This article focuses on Kurdish security question in Iraq from 2003 to the present. Its central argument is that the security of the Kurdish region of Iraq has only constitutionally de-securitised since 2003. However, the Kurdish security demands in Iraq have been politicized by the different Iraqi governments since 2005, and therefore, security relations between the Iraqi state and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) have been fraught with distrust, tensions, and chaos since that time. The concepts derived from the Copenhagen School (CS) provide the framework for discussing security relations and the inherent security struggles between the Iraqi state and the KRG.
Al-Qarawee, H.2010. “Redefining a Nation: The Conflict of Identity and Federalism in Iraq.” Perspectives on Federalism, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 32–41.
2.
Aradau, C.2004. “Security and the Democratic Scene: Desecuritization and Emancipation.” Journal of International Relations and Development, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 388–413.
3.
Bahgat, G.2005. “Saddam Hussein’s Legacy: A Preliminary Assessment and Future Implications.” Review of International Affairs, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 93–103.
4.
Barkey, H. and Laipson, E. (2005) ‘Iraqi Kurds and Iraq’s Future’, Middle East Policy, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 66–76.
Behnke, A.2006. “No Way out: Desecuritization, Emancipation and the Eternal Return of the Political — A Reply to Aradau.” Journal of International Relations and Development, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 62–69.
7.
Booth, K.1991. “Security and Emancipation.” Review of International Studies, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 313–326.
8.
Buzan, B. and L.Hansen. 2009The Evolution of Security Studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Buzan, B. and L.Hansen. 1997. “Rethinking Security after the Cold War.” Cooperation and Conflict, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 5–28.
10.
Buzan, B. and O.Wæver. 1997. “Slippery? Contradictory? Sociologically Untenable? The Copenhagen School Replies.” Review of International Studies, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 241–250.
11.
Buzan, B. and O.Wæver. 2003. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
Buzan, B.O.Wæver, and J.Wilde. 1998. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. London: Pinter.
Eriksson, J.1999. “Observers or Advocates? On the Political Role of Security Analysts.” Cooperation and Conflict, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 311–330.
16.
Floyd, R.2007. “Human Security and the Copenhagen School’s Securitization Approach: Conceptualizing Human Security as a Securitizing Move.” Human Security Journal, vol. 5, no. 37, pp. 38–49.
17.
Gunter, M.2011. “Arab–Kurdish Relations and the Future of Iraq.” Third World Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 1623–1635.
18.
Gunter, M.2013. “The Kurdish Spring.” Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 441–457.
19.
Gunter, M. and H.Yavuz. 2004. “The Kurds in Iraq: Why Kurdish Statehood Is Unlikely.” Middle East Policy, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 106–131.
20.
Hanish, S.2010. “The Kirkuk Problem and Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution.” Digest of Middle East Studies, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 15–25.
Kuzemko, C.2012. Dynamics of Energy Governance in Europe and Russia. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
26.
McDonald, M.2008. “Securitization and the Construction of Security.” European Journal of International Relations, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 563–587.
27.
McSweeney, B.1996. “Identity and Security: Buzan and the Copenhagen School.” Review of International Studies, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 81–93.
28.
McSweeney, B.1999. Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. New York: Cambridge University press.
29.
Neumann, Iver B.2002. ‘Kosovo and the End of the Legitimate Warring State’, in Petervan Ham and SergeiMedvedev, eds, Mapping European security after Kosovo, (pp. 66–79), UK: Manchester University Press.
Olesker, R.2014. “National Identity and Securitization in Israel.” Ethnicities, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 371–391.
32.
Roe, P.2004. “Securitization and Minority Rights: Conditions of Desecuritization.” Security Dialogue, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 279–294.
33.
Roe, P.2005. Ethnic Violence and the Societal Security Dilemma. London and New York: Routledge.
34.
Roe, P.2010. “Societal Security”, in A.Collins, ed., Contemporary Security Studies (pp. 202–217). New York: Oxford University Press.
35.
Romano, D.2010. “Iraqi Kurdistan: Challenges of Autonomy in the Wake of US Withdrawal.” International Affairs, vol. 86, no. 6, pp. 1345–1359.
36.
Rydgren, J. and D.Sofi. 2011. “Interethnic Relations in Northern Iraq: Brokerage, Social Capital and the Potential for Reconciliation.” International Sociology, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 25–49.
37.
Sheehan, M.2005. International Security: An Analytical Survey. The USA and London, UK: Lynne Rienner.
38.
Stansfield, G. and L.Anderson. 2009. “Kurds in Iraq: The Struggle between Baghdad and Erbil.” Middle East Policy, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 134–145.
39.
Stritzel, H.2007. “Towards a Theory of Securitization: Copenhagen and Beyond.” European Journal of International Relations, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 357–383.
40.
Tarimo, A. (2010) ‘Politicization of ethnic identities: The case of contemporary Africa’. Journal of Asian and African Studies, vol 45, no. 3, pp. 297–308.
41.
Theiler, T.2003. “Societal Security and Social Psychology.” Review of International Studies, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 249–268.
42.
Wæver, O.2000. “The EU as a Security Actor: Reflections From a Pessimistic Constructivist on Post-Sovereign Security Orders”, in M.Kelstrup and M.Williams, eds, International Relations Theory and the Politics of European Integration: Power, Security and Community (pp. 250–294). London and New York: Routledge.
43.
Wæver, O.B.Buzan, M.Kelstrup and P.Lemaitre. 1993. Identity, Migration and the New Security Agenda in Europe. London: Pinter Publishers Ltd.
44.
Williams, M.1998. “Modernity, Identity and Security: A Comment on the Copenhagen Controversy.” Review of International Studies, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 435–439.
45.
Wolff, S.2010. “Governing (in) Kirkuk: Resolving the Status of a Disputed Territory in Post-American Iraq.” International Affairs, vol. 86, no. 6, pp. 1361–1379.
