Many expected the Kurdish region in the north of Iraq experience an economic rise and stability after the IS control over Iraq ad its years-lomg fighting against terrorism. The situation in the region has not seen any changes after protests have hit Iraq in the past month which made Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi to resign and a political crisis has paralyzed the country.

Meanwhile Masrour Barzani was elected as the region’s premier and former Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani is leading the region as its president.

Also on the western side of the region the Kurds in Syria were left by the US against Turkey incursion into the Kurdish regions, an event many called Washington’s treason against the Kurdish fighters that fought with the US-led allies against the IS.

Dr. Bamo Nouri, a Visiting Lecturer and Associate Fellow of the Higher Education Academy Department of International Politics at City University of London, believes the protests in Iraq is a good chance for a real change in the life of the people in the country but is surprised why the people in the autonomous Kurdish regions have not taken the opportunity to bring changes in the region and their lives.

The structure of the Kurdish region does not have the needed strategy and changing faces and officials will not make any help in the life of the people and the situation of the region.

What follow is his full answers to Kurdpress questions;

Do you think the demonstrations across Iraq are a direct threat for the Kurds? Why there is no demonstration in the Kurdistan Region?

The demonstrations in Iraq constitutes a powerful moment for the re-awakening of the Iraqi populace, conscious awareness and engagement by the unrepresented masses, and the beginning of a reform process that may change Iraq for the better - something which wars and sanctions failed to bring. The demonstrations are civic, directed, and clear in the demands that are being made. For the first time, Iraqi people are thinking about Iraq's solutions with full faith in a united Iraq that every ethnicity, religion and sect can benefit from.

I'm very surprised that Iraqi Kurdistan has not joined the momentous opportunity to demand and enact change. In general, people in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq have given up hope in a prosperous future of the region because of the little positive change that has taken place under the PUK and KDP governments since 2005. The youth are fatigued and do not wish to enact change through civil liberties in the form of demonstrations and lobbying because of the repressive and authoritarian forces in the region. Those who dissent, in print or in the street, are targeted and often killed - see the journalists that have been killed or found dead (Kawa Garmyani, Sardasht Osman and Amanj Babany). Since 2005, numerous organisations have documented consistent violations of constitutional rights: Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the US Department of State, the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq and the Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights have all have reported extensively on violations of freedom of press, expression and peaceful assembly.

Instead, many of the youth in Iraq are plagued by mental health (many suicide cases) issues with 25% of the regions population now affected by the phenomena. Those who enjoy the region are often linked to the KDP and PUK and those who have the fight and drive prefer to flee the region with huge numbers having fled since 2011.

Masrour Barzani explained his actions on the first 100 days working as the prime minister of the region. How do you evaluate it? Is there any difference between his government and that of Nechirvan Barzani?

It is difficult to judge Masrour's cabinet as its still way too early to analyse his policies which still remain to address the key flaws of the KRG's political system. Although there is a new cabinet, I believe that although faces will inevitably change, family names and policies will remain the same. Despite a new face in Masrour, the system and its institutions remain the same. Ministerial fiefdoms where political parties are given ministries in exchange for support to form governing blocs have created a dysfunctional government. It means there is no clear governmental strategy, which in turn severely impedes development. The Kurdish Region has become a nation that is for the few and not the many, as unrepresentative Kurdish political elites bid to share out its resources. Millions of Kurds are left unrepresented and without prospects.

There was an article in The Hill that says, from now on, the U.S should not pay attention to Syrian Kurds but have to work hard with Kurdistan Region, as the region’s capability to help Washington to achieve its goals in the Middle East. How do you see this attitude?

The US in its short history has been consistent in doing one thing - promoting their interests through hegemony and creating more corporation friendly nations. The issue with all four parts of Kurdistan is that it fails to serve US interests directly as all four parts are faced with political instability and are not fertile grounds for US corporations to prosper. The US wants to make money for its economy, this has been the case more so with Trump, who wants the US to be paid for everything that it does. This accurately explains why he ignored the Kurds in his deal with Turkey, but in the same week praised Saudi Arabia because 'they pay for the services we give to them'. The US will work with whoever supports their economic interests, at one point the US believed the Kurds were useful not just in the fight against its enemies, but in the creation of a flourishing free-market democracy. Kurdish elites squandered a massive change to establish a prosperous Kurdistan, instead the Kurdish Region is now synonymous with corruption and instability.

Reporter’s code: 50101