Error occured during this request! Please try again later.
LONDON – Two British MPs made strong statements in support of the rights of the Kurdistan Region in questions in the Commons to the Middle East minister Alistair Burt.
All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) Chairman and Conservative MP Jack Lopresti had tabled a question about whether the British government would send observers to examine the Iraqi elections in May. A second Conservative MP and APPG vice-chairman, Robert Halfon had tabled a question about the UK's work to encourage dialogue between Erbil and Baghdad.
Burt replied to both questions: "I was able to meet with both Prime Minister Abadi and Kurdish Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani in Munich at the weekend, when on behalf of the UK I encouraged the continuing dialogue recently begun between them individually, which is essential to the long-term stability of Iraq. We have no current plans for observers from the UK to attend May’s elections, but we are working with others to ensure efficient and effective monitoring.”
On the issue of observers, Lopresti then asked: "Will British diplomats study the Federal Government’s progress in implementing the Iraqi constitution, especially in disputed areas like Kirkuk, where there have been reports of murder, looting and expropriation, and where the autonomy promised under the Iraqi constitution is under threat?”
Burt's reply was "There is no doubt that both sides see the opportunity under the constitution to ensure that the relationships between them are strong and good. There has been a great deal of conciliation in an area that could be one of much greater conflict, and the UK is encouraging that dialogue to minimise the risk of the issues that [Lopresti] raises."
Halfon then asked: "Will [he] accept the Foreign Affairs Committee’s observation that many Kurds feel imprisoned in a country they see as not implementing the commitment to equality for them? Does he also agree that the five month-long blockade of international flights to and from Kurdistan has been a needless outrage, separating families, obstructing medical treatment and impairing the economy, and will he encourage Baghdad to lift the blockade?”
Burt replied that "The issue of the airport is foremost in the discussions between the respective Prime Ministers, and there is a recognition that if the arrangements for the airport could be changed, that would make a difference. It is essential for the future of a Kurdish region in Iraq that it is stable and secure and that rights are honoured on both sides, and that the constitution is seen to be effective."
Both MPs exuded passion in their defence of Kurdish rights, as did several MPs in relation to the position of the Kurds in Syria and Turkey. Labour MP Barry Sheerman asked: "I know the Minister to be a fair-minded man, so when any of these negotiations are taking place, will he balance loyalty as allies of the Kurdish people over many long years with the track record of President Erdoğan?"
The Minister is an old hand at providing sympathetic and, not surprisingly, diplomatic answers that stick to the government's agreed position. He is unflappable and this is why he is seen as a safe pair of hands but also one who has sympathies with the Kurds.
When the Commons debated the APPG's proposal for officially recognising the Anfal genocide on its 25th anniversary in 2013, Burt and his then Labour counterpart Ian Lucas were clearly moved by the power and passion of the speakers, which included Nadhim Zahawi, Robert Halfon, Mike Gapes, Dave Anderson, Ann Clwyd and Jeremy Corbyn.
The two frontbenchers agreed to adjust their common position to signal greater sympathy for the case. This has not been translated into official government recognition as they both agreed that this should be judicially rather than politically led. But it was from this debate that the government agreed it would formally mark Anfal every year.
All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) Chairman and Conservative MP Jack Lopresti had tabled a question about whether the British government would send observers to examine the Iraqi elections in May. A second Conservative MP and APPG vice-chairman, Robert Halfon had tabled a question about the UK's work to encourage dialogue between Erbil and Baghdad.
Burt replied to both questions: "I was able to meet with both Prime Minister Abadi and Kurdish Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani in Munich at the weekend, when on behalf of the UK I encouraged the continuing dialogue recently begun between them individually, which is essential to the long-term stability of Iraq. We have no current plans for observers from the UK to attend May’s elections, but we are working with others to ensure efficient and effective monitoring.”
On the issue of observers, Lopresti then asked: "Will British diplomats study the Federal Government’s progress in implementing the Iraqi constitution, especially in disputed areas like Kirkuk, where there have been reports of murder, looting and expropriation, and where the autonomy promised under the Iraqi constitution is under threat?”
Burt's reply was "There is no doubt that both sides see the opportunity under the constitution to ensure that the relationships between them are strong and good. There has been a great deal of conciliation in an area that could be one of much greater conflict, and the UK is encouraging that dialogue to minimise the risk of the issues that [Lopresti] raises."
Halfon then asked: "Will [he] accept the Foreign Affairs Committee’s observation that many Kurds feel imprisoned in a country they see as not implementing the commitment to equality for them? Does he also agree that the five month-long blockade of international flights to and from Kurdistan has been a needless outrage, separating families, obstructing medical treatment and impairing the economy, and will he encourage Baghdad to lift the blockade?”
Burt replied that "The issue of the airport is foremost in the discussions between the respective Prime Ministers, and there is a recognition that if the arrangements for the airport could be changed, that would make a difference. It is essential for the future of a Kurdish region in Iraq that it is stable and secure and that rights are honoured on both sides, and that the constitution is seen to be effective."
Both MPs exuded passion in their defence of Kurdish rights, as did several MPs in relation to the position of the Kurds in Syria and Turkey. Labour MP Barry Sheerman asked: "I know the Minister to be a fair-minded man, so when any of these negotiations are taking place, will he balance loyalty as allies of the Kurdish people over many long years with the track record of President Erdoğan?"
The Minister is an old hand at providing sympathetic and, not surprisingly, diplomatic answers that stick to the government's agreed position. He is unflappable and this is why he is seen as a safe pair of hands but also one who has sympathies with the Kurds.
When the Commons debated the APPG's proposal for officially recognising the Anfal genocide on its 25th anniversary in 2013, Burt and his then Labour counterpart Ian Lucas were clearly moved by the power and passion of the speakers, which included Nadhim Zahawi, Robert Halfon, Mike Gapes, Dave Anderson, Ann Clwyd and Jeremy Corbyn.
The two frontbenchers agreed to adjust their common position to signal greater sympathy for the case. This has not been translated into official government recognition as they both agreed that this should be judicially rather than politically led. But it was from this debate that the government agreed it would formally mark Anfal every year.
Comments
Rudaw moderates all comments submitted on our website. We welcome comments which are relevant to the article and encourage further discussion about the issues that matter to you. We also welcome constructive criticism about Rudaw.
To be approved for publication, however, your comments must meet our community guidelines.
We will not tolerate the following: profanity, threats, personal attacks, vulgarity, abuse (such as sexism, racism, homophobia or xenophobia), or commercial or personal promotion.
Comments that do not meet our guidelines will be rejected. Comments are not edited – they are either approved or rejected.
Post a comment