Why Dialogue?

Karwan Anwar, Secretary of the Sulaymaniyah branch of the Kurdistan Journalists Syndicate.

Written by: Karwan Anwar, Secretary of the Sulaymaniyah branch of the Kurdistan Journalists Syndicate

Throughout history, humans have tried to build understanding between different groups and beliefs. Religions have often attempted to come closer to one another, despite fear and mistrust, while also being influenced by those who control narratives, space, and translation among religious communities.

Similarly, our nation—despite government positions, restrictions, and divisions between conservatives and open-minded people—still preserves a sense of human connection and love among individuals and families. Yet today, we see thousands of tons of bombs and missiles replacing dialogue. We ask: what happened to dialogue between Islam and Judaism, and between Shiite Iran and the United States? The opportunities for negotiation and understanding between these civilisations are still missing.

When two opposing sides try to move closer, the first step is always toward peace. However, these barriers are not easy to break, especially when ideas, languages, and identities are often targeted or suppressed.

If we look at Kurdish history, we see many attempts made to erase or weaken the Kurdish people, sometimes even in the name of dialogue and rights.

After many years of struggle, in 1970 the Kurdish movement and the Ba’ath regime signed the 11 March Agreement, which was initially welcomed by the Kurds and even described in some areas as a historic breakthrough for both Kurds and Arabs. However, shortly after the agreement, an assassination attempt was made when a car bomb targeted the son of Mullah Mustafa Barzani.

This incident contributed to the collapse of trust and the resumption of conflict. Kurdish history contains many similar cases where individuals involved in dialogue were arrested, killed, or targeted.

In general, the Kurdish people have often been open to dialogue and have paid a heavy price for it. As a result, there is a saying: “What the Kurds gain in war, they lose at the negotiating table.” Even so, dialogue remains essential in every era. Cooperation and coexistence open the door to peace and reflect the Kurdish spirit known throughout history.

Dialogue with different religions, sects, and nations should be developed into a principle of life and coexistence, forming the foundation for any modern political or organisational movement.

Another example of Kurdish dignity and coexistence can be seen in the 1991 uprising. In Sulaymaniyah, Erbil, and Duhok, around 100,000 to 150,000 Iraqi soldiers, officers, and personnel fell into the hands of Peshmerga forces. Instead of being mistreated, they were respectfully released and returned to their families in central and southern Iraq. Shortly afterwards, negotiations between the Kurdistan Front and the Iraqi government resumed.

This is one of many examples showing that the Kurdish approach—both at leadership and public level—has often been rooted in dialogue, negotiation, and communication rather than revenge and violence. This reflects an important aspect of our national character.