• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Henri J. Barkey"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Türkiye",
    "Iraq",
    "Gulf",
    "Levant"
  ],
  "topics": []
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Turkey and Its Relations with Iraq

If Turkey manages to continue with improved relations with Iraq, Iraqi Kurds, and its own domestic Kurdish population, then it will have overcome the one of the most important obstacles to its stability.

Link Copied
By Henri J. Barkey
Published on May 27, 2010

Source: USIP's On the Issues

Turkey and Its Relations with IraqIn the Special Report, “Turkey’s New Engagement in Iraq,” author Henri Barkey, professor of international relations at Lehigh University, examines the change in relations and what led to the improvements, and argues why sustained attention is needed to prevent events from undermining the progress achieved to date. This essay is drawn from a forthcoming work on Iraq’s regional relations, co-edited by Barkey, USIP’s Scott Lasensky and Phebe Marr.

In this On the Issues, Barkey discusses reasons for the improved relations, and its significance for Iraq’s future and U.S. national security interests.

USIP: In your Special Report, Turkey's “New Engagement in Iraq: Embracing Iraqi Kurdistan,” you argue that relations between Turkey, Iraq and Kurdistan's Regional Government (KRG) have improved dramatically. How did this transformation come about?    

Barkey: Turkey came to the realization that the KRG is here to stay and that, in fact, it is far more amenable to relations -- diplomatic and commercial -- with Turkey than anywhere else in the region.  Improved relations with the KRG enables Ankara to have more say in what happens in Iraq and also helps reduce domestic tensions with its own Kurdish minority.  The Turkish military also has come to understand that it will not vanquish the Kurdish insurgency in Turkey through violent means alone and a new approach was needed.

USIP: What does this suggest about Turkey's own political stability and direction?  

Barkey: If Turkey manages to continue with improved relations with Iraq, Iraqi Kurds and its own domestic Kurdish population, then it will have overcome the single most important obstacle to its stability since the inception of the republic in 1923.  This said this is a tall order. And failure to resolve the domestic Kurdish problem remains Turkey's Achilles' Heel.

USIP: What does a more cooperative Turkish-Iraqi relationship mean for U.S. interests---specifically, will it affect plans to draw down American military forces?

Barkey: Turkey has transformed itself from a problem country to a helpful and critically important one in Iraq as far as Washington is concerned. It would have been far more difficult for the U.S. to start executing its withdrawal if Turkish-KRG relations remained hostile.

USIP: You’ve helped to lead the Institute’s efforts to promote dialogue between Turkish and Iraqi foreign policy figures—and between Iraqis and their neighbors more broadly--what kind of lessons can you draw from those efforts on the ground?

Barkey: It is very difficult and one needs a great deal of patience.  Most importantly one should expect that change may take place when you least expect it and independent of your efforts.  Still, one always wants to hope that one's efforts contributed even if it is in a minor way to a positive outcome.

USIP: What might undermine this new entente between Turkey and Iraq?  

Barkey: The domestic Kurdish situation in Turkey.  If the Kurdish opening in Turkey falters and if the frustrations of the populations--Kurdish and Turkish--continue to build up with no end in sight, Turkish attitudes towards northern Iraq is likely to harden.  In turn, Baghdad will have to make its choice in the event of Turkish-KRG tensions, and it is unlikely that it will side with Ankara against Erbil.

USIP: How could the U.S. - and Iraq and its neighbors - prevent deterioration, and help maintain improved relations in this region?

Barkey: The U.S. has to do four things.  First, open a consulate in Erbil. Psychologically, it matters to the Kurds to know that Washington officially acknowledges them and is here to stay in the North - even if symbolically - for a long time to come.  It signals others that the U.S. takes the KRG seriously. Second, once the Iraqi government is formed, offer assistance to UNAMI and all parties involved to help resolve the issue of the disputed territories peacefully.  Third, help the new Iraqi government finalize the hydrocarbon law. Finally, begin offering assistance to the KRG on good governance; it has been alone for far too long managing on its own. 

About the Author

Henri J. Barkey

Former Visiting Scholar, Middle East Program

Barkey served as a member of the U.S. State Department Policy Planning Staff, working primarily on issues related to the Middle East, the Eastern Mediterranean, and intelligence from 1998 to 2000.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Winners and Losers in Turkey’s Election

      Henri J. Barkey

  • Article
    The Road to Turkey’s June Elections: Crises, Strategies, and Outcomes

      Henri J. Barkey

Henri J. Barkey
Former Visiting Scholar, Middle East Program
Henri J. Barkey
Middle EastTürkiyeIraqGulfLevant

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Article
    Risk and Retaliation: Israel, Iran, and the Evolving Situation in West Asia

    An Israeli response to Iran’s October 1 attack is imminent. The key question is of its intensity and potential fallout, both within Iran, in terms of nuclear security policy changes, and across the broader region. The coming days are likely to reshape West Asia irreversibly.

      Gaddam Dharmendra

  • Commentary
    India’s View on Soleimani, Iran, and the United States

    For India, the equation is pretty simple: better diplomatic relations between the United States and Iran would let New Delhi deal more smoothly with both countries. A decline in the relationship adversely affects Indian interests.

      Rudra Chaudhuri

  • Commentary
    What Would a Larger Chinese Presence Mean for the Middle East?

    The recent developments around the Strait of Hormuz have once again highlighted the importance of maritime chokepoints and their connection to regional geopolitics.

      Darshana M. Baruah

  • Commentary
    As US-Iran Tensions Mount, What India Can Learn from the Oil ‘Tanker War’ in 1980s

    Last week, Britain impounded an Iranian oil tanker in Gibraltar, claiming that the vessel was carrying oil to Syria in violation of the European Union’s sanctions.

      Srinath Raghavan

  • Commentary
    Under Modi, India Has Shed its Traditional Defensiveness Towards the Middle East

    It has been a rather long learning curve for New Delhi to separate presumed transcendental religious solidarity and the logic of national self-interest in engaging the Middle East.

      C. Raja Mohan

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.