Category Archives: ما بعد التجربة

مذكرات فكرية

‘Diplomacy of incompetence’ in Iraq

‘Diplomacy of incompetence’ in Iraq
Is anyone in charge of Iraq’s foreign policy, asks Salah Nasrawi

——————————————————————————–

A string of diplomatic disputes, including an escalating crisis with Kuwait over the construction of a major sea port, have thrown up opportunities for Iraqis to debate their country’s foreign policy amid mounting criticisms of what has been described as a “diplomacy of incompetence.”

Many among Iraq’s most powerful politicians, including prime minister Nuri Al-Maliki, view the country’s foreign ministry with suspicion, accusing members of the diplomatic corps of failing to foster Iraq’s national interests and instead serving their own ethnic and sectarian affiliations.

However, Hoshyar Zebari, a Kurd who has been the country’s chief diplomat for some eight years, disagrees and blames rival Iraqi politicians for being behind Iraq’s worsening relations with its neighbours.

As Iraq faces the possibility of increasing foreign intervention in the country, including the recent military incursions by Iran and Turkey, many Iraqis are now lambasting their government for its failed foreign policy.

Critics have noted that the Iraqi government has refrained from lodging complaints with the UN Security Council against Iran and Turkey, despite their repeated incursions into Iraq.

A key question now is whether Iraq still has a foreign policy worthy of the name, and, if so, who is in control of it.

The present Iraqi constitution, drafted after the fall of the regime of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein in 2003, stipulates that the country’s “federal authorities” will draw up the country’s “sovereign foreign policy” and formulate its “national security” strategy.

Yet, successive governments since then have failed to develop a well-defined strategy for foreign relations, or to specify who in the federal authority, which includes the parliament, the presidency and the government, is responsible for foreign relations.

After its restructuring following the US-led invasion in 2003 that toppled the Saddam regime, Iraq’s foreign ministry stated that its main objective was to end the country’s isolation by overcoming the “legacy of mistrust and hostility” among its neighbours.

A policy note posted on the ministry’s website states among its “responsibilities and challenges” the need to work to “protect Iraq’s security, stabilise the country and preserve Iraq’s territorial integrity.”

However, many Iraqi politicians say the foreign ministry has failed to implement these goals.

Last week Maysoun Al-Damalouji, a member of the Iraqi parliament on the Sunni-backed Al-Iraqiya List, charged in a television interview with the Al-Baghdadia channel that the country’s foreign policy is “weak and does not protect Iraq’s national interests”.

Another member or parliament, Wahda Al-Jumaili, accused the government’s foreign policy of being “erroneous and confusing”.

The parliament’s foreign relations committee, constitutionally entitled to scrutinise government policy, has repeatedly complained that it is in the dark about what is going on inside the Foreign Ministry.

The committee said Foreign Minister Zebari had shunned opportunities to discuss the country’s foreign affairs with members of his own diplomatic staff.

He recently told reporters that the committee should not “interfere in policy-making by the ministries, including the Foreign Ministry.”

In July, Al-Maliki himself went public about his misgivings about the Foreign Ministry, calling for more “transparency” in Iraqi foreign policy and telling a meeting of Iraqi ambassadors that the country’s “foreign policy should be clearly defined”.

Iraq’s foreign policy “should be controlled by the constitution, law and the state’s interests,” Al-Maliki said, complaining that Iraqi diplomats abroad sometimes “express policies that are different from those forged by the government”.

They “should represent the government and not the political parties or sects or ethnicities” to which they belonged, he said.

Zebari, meanwhile, insists that his ministry’s policies chime perfectly with Iraqi national goals. In a series of press interviews Zebari has defended his ministry as “working hard to introduce Iraq’s shining face” to the world.

He accused rival Iraqi politicians of lacking diplomatic niceties, meddling in the embattled country’s diplomacy and damaging its ties with foreign nations.

Nevertheless, many would agree that Iraq’s foreign policy does seem to be in trouble and that this could reflect a lack of cohesion in government policies more generally, as well as conflicts among the country’s rival political and ethnic groups.

The wrangling over Kuwait’s construction of the Mubarak Great Port on Boubiyan Island across a narrow waterway with Iraq is only one case in point.

While many Iraqis, including ministers and legislators, say that the new port encroaches on Iraq’s territorial waters, accusing Kuwait of attempting to choke Iraq’s access to international shipping lanes, Zebari has said the opposite, holding that the port does not harm Iraq’s interests.

On 29 May, Zebari told the cabinet in a letter that “the construction of the Great Mubarak Port will by no means suffocate Iraq economically or allow Kuwait to control its maritime trade because it will not affect traffic in the Khor Abdullah Canal.”

The letter may have infuriated Al-Maliki, who promptly decided to take over the issue, instructing his office to handle it rather than the foreign ministry.

Last Tuesday, the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper quoted Yassin Majeed, a close aide to Al-Maliki, as saying that the Iraqi prime minister had threatened to fire Zebari “if he does not improve his ministry’s performance.”

In addition to accusations of mismanagement and a lack of inter-agency communication and coordination, critics say that the Foreign Ministry is plagued by corruption, cronyism and nepotism.

Iraqi media outlets thrive on reports of corruption inside the ministry and at Iraqi embassies abroad, the latter having acted as channels for hundreds of millions of dollars intended for rehabilitation work in Iraq.

Little has been done to investigate the allegations.

In August, Othman Al-Geheishi, a member of the Iraqi parliament’s integrity committee, said that the committee would be investigating possible “financial and administrative fraud” at the ministry relating to $260 million spent on preparations for an Arab summit in Baghdad that was not in fact held.

The Foreign Ministry has a reputation for being one of the worst offenders in terms of allegations of governmental nepotism and cronyism.

Critics say that many of those sent to work in Iraq’s 89 diplomatic missions abroad are either political appointees or are related to someone in the government.

Factors presumed to be related to holding diplomatic jobs, such as higher education, a career in public or academic service and political experience, have been sidestepped, critics say, in order to hire diplomats according to quotas based on sectarian and ethnic cliques.

If true, this could explain many of the problems experienced in managing Iraq’s foreign policy.

Iraq’s foreign policy also remains conditioned by geopolitical factors such as the country’s location, sandwiched between the Arab world, Turkey and Iran, border problems and access to international waterways.

But domestic challenges, including political stalemate, instability and sectarianism, are also having significant consequences for national security and foreign policies.

As long as Iraq fails to forge an independent foreign policy that serves its national interests and not the agendas of its sometimes embattled ethnicities, the country will not receive the international respect it deserves.

A question of justice

A question of justice

Bringing justice to the victims is the key to building peace and democracy in Iraq, writes Salah Nasrawi

As the world celebrated International Justice Day last Sunday, there was an opportunity to reflect on the conflict in Iraq, which since the US-led invasion in 2003 has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and acts of abuse, with most of the victims having been forgotten and few of the perpetrators having been brought to justice.
The occasion, which marks the day a diplomatic conference in Rome adopted the statutes of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998, coincided with Iraq’s announcement that it would execute two of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein’s half-brothers within the next month along with three other former regime figures after the five were handed over by the US military.
While the Iraqi people have been subjected to mass crimes both under the Saddam regime and during the subsequent US occupation, very few of the perpetrators have been prosecuted in a proper manner, leaving the victims clamouring for justice.
Now that US forces are preparing to end their eight years of occupation of the country by the end of the year, there is growing debate in Iraq about whether the country will be able to institutionalise peace and democracy without at the same time meeting the demands for justice among ordinary Iraqis.
There have been questions about whether the national Iraqi courts will be able to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of the crimes that have taken place in the country alone, or whether there will be a need to resort to international mechanisms in order to ensure that those responsible for human rights abuses are brought to account.
Nowhere is this need for a careful approach to ensuring justice for the victims of human rights violations at the hands of the former regime, the country’s new rulers and the occupation forces more pressing than in Iraq, where all three have been responsible for atrocities.
Recent rulings by British, Spanish and US courts have also shown the need for more work to be done to end the impunity that has often been granted to those who have perpetrated some of the gravest crimes against humanity.
Earlier this month, the European Court of Human Rights held that Britain had violated the European Convention on Human Rights by its failure adequately to investigate abuses carried out by British soldiers in Iraq during the occupation.
The case involved incidents which had occurred between May 2003 and June 2004 in the Basra province of Iraq, during which time Britain was the occupying power and therefore was responsible for security.
The landmark ruling by the Strasbourg court found that Britain had violated the rights of the families of four Iraqis killed by British forces when an independent investigation into their deaths overturned a British House of Lords ruling that there was no UK jurisdiction regarding the deaths.
The ruling is important since the UK government will now be obliged to accept that human rights law applies everywhere in the world and its soldiers are duty bound to protect civilians.
At the same time, Britain’s Court of Appeal started hearings on Monday regarding demands for a public inquiry into allegations of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment carried out by British soldiers and interrogators in Iraq.
In Spain, a judge also announced plans last Thursday to question present Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki and three Iraqi military officers about the deaths of 34 people at an Iranian exiles camp in Iraq.
Spain launched an independent probe into the deaths of 11 Iranian exiles living at the camp in 2009 under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction, which it says allows it to prosecute serious crimes committed in other countries.
Under the Spanish ruling, Al-Maliki will be automatically summoned to appear before the court when his term as prime minister ends and his judicial immunity expires. The judge ordered the three military officers to appear before the court in October.
The British and Spanish court rulings are in stark contrast with a US Supreme Court ruling last week that a group of former detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq will not be able to sue US military contractors who they say participated in torture and other acts of abuse at the US-run detention facility in 2003 and 2004.
The court last week declined to take up the case of an Iraqi man involved in litigation with the US Tiran Corporation, raising the issue of whether private contractors hired by the US military to perform services in a war zone may be held accountable for allegedly participating in acts of torture and other war crimes.
While some low-ranking American soldiers have faced trial for crimes committed in Iraq, the US has routinely claimed immunity for its soldiers and sometimes also for foreign security guards in its employ in Iraq.
The US army in Iraq has also refused to take full responsibility for its troops to protect civilians during military operations, as is stipulated under the 1949 Geneva Conventions and 1977 Additional Protocols.
It is against this background that the British and Spanish rulings take on their full importance, since in them the British and Spanish courts make it clear that national human rights obligations do not end at a country’s borders.
The rulings could open up Iraqi forces, together with US and other occupation forces, to a deluge of claims of criminal abuse, adding to pressures for further public inquiries into the behaviour of foreign troops since the US-led invasion of the country in 2003.
They also open a window of opportunity for the Iraqi victims of such abuses and certain non-governmental parties to take such claims to the European courts, which have now extended their jurisdiction in such cases beyond their territorial limits and outside Europe.
This could also be a step closer to allegations of the killing of Iraqi civilians by US forces or caused by the US occupation of the country to be taken to the International Criminal Court for examination.
International legal experts have argued that illegal activities carried out by foreign troops in Iraq and by Iraqi security forces have been systematic and widespread enough to qualify as crimes against humanity.
Given their gravity, and the fact that they were perpetrated as part of a political conflict, crimes committed in Iraq during the occupation could be prosecuted before the ICC, such experts say, even if the court has no technical jurisdiction over such forces.
However, an additional hurdle may be that neither Iraq nor the United States are signatories to the Rome Statute that established the ICC.
Yet, this week’s announcement of the planned execution of five Saddam-era officials on charges of mass murder has once again underlined the need for proper legal procedures to be put in place in Iraq to address both past human rights abuses and the atrocities committed under the US occupation.
The executions are expected to raise sentiments that are very much part of the complex mix of emotions that has overwhelmed Iraq as it struggles to reconcile itself with its past and to move on into the future.
Many Iraqis do not consider the fall of Saddam as being the end of the Baath Party regime in the country and insist on bringing those responsible for human rights abuses under its rule to justice, while others consider crimes committed in the country after Saddam’s fall also to be an impediment to building a just and democratic future.
It has long been argued that the legacies of both periods are too complicated and interwoven to be simply dealt with or for justice to be done without giving way to calls for revenge.
The significance of the British and Spanish court rulings is that Iraqis are now able to rely on international law to provide the legal framework necessary both to bring those responsible for past abuses to justice and to halt any ongoing abuses.

© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved

مثقفون يدينون صمت الحكومة العراقية على ممارسات النظام السوري

“نحن الكتاب والصحفيين، والفنانين والمثقفين العراقيين، الموقعين أدناه، نستنكر بشدة صمت الحكومة العراقية واتحاد الأدباء ونقابتي الصحفيين والفنانين العراقيين تجاه المجازر النازية التي يرتكبها نظام بشار الأسد بحق الشعب السوري الأعزل، التي تذكرنا بممارسات نظام صدام حسين. لقد عانينا نحن العراقيين في الداخل والخارج من الصمت المتواطىء، الذي مارسه بعض العرب تجاه محنة شعبنا، ومن الأولى بنا، حكومة ومؤسسات مهنية وشعبية وأفرادا، أن لا نسكت في الأقل على جرائم ترتكب أمام أعيننا تجاه شعب احتضننا طويلا في المنفى.
إننا نطالب الحكومة العراقية، والأحزاب والمنظمات والتجمعات المهنية، ومنظمات المجتمع المدني، وكتابنا ومثقفينا في الداخل والخارج، أن ينفضوا عنهم وعنا عار السكوت على سياسة الأرض المحروقة التي يمارسها النظام السوري يوميا، والقتل العشوائي ، الذي لم يستثن أحدا حتى الأطفال. ونطالب الحكومة المركزية، وحكومة أقليم كردستان بفتح الحدود أمام اللاجئين السوريين، وتوفير كل المستلزمات الضرورية لهم حسب المواثيق الدولية، لحين تحرير وطنهم من طغيان نظام وحكم الحزب الواحد والمتواطئين معه.”
الموقعون:

فاضل السلطاني    شاعر
فيصل لعيبي صاحي      فنان تشكيلي
نجم والي           روائي
فاطمة المحسن        كاتبة
د. فالح عبد الجبار       سوسيولوجي
إبراهيم الزبيدي          

إعلامي وكاتبعبد القادر الجنابي        شاعر
أناهيت سركيس       
فنانة تشكيليةكاظم خليفة          فنان تشكيلي
إبراهيم أحمد             قاص
صلاح النصراوي       إعلامي وكاتب
كريم عبد                شاعر وقاص
هاتف الجنابي            شاعر
د.عبد الرضا عليّ        ناقد وأكاديمي
عبد المجيد الهيتي         اقتصادي
عواد ناصر              
شاعرأحمد مختار           موسيقي
 د.رابحة الناشئ      باحثة وأكاديمية
عدنان حسين          صحفي
بديعة إبراهيم           فنانة وإعلامية
علي كامل              سينمائي
كاظم الواسطي         كاتب
لطيف الحبيب          كاتب
حسين هنداوي          كاتب
كريم الأسدي           فنان تشكيلي
زيد العامري الرفاعي         مترجم
ساطع هاشم            فنان تشكيلي
فاخر جاسم            أستاذ جامعي
فلاح عبد الستار       مسرحي
كريم رسن منصور    
فنان تشكيلي

بيان

                                  
                                                                     بيان
يخوض شعبنا العراقي الابي هذه الايام معركة باسلة جديدة في سلسة معاركه الوطنية الكبرى التي خاضها عبر تاريخه المجيد ضد الطغيان والاستبداد ومن اجل العدالة والحرية والكرامة والتي تستدعي من كل القوى الوطنية، بكافة اطيافها ومكوناتها، الوقوف الى جانبها بكل قوة وحزم وبلا تردد.
ان ايام الغضب التي اشعلها شباب العراق في ساحة التحرير وفي شوارع المدن العراقية، من شماله حتى جنوبه، ومن شرقه حتى غربه، ضد نظام المحاصصة الطائفية وممارساته في الفساد، ونهب المال العام، وعجزه عن ادارة الدولة، ومن اجل الاصلاح والمشاركة والديمقراطية، هي دليل ساطع على فشل المشروع السياسي الذي فرضه الاحتلال الامريكي للعراق منذ عام 2003.
اننا اذ نعلن تأيدنا الكامل لكل المطالب العادلة التي يعبر عنها المعتصمون فاننا نستنكر بشدة كل الاجراءات القمعية التي تواجه بها السلطة المتظاهرين، وخاصة اطلاق الرصاص وقتل الابرياء، كما ندين مواقف التدليس والخداع التي تمارسها السلطة سواء بتوجيه الاتهامات الباطلة للمتظاهرين، او باطلاق الوعود الكاذبة للشعب بهدف اطفاء جذوة الانتفاضة المباركة.
لقد عبرت ايام الغضب والمرارة والندم عن لحمة الشعب العراقي، بكل قومياته ومذاهبه وتوحده خلف مطالب التغير والاصلاح، ونبذ السياسات الطائفية الفجة التي تتخندق ورائها القوى التي استلبت صناديق الاقتراع وخطفت ارادة العراقيين بالتحرر والديمقراطية، وآن الاوان لكي تنطلق قوى شعبنا بالعمل من اجل اعادة بناء الدولة على اسس ديمقراطية ومدنية حقيقية.
صلاح النصراوي
نوري عبد الرزاق حسين
       17   اذار 2011