the military operation than of ISIS. Locals think there could be over two million inhabitants now.
Yet because of the loss of supply routes in combination with the way ISIS rules, many now suffer from a lack of food. Prices have gone up while ISIS still expects people to pay the taxes it imposed.
At the same time, there is no freedom. People hide in their houses to keep out of ISIS’s way, not to be picked up for some reason and be executed for some trumped up case.
People are suffering, are the reports from Mosul, and many just want one thing: to be rid of the force that is suppressing them, of the villagers that imposed their will on them.
They need the liberation sooner rather than later. But they show fear for the results, if political forces beforehand agree to divide their city.
Mosul Eye, a blogger still reporting from the city, made that clear this week, writing:
“We Do Not Want to Join Turkey. We Do Not Want to Join Kurdistan. We Do Not Want to Divide Our City. We Want to Stay an Iraqi Province Within Our Natural Borders Under International Protection. We Are Terrified of Any Genocides and Bloodbaths Might Occur After Liberation.”
The blogger gives a solution, both to the fears of the Mosul people, and the demands to have a solid political solution in place before chasing ISIS out.
He asks for an international trusteeship for Mosul, turning it into an international town, like for instance Berlin after the Second World War.
International rule would give the local parties time to agree on a solution that shows the desire of the Mosul people – which is rather more difficult when most of them are still under occupation.
Yet the will of the people should be the leading incentive, not the will of the liberators, or of politicians who claim they speak for those still under occupation.
At this stage, the Mosul people do not want to see their town and province divided. Getting the international community in for a temporary rule, would give them time to decide whether the perspective they formed under occupation indeed is the right one.
Mosul is important, for it is a possible breeding ground of new resistance and terrorism. Giving the city a rule it does not want, might ignite this.
A less well known example is the Moroccan town of Tanger, that about a century ago (1923-1956) was ruled by eight western countries in coordination with the Moroccan Sultan (later King), to solve disagreements between France, Spain and Britain about who would control it.
Although the situation is different because these countries were colonial powers, similarities stand out too, as Mosul also is not only part of a local power struggle, but also of a geopolitical one.
International rule brought Tanger prosperity and a situation where different ethnic groups were able to live in harmony.
Exactly that is needed for Mosul too. After having been looted and impoverished by radicals, its inhabitants desperately need a period of peace. Most probably only international rule can bring that.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rudaw.
