كفاح محمود

Political crises can develop into a “political stroke” when decision-making channels become blocked by competing centers of power, conflicting authority and excessive bureaucracy. If left untreated, this condition produces political paralysis: governments and legislatures remain formally in place but cannot implement decisions, deliver plans or respond effectively to recurring crises. The resulting normalization of inaction erodes public confidence and leaves the state managing its problems rather than building its future. Institutional reform, clearly defined powers, respect for the law, reduced power struggles and greater reliance on competence are presented as ways to restore the state’s capacity to act.

Political protests, sharp divisions, economic crises and declining trust in institutions are presented as symptoms of a broader political illness rather than problems in themselves. The column argues that corruption, weak justice, concentrated decision-making, institutional decay and unequal wealth distribution are the underlying causes that governments must address instead of relying on ministerial changes, temporary reforms, security crackdowns or new promises. Public debate, a free press, responsible opposition and an independent judiciary may create short-term political tension, but they can serve as an early warning system. Suppressing criticism and dissent produces artificial stability, allowing crises to deepen until the state becomes unable to recover.

Examines political hybridization, where politicians simultaneously participate in governing and oppose the government to evade responsibility. Highlights how this duality weakens democratic accountability, blurs the roles of power and opposition, erodes public trust, and fosters a culture that normalizes political inconsistency. Stresses that democracy depends on clear responsibilities and that societal tolerance of such behavior enables it to spread and damage state institutions.

Describes a deteriorating political environment where unethical practices spread like a contagion, transforming minor transgressions into normalized behavior that corrupts political and social life. Highlights how misinformation, defamation, and emotional manipulation replace constructive engagement, ultimately weakening societal immunity and enabling systemic decay. Warns that political collapse occurs not through isolated corruption but through widespread imitation of harmful practices, marking a shift from healthy to diseased political dynamics.

Political parties in Iraq and the Kurdistan Region repeatedly fail to form a genuine national opposition, treating power as spoils and using obstruction to reclaim influence lost at the ballot box. Losing factions exploit regional allies, stall parliament and government formation, and convert internal deadlock into leverage for external agendas. Structural issues such as security‑state legacies, rentier politics, patronage networks and electoral laws designed to fragment political competition further weaken the possibility of a constructive opposition. Building a functional opposition requires legal recognition, oversight powers and electoral reforms that prioritize programs over patronage, ensuring political alternation based on policy rather than obstruction.

US and Israeli strikes severely damaged Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure, leading to a negotiated settlement that limits its nuclear ambitions and curbs support for regional armed groups. Iranian media portrays the outcome as a victory, despite significant concessions affecting its nuclear program and regional proxies. The contrast between public narrative and negotiated realities highlights weakened Iranian influence and strained allied factions across Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq.

The text highlights the Peshmerga as a unique and ethical Kurdish fighting force with a century-long legacy rooted in resistance, tracing its origins from early Kurdish uprisings through the 2014 battle against ISIS. It emphasizes their disciplined conduct, constitutional legitimacy within the Kurdistan Region, and international recognition exemplified by France naming a street after them. Current attempts by armed factions to label them as militias are framed as efforts to undermine legitimate institutions, with Masoud Barzani rejecting calls to dissolve the force as threats to Kurdish constitutional rights and regional security.

Highlights how political entourages in weak institutional environments become parallel centers of power that distort information, marginalize competent voices, and influence decisions based on personal loyalty rather than merit. Emphasizes that such networks undermine accountability, weaken state functioning, and perpetuate a culture of favoritism. Argues that building a modern state requires dismantling entrenched social and political forms of entourage culture and restoring decision‑making to institutional, transparent, and competence‑based processes.

Describes how public offices in Iraq have transformed into lucrative political assets driven by patronage, corruption, and competition for influence. Explains the rise of a political class focused on securing positions that provide financial and power-based benefits while weakening institutions and entrenching a culture of dependency and rent‑seeking. Highlights the broader societal impact as state roles become opportunities for personal gain rather than public service, turning politics into a marketplace that undermines national cohesion and governance.

Shifting power dynamics in the Middle East have elevated the Kurdish issue into a central factor in regional security, energy politics, and conflict realignments. Turkey’s reassessment of its conflict with the PKK, Syria’s reliance on the Syrian Democratic Forces in future settlements, Iran’s intensified crackdown on Kurdish movements, and Iraq’s political and economic pressures on Kurdistan each shape the strategic landscape. Iraqi Kurdistan remains the most stable Kurdish entity but faces mounting regional and internal pressures. The outcome of broader regional conflicts and potential moves toward de-escalation will determine whether Kurdish aspirations progress toward political integration or continue to be constrained by persistent instability.

The text argues that both Marxist-inspired political movements and contemporary Islamist political projects have falsely claimed absolute representation of the people or divine legitimacy, leading to repression, inefficiency and the erosion of political plurality. Examples from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan illustrate how ideological governance suppresses criticism and undermines institutional accountability. Sustainable legitimacy, the author concludes, requires constitutional limits on power, competitive elections, independent courts, civic education, free media and accountability mechanisms that prevent parties or religious authorities from monopolizing representation.

The text argues that Iraq’s federal partnership remains fragile due to the use of economic pressure, security tension, and constitutional gaps as political tools. It contrasts regions that achieved relative administrative stability with others marked by corruption and poor governance despite major funding. It warns that unresolved disputes, including those related to Article 140 and federal resource distribution, undermine trust and fuel recurring crises. Strengthening federal institutions such as the Federal Council and the constitutional court is presented as essential for stabilizing governance, ensuring fair resource distribution, and preventing political conflicts from escalating into economic and security disruptions.

Iraq’s post‑2003 system replaced the former dictatorship with a political order that preserved exclusion, corruption and power monopolization under a new guise. Elections and democratic language mask control by dominant factions that rely on sectarianism, tribalism and political money. Economic deterioration, unemployment and weakened state institutions have fueled the rise of militias as alternative structures of income and authority. The Kurdish question further exposes ongoing centralization and punitive practices toward the region. Without genuine rule of law, citizenship and equitable power‑sharing, removing a dictator remains insufficient as the underlying authoritarian mentality continues to shape governance.

Iraq is depicted as moving through successive forms of domination, beginning with military rule in 1958, followed by Baathist consolidation and Saddam Hussein’s personalist regime, culminating in the post‑2003 rise of militias amid political vacuum. The narrative argues that these shifts replaced one captor with another, eroding state institutions and enabling deep Iranian influence through militia power. The analysis stresses that genuine recovery requires liberating Iraq from all forms of control rather than merely changing ruling factions.

Repeated attacks on Kurdistan are portrayed as a sustained campaign threatening security, economy, and stability while Baghdad responds with ineffective investigative committees that fail to identify or punish perpetrators. The piece argues that the Iraqi government either lacks the will or courage to confront known militant groups, causing public frustration and eroding trust. Growing Kurdish disillusionment is linked to Baghdad’s inability to protect the region, reducing official inquiries to tools for burying accountability.

The piece highlights the historical and moral significance of the Iraqi Communist Party, emphasizing its commitment to justice, national unity, and defense of Kurdish rights. It argues that the party earned a unique place in Iraqi public consciousness through sacrifice, ethical conduct, and advocacy for marginalized groups. Despite ideological differences, the text praises the party as a model of civic virtue and national integrity, asserting that nations are built through justice rather than dominance.

Militia influence across several Middle Eastern countries is depicted as eroding state authority by exploiting poverty, weakened institutions and political fragmentation. Armed groups grow into parallel powers that obstruct governance, distort national identity and prevent states from exercising sovereignty. Stability cannot be restored without reestablishing the state as the sole legitimate holder of force and authority, countering the rise of external‑backed armed factions that convert instability into leverage.

Iran projects influence through armed proxies across Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen and the Gulf to expand its negotiating leverage during heightened confrontation with the United States. Militias in Iraq strike American interests while becoming embedded in state structures, and Kurdistan faces repeated attacks linked to regional escalation. Hezbollah’s involvement in Lebanon deepens national instability as Israeli operations intensify. Attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure demonstrate Iran’s use of both proxy and direct threats to widen the conflict zone. These tactics form a strategic pressure system where surrounding territories become bargaining tools, leaving regional states hostage to Iranian escalation.

The Kurdistan Region faces simultaneous military attacks by armed groups aligned with external powers and economic pressure from federal authorities, undermining its stability and success compared with other Iraqi provinces. Escalating rhetoric and targeted assaults on infrastructure, diplomatic missions, and economic assets diminish Iraq’s credibility and deter regional engagement. While Kurdistan’s leadership adopts a restrained approach and cooperates on oil export mechanisms to reduce tensions, the federal government remains unable to confront rogue factions that repeatedly violate state authority. The combination of external influence, internal sabotage, and federal inaction threatens Iraq’s overall stability and its most secure region.

Kurdistan is targeted by ongoing attacks aimed at undermining its relative stability and development compared to other parts of Iraq. The region’s success exposes failures in areas dominated by militias and poor governance, creating incentives for hostile actors to disrupt its progress through military strikes, financial pressure, and political division. Kurdistan’s openness to Iraqi visitors, resistance to militia penetration, and role as a refuge for political dissidents increase this hostility. The attacks are framed as part of a broader effort to suppress a functioning alternative model within Iraq that demonstrates the potential for stability beyond militia influence.

The text argues that escalating tensions between Iran on one side and the United States and Israel on the other are expanding into neighboring Arab regions, endangering cities that are not party to the conflict. It warns that armed factions in Iraq aligned with Iran are drawing the country into a broader confrontation and turning places such as Erbil into targets despite their efforts to maintain stability and balanced relations. The piece contends that targeting peaceful cities under the pretext of retaliating against foreign bases represents an unjustified expansion of aggression and transforms the region into a battleground for competing spheres of influence, placing ordinary populations at risk.

Criticism is directed at media outlets that use guest titles as tools for manipulation, often promoting unqualified figures to serve political or sectarian agendas. The practice undermines credible expertise, fuels misinformation, and replaces informed debate with sensationalism. Professional media are contrasted with politically driven channels that deploy misleading labels to delegitimize parties, distort public discourse, and promote polarization.

Explores how dehumanizing media tactics transform political and ethnic disputes into hostility, highlighting how fragmented narratives and manipulated content fuel polarization. Examines targeted campaigns against the Kurdistan Region and their role in shaping public perceptions before political or military actions. Warns that such propaganda normalizes exclusion and potential violence, calling for societal vigilance, verification standards, and critical evaluation of media content.

Economic pressure on the Kurdistan Region is depicted as an intentional political tool by federal authorities, using delayed and suspended salaries to weaken public trust and stability. The commentary links current tactics to past sanctions and blockades, arguing that economic deprivation is part of a broader effort by radical factions to undermine federalism and obstruct regional development. Threats to essential infrastructure and investor confidence are described as amplifying social strain, eroding the middle class, and fueling migration and instability. The writer concludes that weaponizing livelihoods endangers the unity and stability of both Baghdad and the Kurdish cities.