Should We Head to the Polls — And For Whom Should We Cast Our Vote?

Viewers: 5,439

Opinion | Diyar Harki – Founder of KurdFile

There is little reason for optimism in this election. The outcome appears predetermined: the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) are poised to secure first and second place once again. This is not coincidence — it is the result of entrenched control, long-term subjugation of the electorate, and the systematic erosion of public morale.

A population stripped of hope becomes conditioned to accept its rulers. When belief in change dies, revival requires time, resilience, and unified purpose. The widespread frustration that fuels boycott calls stems from one central failure: the inability of alternative political forces to unite around a coherent national project. As long as fragmentation persists, the dominance of the KDP and PUK remains unchallenged.

Tomorrow is election day. Participation is not merely procedural — it is a declaration of existence. Even a spoiled ballot carries political weight. An invalid vote denies dominant parties the ability to appropriate silence as consent. Imagine the impact if tens of thousands of ballots are deliberately invalidated; it would send a message no media narrative could conceal.

For those who still believe their vote may carry value, two alternatives stand out, despite their shortcomings. The Kurdistan Islamic Union (KIU) remains stagnant yet comparatively moderate. It has failed to expand or mobilize broader dissatisfaction, but it has maintained internal discipline and preserved a consistent Kurdish identity. Its weakness lies not in corruption, but in its inability to grow beyond its traditional base.

The Helwest List (Position List) represents a newer force with potential for development, though it carries internal risks. Ambition and self-interest exist within its ranks, and organization remains uneven. Still, it holds the possibility — however fragile — of evolving into a reform-oriented movement capable of regaining public trust.

The New Generation Movement has effectively dissolved into irrelevance. The People’s Front carries a history rooted in militarized politics. The Justice Group (Komal) remains stagnant and inward-looking. As for minor personalities running without viable infrastructure, their participation changes nothing structurally.

Casting a vote for the KDP or PUK, for many citizens burdened by unpaid salaries, rising fuel costs, unstable electricity, and economic hardship, feels like endorsing the very system that produced those conditions.

Yet abstention alone reshapes nothing.

The responsibility, therefore, is to show up — whether to reject, to protest, or to cautiously support the least flawed option. Even when immediate change seems unlikely, political pressure accumulates over time. A vote, even a symbolic one, contributes to that accumulation.

This assessment is not written with optimism, but with responsibility. The available choices are imperfect, fragile, and in many cases weak. But disengagement guarantees permanence; participation at least leaves open the possibility — however remote — of gradual transformation.

Author Profile
Diyar Harki
Diyar Harki is an independent investigative journalist and human rights advocate. As a member of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), he focuses on exposing corruption and human rights abuses in Kurdistan and Iraq. He voluntarily contributes to Kurdfile Media.