The stability of the Kurdistan Region is a national responsibility and a strategic partnership to protect Iraq from division and chaos.

Since the establishment of the modern Iraqi state, the balance between Baghdad, the regions, and the various components has been one of the fundamental challenges in state-building. Although the Iraqi experience after 2003 established a new form of pluralism and constitutional recognition of the components, the relationship between the federal government and the Kurdistan Region remained fraught with tension, oscillating between partnership and hostility, and between cooperation and crisis. Today, when we speak of the need for stability in the region, we are not raising a sectarian Kurdish issue, but rather a sovereign Iraqi issue with strategic dimensions that affect the country's present and future. The crisis is not just about salaries… but about understanding the relationship between Baghdad and the region. It is easy to reduce the current problem in the Kurdistan Region to a “salary crisis,” but the reality is far more complex. This crisis is not so much financial as it is political – it reflects the deep dysfunction in the mechanisms for managing the relationship between Baghdad and Erbil, and the absence of binding agreements that preserve rights and define obligations. It is the result of years of accumulated lack of transparency, overlapping jurisdictions, and political infighting in which the Kurdish citizen is often used as a means of pressure or a bargaining chip. The relationship between Baghdad and the region has gone through many crises: the budget crisis in 2014, the referendum crisis in 2017, and the recurring salary crisis that has cast a shadow on the living conditions of employees and affected people's trust in the state. Each time, the solutions came too late, based on temporary compromises that quickly collapsed with the first political or economic change. What have we learned from past experiences? One of the most important lessons of past crises is that temporary solutions do not create lasting stability, and that the absence of dialogue leads to explosion. Every time serious dialogue is sidelined, we return to square one, where accusations prevail, questions of doubt about intentions are raised, and the people's issues are used as tools of political pressure. In the 2017 crisis following the referendum, the absence of national initiatives and the rejection of the language of dialogue led to disastrous results that almost tore apart the national fabric. In the 2020 budget crisis, the region paid a heavy economic price due to the withholding of its allocated funds. However, the loss was not limited to the region alone, but extended to Iraq as a whole, which entered a state of sharp internal polarization. These experiences have proven that a lack of trust opens the door to regional and international interference, transforms financial and administrative disputes into existential crises, and further complicates the national political landscape. What is needed: a roadmap that cannot be postponed. Therefore, the stability of the Kurdistan Region should not be viewed as a "political favor" or a "concession from Baghdad," but rather as a national entitlement and a necessity for the survival of the state. Iraq cannot rise up, nor can it be built on a solid foundation, without reformulating the relationship between Baghdad and the region on new foundations: • First: Returning to the constitution as the supreme reference, away from selective interpretations or political exploitation of loopholes. • Second: Reaching a comprehensive financial agreement, based on the principle of transparency and fairness in the distribution of wealth. There must be a clear mechanism for managing oil and non-oil revenues, and real monitoring to ensure that entitlements reach citizens without delay or manipulation. Third: Establishing a permanent coordination council between Baghdad and Erbil, not limited to crisis management, but rather an institutional framework for exchanging views and providing solutions before disputes escalate. Fourth: Depoliticizing essential services and livelihoods, and ensuring that the basic needs of Kurdish citizens – or any Iraqi citizens – are not used as bargaining chips between political factions. Between justice and reconciliation… a new discourse is needed. What is required today is not just financial or technical solutions, but a new political discourse that recognizes the rights of all and restores the concept of a “shared homeland.” Exclusionary rhetoric – from any side – only produces more fragmentation and leads to destructive scenarios. It is time to turn a new page, one of national understanding and partnership based on mutual respect, not on imposing one's will or settling scores. If there were past mistakes—whether in the policies of the region or the federal government—the solution lies not in collective punishment, but in correcting the course through state institutions and clear political and legal mechanisms. Stability is not only in the interest of the Kurds, but also a guarantee for the unity of Iraq. When the Kurdistan Region is stable, this will positively impact the national economy, contribute to reducing security spending, provide a better investment climate, and strengthen the state's presence in its regional environment. Conversely, the region's continued state of instability weakens Iraq's international negotiating position and undermines its ability to confront major challenges, from terrorism to economic pressures and external debt. Political forces in both Baghdad and Erbil are called upon to shoulder their historical responsibility and move beyond narrow partisan calculations of profit and loss toward a comprehensive national vision that invests in stability, not crises. In conclusion, the stability of the Kurdistan Region is not merely a political choice, but a national and strategic responsibility that serves the interests of Iraq in all its diversity. What is needed today is a courageous and responsible dialogue that addresses the root causes, not just the symptoms; builds on what has been achieved and overcomes what has been hindered, in a spirit of partnership, not hostility, and of understanding, not exclusion. A strong Iraq can only be built on the unity of its decision-making, the fairness of its institutions, respect for its diversity, and its complete commitment to all its citizens, in the north and the south, in the center and the regions, without discrimination or prejudice.