Iraqi vice-president Dr. Adel Abdul Al-Mahdi continues his struggle for building a stable democratic Iraq where peace and concord prevail among all the spectrums of Iraqi society. He emerged from the opposition ranks at the time of the previous regime to hold senior positions in the new regime. However, he still believes that the road to change is long and full of twists. It requires hard work and perseverance.
In this interview, Dr. Abdul Al-Mahdi discusses several thorny issues related to the project of re-building the Iraqi state, the threat of terrorism, internal differences, the future of political blocs, sectarian polarization and foreign intervention.
Majalla: Is there a political explanation for the return of bombings in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, or are there political parties applying security pressures to make political gains?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: The obvious explanation is that the battle with the enemy forces is not over yet. A battle is an attack and a counter attack. Security forces managed to improve the security situation and have achieved important results, but that does not mean that they have succeeded in removing the enemy forces completely from the field. After the end of any battle enemy forces regroup and try to discover new gaps. They aim at confirming their existence, raising their morale, refuting Government statements, and taking back the initiative into their own hands.The announced plans of the foreign troops’ withdrawal from cities or the final withdrawal of foreign troops, helps greatly in encouraging such acts. In addition to this, security is closely linked to general conditions and good management and the unity of power and administration that they can achieve. It is also closely linked to economic conditions and services and to the satisfaction or indignation of the public. What can be stated here is that the achieved positive shift in security is a real strategic shift, and that only real strategy setbacks can cause it to relapse or suffer a setback. But, all evidence confirms that we are not moving in this direction.
Majalla: Mr. vice president, is Iraq in need of a new social contract in order to complete the process of national reconciliation?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: The constitution was a kind of new contract. There seems to be a growing public acceptance of it. But, this acceptance is accompanied by a desire to make some amendments according to constitutional mechanisms and according to the reactions and experience produced by the current stage. We certainly need, as politicians and decision makers, to think in a different way than we used to think in the past. We need to get out of the narrow individual vision of a single group, with their clashing ambitions, to the wider vision of the nation as a whole. This way everyone will benefit. On the contrary, if we were to continue walking the narrow road, as some want us to do, the results will be devastating for everybody, without exception.
Majalla: When will sectarianization end in Iraq? Is there still a need for it? What are the real reasons behind it? And, does the religious discourse still have its impact on the choices of Iraqi voters (for example, the recent elections)?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: There is no doubt that sectarianization will continue for quite a while, and not only Sectarian polarization will persist, but religious and national polarization as well. There are internal and external factors and conditions that must be taken into consideration, in order to make a complete transition from this situation to a new situation. Sectarian and national polarization was a response to a sectarian and national policy that was unjust to everybody. Justice is the only solution to end polarization. Everyone should be allowed to participate according to a national Iraqi vision that defends and works for the benefit of all of us. As for the decline in religious discourse, we must be careful in this regard. Religious movement, or movements that have a religious background, are still active and strong. This was confirmed by the results of the recent elections: religious movements won in the south by a 95%. This fact does not mean that the Islamic movements, or any of the other religious movements, have integrated policies which necessarily contain guidance. There is a crisis in the Iraqi political movement in general. That is to say, the political movement, and particularly the Islamic movement, is in dire need of deep, real and serious reform. This is true of all religious and non-religious movements on the Arabic or Kurdish tracks. Past conditions have now changed, which requires changing the form and content of political movements as well. If this does not happen, Iraq as a whole will be the one who pays the price and not the political movements alone.
Majalla: What is the possibility of the formation of a civil non-religious movement among the Iraqi Shiite?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: The formation of such a civil movement is possible. There are many non-religious intellectual and political movements among the Iraqi Shiite. This is not the problem. The problem is whether or not the Iraqi people will support such a movement. Shiite Iraq was the home of the communist movement. The Baath Party, the Movement of Arab Nationalists and many other non-religious movements, as you like to call them, were first formed among Iraqi Shiite. At some point some of these movements, if not all of them, have managed to gain the support of certain important Iraqi and Shiite sectors. But their influence has subsided a lot. Religious movements took their place. This happened a long time ago. Gaining the support of the people and forming an influential movement does not depend on being religious or non-religious. It depends on whether or not the people are convinced that such a movement serves their national, moral, and material aspirations. If religious movements fail to do that, their popularity declines. And the same is true also for non-religious movements.
Majalla: Where is the place of the non-partisan bourgeoisie Shiite in the political Shiite representation in Iraq?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: They have a very weak representation. Indeed, the bourgeoisie are generally powerless in Iraq. They received many blows since the fifties and until now, which has left them with nothing. Their economic role has declined, which led to the declining of their intellectual and political role, particularly since they were not strong in the first place. They were inexperienced and not truly independent. They did not have real political and social work rules that they could depend upon to play their desired political role. Thus, their political future became blurred and their movement was fragmented. They became too weak to face an armed poor man from the so-called "shabby Proletariat" ordering them to close their shops or to grease his palms to leave them alone to continue their business.
Majalla: Has the role of the United Iraqi Alliance come to an end, especially after the recent local elections?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: No, it hasn’t ended yet. And, I would like to remind you that the first local election battles, which took place in the same period of the previous legislative elections, were fought through individual slates, while the legislative elections were held through coalition slates, with regard to the forces you refer to. This time, the elections will also depend on the calculations of the different political powers, and on the combined or individual pressures which they will face.
Majalla: Is it possible that Iraq might witness a national alliance rather than several sectarian alliances, especially after news leaks on negotiations between you and parties outside the UIA, who were former enemies to the Supreme Islamic Council?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: This is an ambiguous question that has many sides to it. But, as to whether Iraq can witness an alternative national alliance, the answer is: Yes. Many politicians consider the Iraqi voice as one voice. They consider the voice of the south equal to the voice of the north, and that it must be won. Therefore a national alliance might be achieved in either case, whether before the elections, or after the elections through the alliance of the local political powers. The problem with the second case is that the local powers are more powerful individually than if they enter into an alliance. But, in the first case, there will already be a national government before the elections. Such an agreement on a government and a method of governance, particularly before the elections, will definitely constitute an important step towards the maturation of the political process in Iraq, and will help it get out of all forms of political trenching. Therefore we need to develop our electoral system, issue a law that regulates political parties, and separate the state, with all its institutions, from the political parties. The state must be completely neutral economically and politically. This will confine political parties to working within the framework of the government (the executive and legislative authorities responsible for making polices and ensuring their implementation), rather than trying to seize ministries and public service circuits. Such governmental institutions must be kept away from all this and be independent from political parties and political forces, so that they might continue to function during political crises.
Majalla: What are the reasons behind the Kurdish concerns about the policies of the central government? Is there a lack of trust between the two parties? Or do the Kurds find it difficult to be on the government side instead of being on the opposition side?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: Yes, there is a lack of trust. But, Kurds have practiced management since the beginning of the nineties. In addition to this, the Kurdish movement has practiced several kinds of local management a for long time before that, due to the historic military nature of the movement. Therefore, the difficulty that faces the Kurdish is not how to move from the opposition mindset to the state mindset, but rather how to change from a geographically-oriented mentality to a politically –oriented mentality. Their land, values, language, and forms of government were attacked, and so it was natural that they try to defend themselves against the forces that threaten them. But if the Kurds defended their geography, culture, and interests while they were on the opposition side, by isolating themselves, in fear of penetration by enemy forces, defending their interests today requires that they try a different approach which focuses on seeking their higher interests. Those interests lie, in my opinion, in Baghdad and not in Kurdistan. A pluralistic, democratic, and federal Iraq guarantees fulfilment of the interests of Kurds. A united Iraq serves the interests of Kurds rather than an independent Kurdistan. The Iraqi proposals must take into account the Kurdish interests which are in harmony with the general interests of the country, according to what is stipulated in the Constitution. Also, Kurdish interests must be included among the national interests. If the geographically-oriented proposal was to hinder the national interest proposal then it must be subjected to it and not vice versa, as long as the whole process is done under the constitution. This will protect the interests of everybody. The geography proposal must serve the main proposal and not stand against it. It must serve the national proposal and help solve the local problems rather than exploit such problems to make matters more complicated. In addition to this there is a lack of trust, because there are many in Baghdad and Iraq who do not really believe in a pluralistic, democratic, and federal system. They hope to return to the kind of governance relationships that existed in the past. There is a trust dilemma because there are mistakes made by all sides. Neither the problems suspended from the past nor the current problems are dealt with by using common sense. Instead, force is used and enmity prevails despite the fact that all sides live on the same land and have common interests. Many pretended to have forgotten the experiences of displacement, killing and fighting that the Kurdish have been facing for a century. The Kurdish mistakes are not being dealt with in a way that serves the country's interests or in the context of the overall historical problem that still persists. Instead, these mistakes are exploited for political ends. No dialog or constitutional methods are employed to correct them as if the Kurdish are not Iraqi. Addressing such issues is dropped as a result of appealing to the narrow-minded geopolitical logic rather than the national interest logic. Let's say that the oppressed forces - whether Kurdish, Arab, Turkish or Christian - which suffered from injustice and despotism should take into consideration the Law of Fanon explained by him in his book "the Oppressed on Earth". He warned that the oppressed should not use the same methods of the oppressor when the circumstances become favorable for the former in the face of a less powerful force or side.
Majalla: what do you think of the Iranian role in Iraq? What about the charges directed at Tehran accusing it of training Iraqi elements in preparation for military operations in Iraq and disturbing the peace of the country?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: We look positively to the Iranian role. In fact, we have demands from and differences with the Iranian regime and they have demands from and differences with us too. If we want to judge the Iranian position disregarding the history of wars, relationships between the two countries, the status quo, the presence of the foreign troops in Iraq and the regional agendas, we should broaden our view to include all neighbours whether near or distant. If not, our judgment will be negative and non-objective. I think Iran was the first country that acknowledged the new circumstances in Iraq and Tehran admitted that we have differences with them. But the best way for us all is dialog, politics and mutual interests. Iran is not a devil. Others are not angels either. All countries have their own interests and policies which we should understand well. We should also understand our circumstances in order to be able to deal with them. The New Democratic Iraq aspires for friendship with all and without any exceptions. Only authoritative and individualistic regimes try to find justifications and external conspiracies to justify their internal despotism. Iraq has disposed of the theory of despotism and wants to build everything on friendships and mutual, balanced and equal relationships.
Majalla: To what extent will the long-term agreement with the United States protect Iraq? What are the reasons for the Iranian worries about Iraq's acceptance of this agreement?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: The agreement in itself is not as important as the US administration. Regardless of the Iraqi situation, I think the US administration is no longer so much interested in Iraq. This may be attributed to internal US circumstances. Wars, regional and international circumstances have imposed a lot of pressures on the US administration. Iranian worries have arisen from two things: Firstly, Iran has a policy in the region that provokes hostility on the American side. Tehran thinks that the Iraqi government is led by the Shiites and thus does not want the name of the Shiites to be included in any agreements with countries like the United States. Secondly, it was understood from the very beginning that the US presence in Iraq was directed against Iran – the so-called Axis of Evil- in the first place, unlike the US presence in Afghanistan, for instance. Iran participated in the Bonn Conference and has recently taken part in a meeting to discuss the circumstances of Afghanistan.
Majalla: Would Iraq be the price of Iran-US rapprochement on the one hand and the Syrian-US rapprochement on the other hand? In other words, would Iran play a bigger role in Iraq?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: Iraq will not be the price of anything. This country is now ruled by a national government that knows well its people's interests. The government is overseen by an elected representative committee which is only subject to the will of the voters and the several political forces forming its checks-and-balances system. I think the Iranian-US, the Syrian-US or the Iranian-Arab rapprochement (especially with the KSA) will be in the very interest of Iraq. This country pays the price when it becomes an arena of dispute and conflict. But when it becomes the axis of agreement and reconciliation, it harvests a lot of gains.
Majalla: Do you feel any negligence at the Arab side concerning their relations with Iraq? What Iraq should do in order to improve these relations? And what are the restrictions imposed upon Arab initiatives toward Iraq, especially the initiatives of the neighbouring countries?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: Of course there is a kind of negligence at the Arab side concerning their relations with Iraq. Many important official and popular segments in the Arab world deal with Iraq as if it is inferior. With feelings of superiority, they dictate many things to this country which they don't even have in their own countries. A part of Iraq's problem concerning its system of government or its Arab relations is the product of the Arab and regional circumstances. These official and popular forces bear a significant part of responsibility for such circumstances. They try to find a scapegoat or escape from their dilemma. The problem of Iraq has deep roots. These include Arab fragility and disunion, lack of mature decisions, national and sectarian fanaticism, traces of withdrawal into the past and failure to learn from it or look forward to the future. We Arabs are still burying our heads in the sand overlooking the world around us and forgetting the role which we should play. For Iraq, the relations with Arabs are not a luxury. In fact they are a duty. Iraq would not deserve the name if it gave up its Arabism. It should maintain its Arabism not only because it belongs to the Arab world but because Arabism provides this country with the elements of life, power and survival as well. From there, Iraq should also be aware of this role, defend it and remove any obstacles, whether real or false, that may hinder its progress. This is in the best interest of both Iraq and the Arab world.
Majalla: You often speak about the militarization of the society? Do you have fears from an emergence of militarism in the Iraqi community?
Dr. AbdulMahdi: The problem is not in the fears we have about the emergence of militarism. The big question is: Will we be able to get rid of it? Iraq has been almost militarized politically, culturally, educationally and morally. It has been militarized for generations and long decades. The history of this country is full of external and internal wars. Militarism is very strong. In the constitution, we tried to set up the basics of education for engagement in the civil society. But we rather failed firstly because of our deficiencies…and secondly because of terrorism, destruction, armed activities, Sectarian disputes and ethnicities. Militarism has re-emerged but this time more forcefully. The number of the forces that have arms today at least equals the number of those we had by the end of war against Iran. Unfortunately, the new trend now has a renewed breeding ground. I believe the military leaders should themselves condemn and confront this trend in order to avoid new wars, riots and revolutions. The army should not be involved in activities other than defending the homeland.
Majalla: Mr. vice-president, now six years have passed since the changes made to the political process? Are you satisfied with this process? What's your opinion of the whole experience?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: No, I am not satisfied at all. This is not because there is nothing that took place in reality. In my recent meeting with Sarkozy in Paris, I told him that compared with the previous Iraqi situation, the current situation is like a miracle. I am not satisfied because I am sure that Iraq has great potentials and circumstances are more favorable. There is much we can do to rescue Iraq from the crisis. Right, there are a lot of pressures and obstacles, but we should have inner feelings of achievement. We should believe in our minds and potentials. We should have courage to overcome the barriers. The problem is that we still fear being accused or condemned more than we fear poverty, weakness, enslavement, ignorance, illness and conflict.
Majalla: What was the last book you've read recently, Sir?
Dr. Abdul AL-Mahdi: Do you mean reading one book at a time? I think this kind of reading has ceased to exist since Agatha Christi, Jerji Zeidan, books of Dar Al-Hilal, Ihsan AbdulQudoos, Naguib Mahfouz, etc, or since the academic, political or general books. Now, we read books through their titles and indices. We may page through them, go beyond what is written and reflect on what is interesting and eye-catching. We can engage in reading more than one book at the same time. The most important books are those which make you go back from the sentence to the page, from the page to the chapter and from the end to the introduction. Those are the books that you keep for a long time. Besides the Holy Qur'an and Nahj Al-Balaghah, the books that I keep beside my bed or take on my current travels include "Rajwan, the last Jew in Baghdad", an English book written by an Iraqi citizen called Naseem. The book sheds light on exciting scenes of his life in Iraq and Baghdad especially during the 1930s and 1940s. The list of must-read books also includes "Mohammed and Qur'an" translated by Dr. Radwan Al-Sayed, "Christians of Iraq" by Suhail Qasha, "Global Economies since the Southeast Asian Crisis" translated by Hanaa Al-Khafaji, "the Key to Science" by Sakaki, "Iraq between the end of Abbasid Era and the End of Ottomans Era" by Abdul Ameer Al-Rafi'ae… and two English books about President Obama, his life and personality. I also read a French book titled, "Sacred Ignorance: The Age of Religion without Culture" by Olivier Rowa in which he analyzes the religious conduct of the Christians. In this book, Olivier tries to sanctify the exclusion of the other. Another French book I've read recently was titled "Administration of Water in Islam" supervised by Nasser Farouki et al. I've read an English book titled "The Crisis of the Islamic Civilization" and "Alleviated Disaster" by Ayatollah Al-Azmi Al-Sayed Mohammed Said Al-Hakeem. I wrote a book which has been recently published, titled, "Constants and Variables in the Economic History of Islamic Countries". Now I am revising the book and correcting the errors to prepare it for the second edition. Moreover, I am reading a UN report concerning the assistance to Iraq on the internal borders and the issue of Kirkuk. This report was presented by the UN representative Al-Sayed Demstora. It consists of 500 pages and should be read page by page as homework.
