In a politically charged environment, it is sometimes impossible to decode wrong from right and to precisely know foes and friends. Not only are the rules for conduct fluid but also allegiances and loyalties rapidly shift. This is common in the Arab World, especially in today’s Iraq. While the country is on fire and is facing an existential threat, its current politicians are jockeying for personal advantage and behaving as if nothing else is more important than their immediate benefits.
This tragic state is not accidental. Rather, it is a predictable outcome of the invasion of 2003, which brought to power individuals who were selected for their incompetence and indifference to patriotic issues. These individuals were carefully cultivated by neoconservatives who dominated the most important positions in the American-led Occupation Authority. A few months before the invasion, neoconservative strategists in Washington, Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith of the Defense Department, organized highly secretive indoctrination programs for selected Iraqis.
Instead of focusing on building Iraq, the programs focused on sectarian and ethnic minority identity. The programs underscored the advantage of having a loose federation system for Iraq and highlighted the role of Israel in building a new Middle East. Participants were instructed to revise Iraqi history, promote sectarian identity, and give priority to disarming Iraq.
Nouri Maliki was well aware of the scheme to weaken Iraq through sectarian and tribal fragmentation, but he played along with the scheme that was espoused by almost all politicians who accompanied and worked with the Occupation Authority. However, a couple of years after he assumed the premier job, he realized that he could neither govern a fragmented cabinet nor build a functional state; that these would be impossible to achieve without gaining independence from the U.S.
Maliki faces a monumental challenge, which neither he nor those who support him can overcome under the current circumstances. This is further complicated by certain mistakes that have been committed by Maliki. Chief among these mistakes are:
Viewing representatives of various parties involved in his government as members of a cabinet with a program to execute, rather than being participants in the pocketing of public wealth and advocates of their respective parties’ agendas.
Hesitating to confront the American embassy in Baghdad over how Iraq should be managed. In fact, Maliki has failed to build sound economic institutions and a national economy irrespective of Washington’s dictate.
Surrounding himself with unprofessional advisors who not only seek to gain material benefits from their positions but who also tell him what he wants to hear, while deepening his fear of American reactions to his program.
Failure to articulate to his security and military advisors that building professional and well trained forces is an utmost priority.
Failure to take swift action against those in the military and security apparatus who sell security jobs openly to those who bid the highest price.
Failure to acknowledge that Washington is not willing to provide weapons to the Iraqi security and military forces. Indeed even after the ISIS terrorists captured an area of Iraq and despite Washington’s refusal to deliver fighters jets along with advanced military radar, he has persisted in his hope that one of these days the U.S. might send such weapons.
Willingness to compromise with tribal leaders who put their personal interests ahead of national interests. In fact, he has placed barely qualified individuals from these tribal and ethnic groups in leadership positions in security and the military. This has transformed these institutions into a collection of competing interests and ignorant commanders.
Willingness to overlook abuse of public wealth by tribal and religiously driven politicians for fear that he might lose the support of their sponsors, either the U.S. or neighboring Arab countries.
Failure to recognize that having strategic relations with Russia is the only way to save Iraq and defeat terrorism.
Failure to take action and confront countries that from the beginning have supported terrorism in Iraq. Though he accused Turkey of supporting terrorism, he did not bother to cut imports from Turkey which amount to about $14 billion a year.
Furthermore, he has taken certain responsible actions that have angered the Washington elite. To be precise, he has maintained friendly relationships with neighboring states, Syria and Iran. This, in Washington’s view, constitutes an unforgivable act. Moreover, he has considered the presence of American troops in Iraq as strong evidence that the country is still occupied. While he successfully maneuvered to end their presence, he did not confront politicians who subordinated Iraqi national interests to that of the foreign power’s.
What further complicates the matter is that his administration leaked to the media his meeting minutes with John Kerry. Though his office, a few days later, denied the accuracy of the leaked conversation with Kerry, Washington viewed the matter as bold disobedience that must not pass without punishment.
Maliki, too, is a believer, like many Arab rulers, of the flawed notion that Washington is the ultimate protector of his power. This notion overlooks three premises. First, that for many decades Washington has looked at the Arab world strictly through an Israeli lens; what serves Israel serves the U.S. Second, the political elite in Washington are driven by a belief that destabilizing Iraq is not only a fulfillment of certain Biblical prophecies but also a necessary measure to keep the region under Western domination. Third, Washington considers that protracted conflict in Iraq is instrumental in weakening the country, which is essential for implementing the goals of the destruction of Syria and the resistance forces in Lebanon and Palestine and for containing if not dividing Iran.
Iraq is passing through the darkest stage in its history. Confronting and overcoming its calamities requires a profound change in leadership thinking and in national priorities. Current tribal and religious politicians who ally themselves with the invading forces are the least qualified individuals to rescue Iraq from the present path of destruction. Their presence in Parliament and in the center of policymaking is a threat to Iraqi national interests. These individuals have linked their fate to Western powers and have mortgaged the future of Iraq to the interests of the neoconservatives in Washington.
Though Maliki, at this stage, is relatively the only reasonable politician, his political awakening has definitely come too late to effectively and comprehensively tackle Iraq’s challenges. Saving Iraq and protecting the future of its children is only a remote possibility if the current political class in Iraq is not uprooted. Maliki should announce to the Iraqis that the current politicians are incapable of defending Iraqi sovereignty and that a new prime minister must be selected who is not willing to compromise on national interests.
Khalid Sanjari is a writer on Middle East Affairs.
RSS
Maliki’s mistakes and Iraq’s planned chaos
Posted on July 30, 2014 by Khalid Sanjari
In a politically charged environment, it is sometimes impossible to decode wrong from right and to precisely know foes and friends. Not only are the rules for conduct fluid but also allegiances and loyalties rapidly shift. This is common in the Arab World, especially in today’s Iraq. While the country is on fire and is facing an existential threat, its current politicians are jockeying for personal advantage and behaving as if nothing else is more important than their immediate benefits.
This tragic state is not accidental. Rather, it is a predictable outcome of the invasion of 2003, which brought to power individuals who were selected for their incompetence and indifference to patriotic issues. These individuals were carefully cultivated by neoconservatives who dominated the most important positions in the American-led Occupation Authority. A few months before the invasion, neoconservative strategists in Washington, Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith of the Defense Department, organized highly secretive indoctrination programs for selected Iraqis.
Instead of focusing on building Iraq, the programs focused on sectarian and ethnic minority identity. The programs underscored the advantage of having a loose federation system for Iraq and highlighted the role of Israel in building a new Middle East. Participants were instructed to revise Iraqi history, promote sectarian identity, and give priority to disarming Iraq.
Nouri Maliki was well aware of the scheme to weaken Iraq through sectarian and tribal fragmentation, but he played along with the scheme that was espoused by almost all politicians who accompanied and worked with the Occupation Authority. However, a couple of years after he assumed the premier job, he realized that he could neither govern a fragmented cabinet nor build a functional state; that these would be impossible to achieve without gaining independence from the U.S.
Maliki faces a monumental challenge, which neither he nor those who support him can overcome under the current circumstances. This is further complicated by certain mistakes that have been committed by Maliki. Chief among these mistakes are:
Furthermore, he has taken certain responsible actions that have angered the Washington elite. To be precise, he has maintained friendly relationships with neighboring states, Syria and Iran. This, in Washington’s view, constitutes an unforgivable act. Moreover, he has considered the presence of American troops in Iraq as strong evidence that the country is still occupied. While he successfully maneuvered to end their presence, he did not confront politicians who subordinated Iraqi national interests to that of the foreign power’s.
What further complicates the matter is that his administration leaked to the media his meeting minutes with John Kerry. Though his office, a few days later, denied the accuracy of the leaked conversation with Kerry, Washington viewed the matter as bold disobedience that must not pass without punishment.
Maliki, too, is a believer, like many Arab rulers, of the flawed notion that Washington is the ultimate protector of his power. This notion overlooks three premises. First, that for many decades Washington has looked at the Arab world strictly through an Israeli lens; what serves Israel serves the U.S. Second, the political elite in Washington are driven by a belief that destabilizing Iraq is not only a fulfillment of certain Biblical prophecies but also a necessary measure to keep the region under Western domination. Third, Washington considers that protracted conflict in Iraq is instrumental in weakening the country, which is essential for implementing the goals of the destruction of Syria and the resistance forces in Lebanon and Palestine and for containing if not dividing Iran.
Iraq is passing through the darkest stage in its history. Confronting and overcoming its calamities requires a profound change in leadership thinking and in national priorities. Current tribal and religious politicians who ally themselves with the invading forces are the least qualified individuals to rescue Iraq from the present path of destruction. Their presence in Parliament and in the center of policymaking is a threat to Iraqi national interests. These individuals have linked their fate to Western powers and have mortgaged the future of Iraq to the interests of the neoconservatives in Washington.
Though Maliki, at this stage, is relatively the only reasonable politician, his political awakening has definitely come too late to effectively and comprehensively tackle Iraq’s challenges. Saving Iraq and protecting the future of its children is only a remote possibility if the current political class in Iraq is not uprooted. Maliki should announce to the Iraqis that the current politicians are incapable of defending Iraqi sovereignty and that a new prime minister must be selected who is not willing to compromise on national interests.
Khalid Sanjari is a writer on Middle East Affairs.