Kurdistan’s Referendum: Why Turnout Matters

Davan Yahya Khalil explores what a yes vote might mean for Kurdistan and its neighbours.

Kurdistan’s referendum may seem like a foregone conclusion, but with so much at stake now for the region, every vote is likely to matter. A large enough turnout will help to overcome any arguments about the legality of the process, or the likely outcomes.

As Kurdistan goes to the polls with its independence referendum, the outcome of the vote doesn’t appear to be in doubt. Opinion polls have repeatedly shown that Kurdistan’s population is in favour of independence, and that trend is likely to be reflected in the outcome of the referendum. Both of Kurdistan’s major political parties are in favour of a vote for independence, while even the level of opposition from some quarters abroad points to an awareness that a yes vote is the most likely result.

The question is likely to be what the consequences of that result are. Senior figures have already made it clear that a declaration of independence would not be immediate, but a yes vote would lead to a complex and potentially difficult period of discussion between Kurdistan and its neighbours.

Already, some Kurdistan’s neighbours are issuing warnings of potentially grave consequences, with Turkey and Iran calling the referendum an attack on their integrity, despite Kurdistan having functioned as a stable neighbour to them for many years. Russia has been ambivalent, stating that it has no official position on whether to recognise an independent Kurdistan as yet, although Israel has already stated that it will, and that the move has the potential to be beneficial for the Middle East as a whole. The UN meanwhile has called the move potentially destabilising, even though Iraq and the wider region have had years to come to terms with the idea of Kurdish independence.

These early signs suggest that there are likely to be calls among the international community to set aside the referendum’s results, and at least some refusals to recognise Kurdistan in the immediate aftermath of the vote. None of these are likely to affect the outcome of the vote, but instead appear to be attempts to negotiate its aftermath, setting out the case for future military action, or for using its threat as a tool in future discussions. The creation of a sufficiently hostile climate could lead to the reduction of the emerging country’s influence in the world, or even to international powers standing by while one or more of its neighbours attacks it in an attempt to acquire territory.

Baghdad, meanwhile, has sought to delay the referendum through legal processes in its own courts, unilaterally declaring it illegal, and ignoring arguments that its own failure to follow Iraq’s constitution provides sufficient grounds for the separation. As with the international calls, the legal process is likely to have little direct effect on the outcome of the referendum, which seems set to take place anyway. Such moves are even unlikely to influence international opinion directly, as it is a rare country that is truly happy about a potential independence referendum.

What it could do, however, is create an impression of illegitimacy that could in turn drive some voters away from the polls. If it succeeds in doing so, Baghdad may seek to argue that the referendum is not representative, which is a more powerful argument than any objection it can raise regarding legality. It is the kind of objection that could reduce Kurdistan’s international support, and make subsequent efforts to prevent its secession seem more legitimate.

The answer to this, of course, is to ensure that there is as big a turn out as possible for the referendum, demonstrating that it does in fact represent the will of Kurdistan’s people. Already, electronic voting has begun for those outside the country who are eligible to vote, and the numbers of ballots cast seem promising. The onus now will be on all those connected to Kurdistan’s political process to persuade people to turn out to vote.

Those arguing that the referendum should be stopped or postponed can only be countered by demonstrating that this is genuinely the will of the Kurdish people. If enough people express their will in the referendum, it creates a situation where international observers are less likely to stand against it, seeing a danger in trying to overturn the expressed will of Kurdistan’s millions of inhabitants.

The warnings from Kurdistan’s neighbours have also demonstrated the importance of security in the coming vote. It is essential that Kurdistan is able to provide a poll in which all participants are safe from the potential for attack, while being free to cast their vote in line with their beliefs. That requires a balancing act, because excessively heavy security could seem like an attempt to influence the result when viewed from the outside. With Baghdad already calling the vote illegal, it is vital that it is seen to be free, fair and open by all involved, and particularly by independent observers.

In spite of all the warnings, there is great potential for the independence referendum to bring beneficial outcomes for Kurdistan. It is clearly a potentially historic moment for the nascent country, and it is one that it is vital as many people as possible take part in, so that the results truly reflect their desires.

Davan Yahya Khalil is a Masters student of law, an author and a political activist. Brought up in Kurdistan during the period when the Kurds were being persecuted by the Iraqi government, he currently lives in the UK, is a member of the British Association of Journalists, and is the founder of news site The New Mail. He has written three books on the region. His previous books include The Idea of Kurdistan and Kurdistan: Genocide and Rebirth, which was an international book awards finalist in 2015.

Image Credit: jan Sefti Via Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)