������Ƶ

The much anticipated operation to liberate Mosul has been underway for two weeks already. The Iraqi army, Kurdish Peshmerga, Sunni and Shia militias are all involved and supported by a United States-led coalition and its airstrikes.

The operation marks the U.S. forces return to Iraq after the controversial withdrawal in 2011. Since the emergence of ISIL (or the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) in 2014, the number of U.S. military advisors slowly but steadily has increased to over 5,000.

After more than two years of the train-and-equip program for Iraqi forces and Peshmerga, the early signs of the operation seem promising, with a good level of cooperation between the various military groups involved — something which many analysts warned could further complicate the future of the liberated territories.

Addressing a crowd of journalists in Khazir, Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdistan Region, announced the success of the first round of the operation and praised the coordination between the Iraqi and Kurdish Peshmerga, calling it “historic.” He added that this is the first time that both forces have shed blood together.

He also warned the operation could be a lengthy one and that there is no a political agreement in place between Erbil and Baghdad besides the military one.

A Post-ISIL Mosul

Policy makers and analysts had urged that non-military elements be addressed prior to launching any offensives against ISIL in Iraq’s second-largest city and the militants’ last stronghold in the country. Earlier in September a report by the Middle East Research Institute urged for the structural issues that led to the emergence of ISIL to be taken into account to avoid any void in the aftermath of the operation.

The report also called for the urgency of humanitarian planning, addressing issues of governance and post-conflict security and reconstruction and reconciliation to prevent the power dynamics that allowed the rise of ISIL in the wake of systematic marginalization of Iraq’s Sunni population. Despite such calls, the operation kicked off without addressing these crucial non-military aspects and without any political agreement between the political actors on how to govern post-ISIL Mosul.

Two weeks on from the operation the absence of order in the newly liberated areas are visible.

Many complain about the dysfunctional government and the ease with which ISIL captured Mosul and the surrounding countryside two years ago. Colonel Khalid Jasim al-jabardi told The Economist, “The (Mosul) mayor is still in Erbil, millions of dollars have been sent, but there’s still no electricity, no food, no water. People are starting to say that life under Daesh [ISIL] was better.

“If the same happens when Mosul falls, then we will have big problems. Perhaps not Daesh, but another terrorist group will emerge.”

In addition to the military battle, which seems to be going underway as planned, frictions have emerged as a result of Turkey’s role in the fight. Turkey’s military actions in Bashiqa east of Mosul and deployment of its tanks and artillery near Iraqi border has infuriated the government in Baghdad and elicited a warning from Iraq’s Prime Minister, but Ankara says the move is a precaution.

Political analysts believe Turkey is attempting to export its internal crisis to Iraq in the wake of the failed coup and wants a role in the battle to retake Mosul from ISIL, by virtue of being a member of the anti-ISIL coalition.

Iraq’s Island of Decency At Risk

Compared to the rest of Iraq, the Kurdistan region has often been seen as an island of decency and a beacon of hope for the rest of Iraq thanks to its economic development coupled with political stability. Its Peshmerga forces have been crucial ground troops holding the ISIL rampage in the region, and they will continue to do so as the battle for the liberation of Mosul is underway.

Speaking to Thomas L. Friedman, the New York Times columnist, on his decision to authorize military force to protect the refugees from ISIL and Kurdistan on August 2016, President Obama noted “the Kurdish region is functional the way we would like to see. It is tolerant of other sects and other religions in a way that we would like to see elsewhere.” Friedman describes Kurdistan as an island of decency.

Compared to the rest of Iraq, the Kurdistan region has often been seen as an island of decency and a beacon of hope for the rest of Iraq.

However, the president warned against the Kurd’s total reliance on the United States, adding, “I don’t want to get in the business for that matter of being the Kurdish air force, in the absence of a commitment of the people on the ground to get their act together and do what’s necessary politically to start protecting themselves and to push back against ISIL.”

Two years on, this rare stability remains at risk due to multiple shocks, including the political stalemate since last year. The deadlock is the result of a power struggle among the region’s main political parties over the controversial presidency crisis.

Despite U.S.-sponsored negotiations, the political parties failed to reach any breakthrough. While Barzani continues his tasks as president, controversies remain over the fate of his office.

The consequences of the protracted political deadlock, accompanied by the economic decline, have been severe. Parliament has failed to hold any sessions to pass necessary legislations to tackle economic crunch since August last year. The speaker of parliament and several ministers were dismissed from their posts without early elections or cabinet reshuffle, which in turn has impacted the overall governance process.

As a result, the public is paying a high price and continues to suffer from the lack of sufficient service delivery. Economic decline coupled with the collapse of a democratic order in the Kurdistan region, if the parliament remains muffled and the parties fail to reconvene, would add to the instability of Iraq and the Middle East.

The United States should therefore intensify and leverage its influence and condition its military and financial support for the Kurdistan region to encourage political parties to resume talks and restoration of the governance system.

Long-term stability in the post-ISIS Mosul, Iraq and the Kurdistan region requires a multifaceted approach, which includes addressing the non-military elements impeding peace and prosperity. A stable post-ISIS Mosul, Kurdistan and Iraq requires the United States to have an overarching approach to help in ending the politics of marginalization and sectarianism but also for the rule of law, good governance and accountability to triumph.