[Economy] How is a nation completed? (2026.7.31)

There is something harder than joining the WTO

— The task of "nation-building" that Iraq has been tackling for over 20 years

"Iraq has advanced negotiations for WTO (World Trade Organization) accession."

Seeing this news, many people will likely receive it as economic news, thinking "free trade will progress" or "investment will increase."

However, when we place this news within the flow of the past 20 years, a completely different landscape comes into view.

I have previously covered Iraq's financial reforms, dollar payment reforms, state-owned bank reforms, dependence on Iran, and energy policies individually.

At first glance, these are separate themes.

However, while researching the WTO accession negotiations this time, one common thread became visible.

That is,

these were all part of the "process of completing the nation called Iraq"

that is what it means.

WTO accession holds a meaning close to the final finishing touch.

In other words, the theme this time is not "trade."

What is a nation? How is a nation completed?

From that perspective, the meaning of these accession negotiations, which have continued for over 20 years, looks completely different.

⸻

What the WTO is examining is not "trade"

From the name WTO, many people think of tariffs and imports/exports.

Of course, those are important elements.

However, when looking closely at the accession conditions, what is actually being questioned is something more fundamental.

Member countries are required to have:

* A unified tariff system nationwide
* A consistent trade policy
* Transparent laws
* An administration capable of fulfilling contracts
* Predictable institutional operations

In other words,

"Can you keep your promises as a nation?"

is what is being questioned.

That is why WTO accession is not an economic test.

It is a national capacity test.

⸻

What was stalled for 20 years was not the accession negotiations, but nation-building

Iraq applied for membership in 2004.

However,

since the second working party meeting in 2008,

negotiations effectively stopped for 16 years.

On the surface,

"negotiations did not progress"

is the story.

However, when looking back at what was happening in Iraq during this period, the meaning changes completely.

* Post-Iraq War national reconstruction
* Sectarian conflict
* Collapse of administrative functions
* Rise of ISIL (Islamic State)
* Crisis where a large part of the territory was controlled by armed groups

In such a situation, before making promises to the international community as a nation, maintaining the nation itself was the top priority.

In other words,

what was stalled was not the accession negotiations.

It was the very work of building the nation.

⸻

What the Kurdistan Region issue indicated

Symbolic of this theme is the existence of the Kurdistan Region (KRI).

In Iraq, there are

* The Baghdad government
* The Kurdistan Regional Government

two governing systems.

The problem is not just ethnic conflict.

Even the tariff systems were different.

The WTO is based on the premise of

"one trade system for one nation."

However, in Iraq,

it was in a state where it was ambiguous which system represented the nation.

From the perspective of overseas companies,

they cannot judge "which system to trust."

The fact that institutional integration was decided in 2019 but implementation was delayed, and only fully began in 2024 with EU support, speaks to the difficulty of this issue.

What becomes visible here is that

the Kurdish issue was not just an ethnic issue, but

an issue where the very integrity of the nation was being questioned.

⸻

The meaning of Saudi Arabia being the chair

In 2024, Ambassador Saqer Al-Moqbel of Saudi Arabia became the chair of the working party that resumed accession negotiations.

It may look like a simple personnel matter, but geopolitically it is symbolic.

Saudi Arabia has put forward "Vision 2030" and aims to become the center of the Middle East economy.

That Saudi Arabia is

leading the process of returning Iraq to the international economy.

This is also a competition over

who will design the regional economic order.

On the other hand, Iraq

still has a dependence on Iran for electricity and gas.

If institutional reform progresses through WTO accession,

as a result, ties with the Western economic sphere will strengthen.

In other words,

this negotiation is a trade negotiation, and at the same time,

it is also a quiet geopolitical competition.

⸻

What the West is supporting is the system itself

The EU, the US, and international organizations are supporting Iraq with

* Legal system development
* Tariff reform
* Administrative capacity improvement

and so on.

On the surface, it is technical support.

But what they are really trying to build is

trust in the system.

What investors want to know is not

"Is there oil?"

but

"Will contracts be kept?"

"Will the courts function?"

"Will the administration move as promised?"

That is why the West is investing not only in roads and ports,

but also in laws and systems.

This connects in a single line with the bank reforms and dollar payment reforms I covered earlier.

Financial systems,

tariff systems,

and investment systems

are all parts for building up trust in the nation.

⸻

The true meaning of breaking away from oil dependence

The Iraqi government repeatedly explains,

"We will break away from oil dependence."

Of course, that is important.

However, what is more essential is

not to cultivate industries to replace oil.

It is to become a nation that is trusted by the world even without oil.

Without trust,

factories will not be built.

Companies will not come.

Jobs will not be created.

Institutional reform is,

rather than economic policy,

also the work of rebuilding the national brand.

⸻

What the latest trends indicate

In July 2026, the Iraqi delegation met with WTO executives to confirm the preparation status for the 4th working party meeting.

Legal system and technical progress are being evaluated.

On the other hand,

the meeting schedule has not yet been officially decided.

This should be seen not as stagnation,

but as a stage of carefully building up institutional reforms.

The nation-building that took 20 years

is not something that will end in a few months.

That is why the international community is also

proceeding while confirming step by step.

⸻

Looking at it structurally

The theme this time is not

"When will Iraq join the WTO?"

The real question is,

"When will the nation be completed?"

I have previously analyzed

Iraq's financial reforms,

dollar payment reforms,

bank reforms,

energy policy,

and dependence on Iran individually.

However, those were not disjointed policies.

They were all

one project to restore trust in the nation.

The WTO accession negotiations this time can be said to be the culmination of that.

⸻

Conclusion

In the news, this might be an event that ends with the single sentence,

"Iraq's WTO accession negotiations have progressed."

However, behind the scenes, over 20 years of war,

sectarian conflict,

institutional reform,

financial reform,

tariff integration,

and nation-building have been accumulated.

That is why I do not view this news as a story about trade, but rather

as the current status of an endless project called "building a nation."

WTO accession is not the goal.

It is a milestone where the international community recognizes that Iraq

"has become a nation that possesses institutions and can keep its promises."

And from this perspective, this news is not just about Iraq.

What is a nation built upon?

Why are institutions necessary?

How is trust in the international community built?

Perhaps Iraq's 20 years show us one answer to those questions.