IslamOnline - Iraq... The Aftermath

Iyad Allawi is seen as “too close to the Americans.”

Iraq is possibly entering the most dangerous phase of its history. Everything depends on the meaning, perception and implementation of one word—sovereignty. Debate around this concept is intense, and rightly so, as it is the central fulcrum around which the short- and long-term future of the country will revolve.

If one had to choose a theme to characterize this period in Iraq’s history, it would be “appearance and reality.” Events following June 30th can either result in the country’s progress towards a modicum of stability or disastrous internal strife and tensions. But what even represents a more insidious danger is the subtle and invasive threat of the continued presence of the occupation forces under ulterior guises, and the hijacking of the country as a surrogate pawn of the US.

- Iraqi Cabinet Installed, Governing Council Dissolved

- “Where Is the Democracy?”

- The New UN Resolution on Iraq: How Effective is This Proposal?

The appearance that the US and UK are now struggling to promote is that the recently-announced transitional government heralds a new phase in Iraq’s history and will lead to autonomy and sovereignty for the country. However, the new, transitional government is seen by many, inside and outside Iraq, as largely an illusion, masking the reality of political maneuvers and machinations.

The reality of the situation is very different with the picture being painted by the coalition. Critics of the transitional government and promises of Iraqi sovereignty emphasize that the most imminent and important danger is not the “security threat,” but rather the possibility of countries attempting to use the present instability to position themselves for the best leverage and advantage, thus destroying any hopes of true sovereignty.

Just how much of a fiction the transitional government and democratic promises are, can be seen in the belief that this new government was chosen by the UN Iraq envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi. Many claim that this is not true, and some even claim that Brahimi “allowed the fiction to spread that he, and not Iraqi political leaders, would pick the new transition government.”^¹

It is argued that the present interim government comprises mere “puppets” who will serve the US and UK interests. Iraqi Sunni clerics have already denounced the new government, claiming that that “it is a US-shaped and dominated administration.” They claim that “there is no difference between the IGC [Iraqi Governing Council] and the transitional government. They are two sides of the same coin,” and that “the United States is imposing at the head of the government a person known for his collaboration and ties to the U.S. intelligence.”

In the same vein, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei dismissed the new interim administration in Baghdad as a “lackey” government.^²

Those claims refer to the new Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. Allwai is a prominent exile and leader of the Iraqi National Accord, a group formed by Iraqi exiles, many of whom are former Baath Party members who had fled the country. He was born to a well-known Shiite merchant family in 1945. He trained as a neurologist. He is seen as being close to the US—and to the CIA in particular. However, he has recently been critical of the coalition forces.

The new President, Ghazi Yawer, is a civil engineer, businessman and important tribal leader from the northern town of Mosul. He, too, is a former exile with strong ties to Washington and has recently been sharply critical of the Coalition.

Dr. Iyad Allawi in particular is seen as “too close to the Americans.”^³ Beside the CIA ties, Allawi has also, in recent days, praised coalition forces, which has a strong hint of complicity.

Many ordinary Iraqis are critical of the transitional government. “How can you accept people who came with the occupiers? The people who were tortured and suffered inside Iraq deserve these positions.”^⁴

There is also the strong suspicion that the present conciliatory gestures and optimistic language by the US government may be another fiction that is intended for US audiences, with the eye on the upcoming US election. “Americans would like to place the guns on Iraqi shoulders until the US elections in November. That’s the crux of the matter,” one commentator suggested.^⁵

Some elements of Iraqi society feel that constitution of the government is not representative enough. The claim of “marginalization and exclusion” has been made by key Shiite religious groups in Iraq.^⁶

The assertion that the new Iraqi “government” was handpicked by the US, and that it is “pretty much a farce,” has also appeared in leading publications such as the New York Times.

“Although for months the world has believed Iraq’s new government would be formed by the UN, in the end it was the choice of the Iraq Governing Council, a US-appointed body made up mostly of exile politicians with limited public support.”^⁷

The central question that will be the determining factor in Iraq’s future is who has the power and control. Who will wield the real power and who will in fact hold the reins of control in the future Iraq?

There are many pros and cons and variables to the present situation, but certainly, a biased Iraqi government, clandestinely run by the coalition, is not likely to lead Iraq to welfare and unity.

Gary Smith is a freelance journalist and researcher based in South Africa. His special field of research is the situation in Iraq. You can reach him at gary@imaginet.co.za.