It was expected – and this has actually been achieved – from all progressives, patriots, Islamists and nationalists in Iraq and abroad, to support the call made by Mr. Al-Sadr to enact a law prohibiting normalization with the enemy state without hesitation and since the first day, despite all that has been said and will be said about the internal Iraqi political dimension related to With the conflict between the two conflicting Shiite political blocs over the leadership of the government, the Sadrist movement and the coordination framework, over the legislation of this law, the accusations of normalization touched most of the parties to the tripartite alliance led by the Sadrist movement, especially the Barzani party, which has been known as the home of the normal disease and the smooth channel for dealing with the enemy state for decades.
Analysts and those interested in Iraqi political affairs pointed out that Al-Sadr wanted to exonerate himself first, after a series of unfortunate statements, including considering the Arab-Zionist conflict in his tweet months ago just a “Syrian-Israeli conflict in which the Iraqis should not get involved.” So he took the initiative to pull the rug out. These accusations are against him and his Barzani allies who are involved to the chin in dealing with Israel, and with them some Sunni Arab politicians, from under the feet of their opponents who use them, specifically from under the feet of their opponents in the coordinating framework. Al-Sadr resorted to putting forward this project; I say, even if this statement is true – and it is true in its broad outlines – it is necessary to support the ongoing efforts to pass the law and not obstruct it. This is because this law will remain, as has the Iraqi law in force, which was enacted by the previous regime, and which, in its articles 201, 203 and 204, who promote Zionism or who are affiliated with it directly or indirectly, are punished with severe penalties up to the death penalty. As for the initiatives and tactics of reformist politicians and their parties, they will go with them to the bottom of the sea of oblivion. But the adoption of the new law, especially the “reasons compelling” paragraph, cannot be justified or accepted, and it must be re-drafted, because it implicitly erases Iraq’s Arab civilizational identity, neglects the reference to the rights of the Palestinian people in their homeland, and replaces that with words of construction with relevant ideological flavour.
There is a dangerous loophole that cannot be tolerated in the paragraph of the reasons for the law, as we have said. It seems that some leaders of the “triple alliance” want, under the cover of passing a law prohibiting normalization, to strike the Arab identity of Iraq and follow the path of the frank allies of the American occupation in its early years. At the forefront of them is the late Jalal Talabani, the head of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, Masoud Barzani, the Islamic Council party led by al-Hakim and the leadership of the “Dawa” party in its two branches, when they stabbed this identity at the hands of the constitution-writing committee during the era of the American civil ruler, Paul Bremer. Incidentally, we mention that the representative of the Sistani religious authority, Sheikh Ahmed Al-Safi, had participated in that committee with a leading and active role. At that time, the committee decided in the constitutional articles it decided that Iraq is not an Arab country, but rather “a country of multiple nationalities, religions and sects” – Article 3 of the current constitution, even though Arabs make up more than 85 percent of its population, and Muslims make up more than 96 percent of them. .
In practice, it was tangibly confirmed that the government led by the “Shiite Kurdish Political Alliance” was and is still acting on the basis that Iraq is a bi-national country (Arabs and Kurds), and not multi-national, especially in the arrangements of laws relating to the languages, signs and symbols of the Iraqi state, with The constitutional lack of recognition of the Arabness of the first component, as it was divided sectarian into two societal components; A Shiite and a Sunni component. As for the second national component, the Kurdish one, it has continued to exercise its rights as a single national component. It has the right to flaunt and defend its national identity and call for secession on the basis of it from the State of Iraq with open and frank support and encouragement from one country in the world, Israel, and has been marginalized. The third national “Turkmen” and other national minorities!
From the standpoint of the constructive mentality and positive interaction, it was, and still is, possible to reformulate this paragraph
Let us return to the draft of the new draft law and read the paragraph of the reasons for its enactment, and we find that it stipulated the following: “Preserving the national, Islamic and humanitarian principles in Iraq, and given the great danger that ensues from normalization with the Zionist entity, or promoting it, or communicating or establishing any relationship with it, and blocking the road.” In front of everyone who wants to establish any kind of relations with the Zionist entity and impose a deterrent punishment against them, and to preserve the unity of the ranks among the people and their national Islamic identity.”
There is no dispute regarding the danger of normalization with the Zionist entity, but the entire disagreement and rejection is over the use of this important and positive law as a Trojan horse to strike Iraq’s Arab identity, and to achieve the ancient Zionist goal that Ben-Gurion and his likes heralded from the founders of the entity, which is to make Arab countries sectarian states ; Sunni, Shiite, Alawi, Druze and Maronite, fighting to gain the upper hand in the region for the Jewish, nuclear “State of Israel!”
Did the writers of this paragraph need this phrase that says “preserving national, Islamic and humanitarian principles in Iraq”? And when did the Zionist entity itself want to strike ideological and intellectual principles or care about them? And when were the principles unified among the general population of any people? What can Israel and others do against the correct principles if their owners, as individuals and parties, adhere to them and are sincere in their adoption?
Israel and the Zionist movement do not want, and if they want, they will not be able to strike or distort the correct principles and ideas. Rather, they want Iraq’s wealth and strategic location and the destruction of its Arab civilizational identity and the erasure of it or its flotation and its disintegration into sectarian and ethnic identities. Islam at the expense of the Arab identity of Iraq, it indicates that there are two possibilities; Either the authors of the draft bill were simple and limited in their thinking and their level of political and strategic awareness to the point of naivety and confusion, or they really intended to float and strike Iraq’s Arab identity to satisfy their Kurdish national ally!
However, in the spirit of constructive mentality and positive interaction, it was, and still is, possible to reformulate this paragraph in an acceptable manner and closer to reality and not to involve the issue of identity in this regard and to amend it to be: “The reasons for this law are to preserve Iraq as a country, people, and location. strategically, wealth, and the rights of the Palestinian people in their homeland and supporting their resistance to the Zionist occupation,” while retaining the phrase that says “in view of the great danger that poses to normalization with the Zionist entity, or promoting it, or communicating or establishing any relationship with it, and blocking the way for anyone who wants to establish a relationship with the Zionist entity.” Any kind of relations with the Zionist entity and a deterrent punishment against them.”
At the minimum, it was possible to avoid the draft law being plunged into this dangerous labyrinth about the identity of Iraq, and not to neglect the reference to the rights of the Palestinian people in their homeland and support their resistance to the Zionist occupation. as Islamic politicians. Is it scientific and reasonable to describe the identity of a country and people as “national and Islamic”? Doesn’t this phrase raise ridicule to the languages of other peoples? What does it mean for that identity to be national, if the goal is not to deceive the people and erase the civilizational identity of them and their country?
The repetition of the process of writing off Iraq’s Arab cultural identity and the repetition of structural and partisan ideological characteristics is an insult to both Iraqis and the Palestinians. And Turkey, their opinion is old and well-known in rejecting Iraq’s Arab identity and reminding them of their ancient ambitions in the land of Iraq and its wealth from time to time!
I believe that the Sadrists will risk their reputation and heritage if they insist on this methodology in following bad advisors. This law – if approved – will bear their name whether they like it or not, if they are behind this write-off on the identity of the Arab Iraq as a country and a people, then it is certain that they and their sectarian system and all its institutions They will leave and disappear one day, but Iraq will remain and will return to its true identity. It is the homeland of the first “Semitic” islanders, since the Akkadians, Amorites, Assyrians, Arameans, Chaldeans and even the last Arabs, who became the mainstay of this human mix and its contemporary Iraqi demographic material!
A final note in this context; It was stated in media leaks from the Chambers of the House of Representatives that there are parties trying to amend or cancel Article Five, first and second, regarding the accusation of high treason to the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Prime Minister, their deputies, ministers, their agents, and those with special degrees in the event that they commit the crime of normalization with the enemy state and recognition. or to reduce the penalty stipulated in this article, which is death. Although I have been an advocate of the abolition of the death penalty by saying for decades, but I think that these leaks – if true – do not bode well, and we should stand against them and reject them firmly because they will empty the law of its intended content completely, leaving the matter of deciding the existence of the death penalty itself in all crimes and suspend it or Its abolition of the free popular decision through a fair referendum in the future.
* Iraqi writer