In June Gorran quickly turned down a conditional joint offer from the PUK and the KDP to reactivate the parliament which called for the resignation of the parliament speaker after the first session.
The KDP last week dropped its precondition it had set for the parliament reactivation, saying that they are open to welcome back the parliament speaker Yousif Mohammed, a Gorran member, to return to his office in Erbil.
Gorran is yet to respond to the KDP offer.
The fact that the party this time has asked for some time to consider the KDP offer seems to suggest that the offer has some elements of a win-win deal aimed at ending a two-year political deadlock.
The new leader of Gorran, highly expected to be Omar sayid Ali, who helped Nawshirwan Mustafa to found Gorran in 2009, would soon be tested over his maneuvering skills in the soon-to-be-held negotiations with the KDP.
The main issue for Gorran is not the fact that the parliament is closed for about two years or that the time or circumstances are not right for an independece referendum. It all rather comes down to one central issue: the issue of the Kurdish presidency.
Gorran is for a parliamentary system, and has been very clear that the term of Kurdish president Masoud Barzani has ended four years ago. President Barzani himself has acknowledged the fact and said that he will not run in the next elections set for November 1.
Bills passed by the Kurdish parliament has to be signed into law by the president, and knowing that Gorran considers Barzani’s term expired and therefore illegitimate, the party has refused to seek his signature.
So even if the Kurdish parliament is reactivated and passes a law backing the referendum, nothing will have been solved if the two do not agree on the president and his authority to sign the law.
The question now is, would Gorran under a new leadership accept Barzani’s rule in his office until the referendum held in September, and then possibly until the parliamentary and presidential election of November 1?
Pragmatic politics require Gorran to enter the talks with a mindset of winning as many concessions as possible from the KDP instead of sticking to a media campaign with the upcoming November election in mind.
Gorran should not bet on the PUK for a stronger hand in the negotiations. The PUK has already made its decision over the referendum, though in less clear terms: that it is for the referendum with or without parliament.
With slightly over two months to go until the referendum, the PUK is put in a difficult, yet an interesting situation.
It can continue to seek a negotiated solution for the KDP and Gorran, as it has been trying to no avail since 2015, or pick one ally over the other, and subsequently give weight to that side.
Mala Bakhtiyar, a senior PUK official, told reporters earlier this week that they will not wait forever until the parliament is reactivated. He said if they come to the conclusion that the legislature is unable to get back to business, then they are going to take “decisive” action.
This, added to his other comments that they are for the referendum, despite the objection from Tehran--a PUK ally--it means that it may be, the PUK picks the all-powerful KDP over a weak Gorran.
This is not to say that the PUK is an all-united party, but the decision makers are well represented by Bakhgtiyar’s views, as opposed to the few whose views resemble Gorran’s.
As for the KDP, it should understand that Gorran has a well-established and influential media campaign to sway the votes on September 25 one or another in areas it considers its stronghold, certainly in Sulaimani and Halabja
provinces. The last thing the KDP wants is a big vote for independence in its strongholds of Duhok, and Erbil and a small “Yes” turnout in Gorran areas.
