BAGHDAD—With six weeks to go (more or less) until the Aug. 15 deadline for turning in their Constitution homework, Shi'ites and Sunnis have finally agreed that there will be some Sunnis on the Constitutional Committee beavering away on the draft of the country's charter.
There will be 15 Sunnis on the committee, picked mainly by tribal sheikhs and other respected men, and another 10 Sunni “advisors” to the committee, accounting for almost 36 percent of the 70-person committee. (There are several subcommittees working away on specific sections of the draft, but I don't have any data on those bodies.)
This is a significant step, and don't let naysayers tell you otherwise. Most significant, perhaps, is the willingness of a hardline Shi'ite cleric, Humam al-Hammoudi of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, to tamp down anti-Ba'athist sentiment among the Shi'ites and Kurds on the committee and, in essence, let bygones be bygones. At least as far as the makeup of the committee goes.
“If we were talking about ministries, names might be more important,” he said, as quoted by the New York Times. “But since it's a committee, having the views is more important than the names.”
I've talked with others, close to Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari and other Shi'ite movers and shakers, and they're of the same mind. Some of these men are optimistic—such as the advisor to the prime minister I spoke with—while others are not. One influential Shi'a leader, who never fled Iraq during the Saddam years doesn't think the constitution will be done on time. The other Shi'a leader, who did, is concerned that the deadline will be met, but the outcome will be less than desirable—at least for secular Iraqis.
(I'm not mentioning names because that was the deal I made with them. I hope you'll trust me enough that these men are players, they know what they're talking about and that they're close to the action.)
There are a number of obstacles to making the Aug. 15 deadline, however. They are:
- The role of Islam in legislation;
- The status of Kirkuk;
- How much autonomy will be given to the provinces.
These were all predicted long ago, and nothing new has developed the change the issues confronting Iraq. The religious Shi'ites in charge of the government—Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim and others—are close to Iran and want a more Islamist government, maybe not as severe as Tehran's wilayat al-faqih, but certainly more Islamic than Iraqis are used to. They want Islam to be the source of legislation instead of a source of legislation.
The Kurds are, somewhat predictably, throwing a spanner in the works by insisting that status of Kirkuk be settled before the constitution is drafted, while the Shi'ites want to put off the idea until after the constitution is approved. The trouble is, the Kurds won't approve the constitution in the scheduled Oct. 15 referendum if Kirkuk is left up in the air. They don't really trust Iraq's Shi'ite and Sunni Arabs to deal with them fairly on this emotional issue, so they're holding out the threat of not approving the constitution as a cudgel to get their way now. Which is what they always do, and it leads to some serious brinkmanship. I suspect the Americans will step in at some point and assure the Kurds they have their back if they'll just yield on this issue.
And as for autonomy, oh boy. This is a hot issue, and there's a new wrinkle. Secular Shi'ites in the south, led by a Baqr Yassin, have started a push toward making the southern three provinces of Basra, Amara and Nasariyah into an autonomous zone called “Sumer,” similar to the arrangement the Kurds have now. He's calling for local control of resources—including the vast oil reserves there—and some kind of control of military units in the region. Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and the Jaafari crowd are opposed to such an idea, saying such a development would pose a threat to the unity of Iraq.
There are three other reason for their opposition: Turkey, Syria and especially Iran. A federal Iraq, with strong provincial governments based on ethnic or sectarian lines is seen as a threat in those three countries who all have restive Kurdish populations that have been hankering for autonomous regions of their own in line with Iraqi Kurdistan. Iran, especially, would face a difficult situation—well, difficult for the mullahs—because it's incredibly diverse. Persians make up 51 percent, Azeri 24 percent, Gilaki and Mazandarani 8 percent, Kurds 7 percent, Arabs 3 percent, Lur, Baluch and Turkmen 2 percent each and “other” make 1 percent. If “Sumer” became a reality alongside an autonomous Kurdistan—each with their own sources of petro-wealth—the Arab population of Khuzestan just across the Persian/Arabian Gulf would likely try to join them or form their own ethnic enclave. You're looking at a scenario of a Balkanized Middle East.
The question you have to ask is why are secular Shi'ites pushing for Sumer? And why is Baqr Yassin, a former Ba'athist opposed to Saddam Hussein and allied with the Syrian branch of the party, the man to lead the movement? Because the secular Shi'ites in the south are scared to death of Iran and its suffocating brand of Islam. Already Basra, which I'm told used to be quite a party town, is populated by black-sheathed women and no liquor stores, cinemas or anything else secular Iraqis enjoy. Militias such as the Badr Organization—formerly commanded by al-Hakim, now head of SCIRI—which fought alongside the Iranian Revolutionary Guards in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88) control the cops. Freelance vice and morality squads roam the streets. And this is all at the urging of Iran, which has deeply infiltrated its neighbor. The old Ba'athist Yassin is fighting the Iran-Iraq war all over again—as are many of the Ba'athist insurgents who strike at Jaafari's Shi'ite government because, they say, “It's Iranian.” And it's why Adnan al-Dulaimi, the custodian of Iraq's waqf and who claims to speak for several insurgent groups, calls for Sunni participation in Iraqi politics so they can combat shu'ubiyyah, a racist term favored by Ba'athists that basically calls Iraqi Shi'ites “Persians”—although “dirty Persians” might be more accurate in its interpretation. This has enraged my Shi'ite sources.
I can't speak to the truth of such charges. I believe that Iran is deeply, deeply involved in a great deal of mischief from the head of the Gulf all the way up to Baghdad. But men who have to know what is going on because they can get killed if they don't are worried about the future, and what kind of country Iraq will become.
In end, it may not matter who's on the committee to write the constitution if the three main groups can't see past their self-interests—or their patrons'.
Chris,
thank you for the detailed description. I am glad you started picking up on the Baathist terminology. Actually when I read some of the communiques issued by the different “resistance” groups I immediately pick up on such terminologies meaning that these said “resistance” are Baathists under a different name.
A federal Iraq is feared to be the first step towards a Balkanized Iraq. Although having a federal system benefits the regions formed by this federal system, but these regional governments should not have control over the country’s natural resources or military. I think most Iraqis are for a secular constitution and they are worried that the Islamic hardliners get their way.
As for Basra, you are right, it used to be a city with lots of night clubs, where Kuwaitis used to go there to have fun in the 80’s.
As for Kirkuk, if it gets to be part of the Kurdish region and with all its oil, this will be a prelude for the Kurds to have an independent state in the not far future. All Iraqi arabs and Turkumen realize that and are fighting it hard.
Sometimes I am encouraged by the progress although it is slow, but with all the baggage inherited from the Saddam era it is very understandable.
It is a hard and long road, this is a nation that is being born again, and they should always keep in mind that without the bold move by the US this would not have taken place. I always use the analogy that Iraq is a patient who just had an open heart surgery, it is painful at the start but it will give a new life to the patient.
Mark
That’s the best analysis of the issues and intrigue surrounding the Constitutional Committee that I’ve read anywhere.
as for sifting the truth from the lies and bias, you are sufficiently experienced in the situation and in reading the people to be able to make a pretty accurate judgment about what you see. Everyone has their point of view, and you can trust yourself enough, I think, to see beyond that to the common directions you see developing. Thanks for your insights and your willingness to express them.
as long as you continue to pretend that the us has good intentions in iraq, you will not understand whats going on.
What the iraqis want is completely irrelevant to the us. If they live or die is irrelevant to the us. The us is acting in its own interests.
There is an elephant in the room which you wish to ignore.
Do not underestimate the ruthlessness of these people. While you debate the “optimal” solution for a new iraqi state, planners are organising extra-judicial killings, reprisals against civilians are being perpetrated, innocent prisoners are being tortured and killed, many thousands of innocents are caught up in the prison facilities.
Look, they didn’t even bother to count the number of dead. Even after they die, the iraqis are irrelevant.
500,000 dead children during the sanctions was acceptable to the american elite. do you think that anything has changed?
How far do you think they would go? What price would be too high?
kesver
what the hell are you talking about. I was over there with the Army, I can tell you that we have the best interest of the Iraqi people at heart. I have been invited into so many homes for tea and a handshake it is not funny. As far as dead civilians, I can promise you the forgein fighters have killed more Iraqiis in the last six months than the US has since the war ended. You might want to stay away from some of the more liberal websites to collect your information.
Kevser
I do not know where you got your information from, I think your main objective is you are against the US and whatever the US does. I was born in Baghdad and I can tell you that over 80% of the Iraqis support the US and the US presence. It is the foreign fighters and their employers the Baathist who are wreaking havoc in that country. You can think what you want but that is the truth.
Mark
Hello Mike,
What part of Iraq was your unit occupying? I’m happy that you had a good experience. I also had a cousin over there for a year or so. I’m very grateful that hes back home.
You say you have the best interest of the iraqi people at heart?
I know you may have, but i can show you that you commanders and political leaders do not share your good intentions.
But first a simple question. How did the US and Great Britain justify the massive use of force against another country?
They claimed that he had WMD and was a threat to the west.
We now know that that wasn’t and isn’t true.
We also know that an extreme amount of spin was used to portray this message. Basically they lied.
You say that you have the iraqis interest at heart? What about your commanders?
Look at the evidence:
What about the permanent US bases being built?
What about putting another PNAC signing advocate in charge of Iraq?(new us ambassador)
What about faking the evidence about the yellow cake from Nigeria? Who was in charge of that? Tony Blairs lies (45 mins)? Colin Powels pathethic performance in the UN? Shock and Awe? Not even Hitler could come up with a better term. The use of burning naplamn-like substance in Fallujah? The very real torture in Abu Graib and other camps? Where are the other 1000 pictures? Where are the videos? Oh, it would make the iraqis angry at the us soldiers? I see. Thats obviously the most important consideration. What about the bodies in the prison mortuaries? how many now 40, 60? who knows. And guess what? There are hardly any reporters operating in Iraq. At least mot outside the green zone. So i ask you, who can honestly say that there is not much worse going on? If i had written 18 months ago that US soldiers were torturing Iraqis in US controlled prisons, you would have said its a lie and i’ve been reading too much leftwing propaganda.
War is organised murder. Nothing else. Working class people killing working class people for nothing. We must not trust this leadership. Their record cannot alow us to continue giving it support.
Mark,
you say that its the foreign fighters and ex-baathists who are wrecking havoc in iraq?
Who started the Shock and Awe acmpaign? Who said ” we do not do body counts”? Who said “bring em on”? Who flew thousands of bombing missions against Iraq in the 90’s? Who bombed their water works and electricity plants in a deliberate attempt to introduce hardship on the iraqi people, so they could displace the one time ally of washington? Who imposed the santions and kept them in place in spite of the evidence of mass deaths among Iraqi children? Ask Ms. “its worth the price” Albright does she have the Iraqis best interests at heart.
I’m afraid its quite disingenious of you to say that the baathists and foreign fighters are the ones “wreaking Havoc”.
What do you expect them to do? Lie down and be exploited by the PNAC crowd? Allow them to well odff all the iraqi assets? Allow them to dictate the law and type of government? Allow them to hand out their money to US contractors?
It’ll never happen. Ever. And as long as you keep thinking that the Baathists and foreign fighters are the problem and not a symptom, then it’ll go on for a very long time indeed.
Kevsar, this is easy..
First of all, I was in Tikrit, Bagdad, and Mosul, with some stops along the way.
You can say WMD all you want, fine we didn’t find them, but we gave Saddam too much time to dispose of what he had via Syria. Secondly, when he surrendered during the Gulf War, part of the agreement was for inspections. He continued to play games, for all intentive purposes, we could have invaded Iraq at anytime during the previous 14 years. Ask the Kurds and the Shiites if they are glad Saddam is gone.
The bases that are being built will be turned over the the Iraqii Army once they are full. One of the bases has been completed and is full of Iraqii military personnel. We will not keep a permanent presence in Iraq.
You gotta stop with the conspiracy theories.
As far as the prisoner torturing is concerned. You have to ask yourself a couple of questions. First when you say torture, are you speaking of sleep depravation and noisy environments like Brittney Spears music is torture. Maybe you prefer seeing people get the heads cut off on video. You have to compare apples to apples. These guys in the prisons aren’t theifs, they are cold blooded killers. And if putting some pressure on them saves lives so be it.
I hate Liberal slants. Your info is so far out of whack, it will take you two lifetimes to see the center again.
Kevsar, this is easy..
First of all, I was in Tikrit, Bagdad, and Mosul, with some stops along the way.
You can say WMD all you want, fine we didn’t find them, but we gave Saddam too much time to dispose of what he had via Syria. Secondly, when he surrendered during the Gulf War, part of the agreement was for inspections. He continued to play games, for all intentive purposes, we could have invaded Iraq at anytime during the previous 14 years. Ask the Kurds and the Shiites if they are glad Saddam is gone.
The bases that are being built will be turned over the the Iraqii Army once they are full. One of the bases has been completed and is full of Iraqii military personnel. We will not keep a permanent presence in Iraq.
You gotta stop with the conspiracy theories.
As far as the prisoner torturing is concerned. You have to ask yourself a couple of questions. First when you say torture, are you speaking of sleep depravation and noisy environments like Brittney Spears music is torture. Maybe you prefer seeing people get the heads cut off on video. You have to compare apples to apples. These guys in the prisons aren’t theifs, they are cold blooded killers. And if putting some pressure on them saves lives so be it.
I hate Liberal slants. Your info is so far out of whack, it will take you two lifetimes to see the center again.
Kevsar, this is easy..
First of all, I was in Tikrit, Bagdad, and Mosul, with some stops along the way.
You can say WMD all you want, fine we didn’t find them, but we gave Saddam too much time to dispose of what he had via Syria. Secondly, when he surrendered during the Gulf War, part of the agreement was for inspections. He continued to play games, for all intentive purposes, we could have invaded Iraq at anytime during the previous 14 years. Ask the Kurds and the Shiites if they are glad Saddam is gone.
The bases that are being built will be turned over the the Iraqii Army once they are full. One of the bases has been completed and is full of Iraqii military personnel. We will not keep a permanent presence in Iraq.
You gotta stop with the conspiracy theories.
As far as the prisoner torturing is concerned. You have to ask yourself a couple of questions. First when you say torture, are you speaking of sleep depravation and noisy environments like Brittney Spears music is torture. Maybe you prefer seeing people get the heads cut off on video. You have to compare apples to apples. These guys in the prisons aren’t theifs, they are cold blooded killers. And if putting some pressure on them saves lives so be it.
I hate Liberal slants. Your info is so far out of whack, it will take you two lifetimes to see the center again.
Hi Mike,
WMD: There was no WMD. Your assertion that Saddam transported them to Siria is not credible. Wheres the evidence for this assertion? Why haven’t the coalition forces invaded if this is the case?
So in conclusion, no WMD.
This leaves the question to be answered, why lie about WMD? Does this not show you something about their motives?
Saddam is gone. That is fantastic. He was a thug of the first order. And he had alot of friends in washington.
Does the fact that the people who supported him (in some cases the exact same people) during his reign of terror now invade and kill thousands of iraqis in order to depose him and set up an alternative strong man in Baghdad make the war ok?
i think we can do better.
So mike, you’re in denial about the torture and the dead bodies in the prisons?
Actiually thats very interesting. Maybe thats indicitive of how the average “centreist” is dealing with the torture issue. It wont go away by ignoring it. You cant say, we didn’t know what was happening.
So, if it was only pranks as you assert, why not release the photos and the videos? I want a good explaination. And you should want one too.
You say its not a beheadding so its ok. Thats your definition of human rights then we have no common ground.
I’ll get back to the bases later.
Kevser
Kevser - How much time have you spent in Iraq? I think someone who has been there might possibly have a little better handle on the true situation there.
Mike - If you were there as military, thank you for your service.
MJ, thanks for the kind words, your name warms my heart, as I am called MJ in my military ranks.
Kesvar, if you are in a war, you have to get information. The city police use torture tactics such as sleep depravation to get information from a suspect. In war the combatants, especially these sickos, have a deep hatred for the US and everything that it stands for. You cannot just politely ask for information that could potentially save thousands of lives. If 1 joker needs to be the subject of some pain so US troops and innocent Iraqi civilians could be spared then so be it.
Your type of passive thinking led us to 9/11 as Clinton repeatedly failed to respond to the attacks on US interest over his 8 years in office.