Bombings Cripple More Than Civilians

When two suicide bombers blew themselves up inside the offices of the two main Kurdish political parties Sunday, they not only killed scores of civilians but further crippled Iraq’s move toward self-governance.

The violence seems certain to reduce the already slim chances of Iraqi elections before July and could even delay those scheduled for early 2005 -- complicating U.S. efforts to turn over power to an interim government that could be regarded as legitimate. In addition, it could strengthen Kurdish groups that want to break away from the rest of the country.

After months of primarily targeting U.S. forces and members of the Iraqi police, the insurgents appeared to be targeting potential members of an independent Iraqi government, including the Kurdish political parties that dominate northern Iraq, analysts said.

“This was a very political attack,” said Toby Dodge, an Iraq expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. “It was not nihilistic; they are targeting key politicians

The Kurds, staunch U.S. allies for many years, occupy a semiautonomous region of northern Iraq known as Kurdistan and are among a handful of influential members of the U.S.-backed Iraqi Governing Council. They are crucial to Iraq’s quest for sovereignty because without the cooperation of the Kurds, the country would probably splinter.

“The bombing sends two messages across the region: The first is, we are still here and we are dangerous; the second is, if you collaborate with the coalition, you are a legitimate target and you must face the consequences,” said Charles Heyman, a senior defense analyst for Jane’s Consultancy Group, based in London.

No group claimed responsibility for Sunday’s attacks, but initial suspicion fell on Ansar al Islam, an extremist Muslim organization that is deeply antagonistic to the secular Kurdish government. Other possible suspects are former Baathists among Iraq’s Sunni Arabs who resent the Kurds’ cooperation with the United States; and non-Kurds in northern Iraq who oppose Kurdish efforts to gain control of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk.

Still, analysts said, the intent was clear: to weaken those vying to lead the new Iraq.

The U.S. had planned to hold regional caucuses to select members of a new assembly, which would choose a new transitional national government. But that plan is being hotly contested by Iraq’s Shiite leaders, who want direct elections.

An elected government, even if it is chosen in an imperfect vote, would put in place politicians with wider support than either the current U.S. occupation authority or the Governing Council, which is made up primarily of Kurds and former exiles. Installation of an elected government could go a long way toward marginalizing the insurgency, analysts say.

“It is in the insurgents’ interest to try to push back the elections planned for the middle of next year, and they are doing a reasonably efficient job of that at the moment,” Heyman said.

“Elections will give some legitimacy to whatever regime takes over in late 2004,” he said, adding: “A reasonably democratic Iraq means the Sunnis, who have had a very good deal for more than 20 years, will never have a chance of getting back to power.... By and large, they haven’t accepted that their day is over.”

The minority Sunnis and Kurds have largely agreed with U.S. officials who say the country is not ready for direct elections before the planned June restoration of Iraqi sovereignty. They calculate that they may be able to secure more influence in Iraq’s new government if it is chosen through the U.S.-favored caucus system.

But a key Shiite leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, is pushing hard for direct elections. Because Shiite Muslims make up at least 60% of Iraq’s population, he recognizes that they could win a majority of the seats in a national assembly.

Sunday’s bombs seemed timed to coincide with the arrival this week of U.N. officials who will attempt to determine whether elections are feasible by the end of June.

Security will be a crucial factor in the United Nations’ assessment. If voters and candidates are at risk of attacks, it will be difficult for the U.N. to sanction elections. With the bombing in Irbil, previously a relatively calm area of Iraq, it appears that no part of the country is safe from attacks.

If Iraq is deemed too unstable to hold elections -- a conclusion that seems difficult to avoid -- it will exacerbate the anger brewing in the south of the country. Left unsatisfied, the Shiite Muslims concentrated there will almost certainly undertake mass protests, a move that would further unsettle the poorest, most populous part of the country.

In addition to threatening Shiite hopes for elections, Sunday’s bombings could also strengthen those Kurds who want a greater measure of autonomy -- or outright independence -- for their part of Iraq. Those Kurds may argue that they need a free hand with their own security forces to keep out enemies.

The prospect of an autonomous Kurdistan is alarming to U.S. ally Turkey, which has a significant Kurdish population and fought a Kurdish rebel campaign for independence for much of the 1990s.

Peter Galbraith, a former U.S. diplomat and an expert on the Kurds, told Reuters news agency that Sunday’s attack could reinforce the case of Kurdish separatists, threatening further chaos in Iraq.

“It is too early to predict the fallout, but the bombings will strengthen those in the Kurdish movement who want to insulate Kurdistan physically and politically from the rest of Iraq,” he said.

Taken together, the continuing violence, diminishing prospects for elections and possibility that Kurds will push harder for autonomy will make it that much harder for the United States to move ahead with the planned transfer of sovereign authority to the Iraqis in June.

“The worse things get, the more the Americans and the Governing Council will be blamed,” Dodge said. “The way you get out of this vicious cycle is by holding elections, because elections will force political mobilization; elections will force links to form between the countryside and Baghdad. That’s been the missing link since the end of the war.... The population feels no stake in the government.”

He added: “If you don’t have elections, the men with the guns gain power.”