Official Website of Ahrar Party

Ayad Jamal Aldin reveals true extent of problems facing Iraq at meeting of the Henry Jackson Society

Ayad Jamal Aldin at the Henry Jackson Society

House of Commons

14 December 2009

12:30 -13:30

Ayad Jamal Aldin: “The future of Iraq: Internal and External Challenges facing Iraq”

The bringing down of Saddam was a necessity. It was justified morally, legally and politically. The free world needed to bring down such a bloody regime and free 25 million people. In addition to freeing the region from the leadership of a mad person who has oil and power. But, the Iraq problem has begun post-Saddam. The project brought forward by the US, and their allies, was a project to change the political infrastructure of the country.

The US project was based on changing the social make up of the Iraqi population. The division of the Iraqi population was the problem. Dividing Iraq on religious lines is against democracy and totally against the human rights declaration. This took Iraq into a dark tunnel, which we pray to come out of in one piece.

The current ethnic division will destroy Iraq as a country. It was not a country that was artificially manufactured by the UK or other regimes. Iraq dates back to the time of Babylon and is one of the oldest civilisations in the world. Still today there are more poets living in Iraq than in any other Gulf state. It deserves to be sponsored by foreign countries.

The current conflict in Iraq is not a social one. It never was. Throughout the history of Iraq, there was never a civil war. Neither before or after the Islamic conquests. Never. There was never a Sunni - Shiites war or an Arab - Kurdish war. The problem in Iraq is political. The solution is political. The society is one that is in agreement within itself. The Sunni and Shiites listen to the same song and like the same food. Aljawahiry was one of the most famous Iraqi poets. All Iraq knows and follows his poetry and there are two statues now for him in important Kurdish towns.

Through all this, I want to tell you that the Iraqi society - although multi-faithed - is united. The problem is political. The current problem is between two sides. One side that got to power due to American tanks and the other side that lost the power due to the American tanks. This is the true conflict.

The groups believe in neither dialogue nor reconciliation. The first group refuses for a reason, and that is because the leaders are based on ethnic divisions. The table where they sit is divided according to the representations of religious faiths. On such a table, there is no room for the Baathist, as it does not represent those divisions. The Baath party refuses also reconciliation and dialogue. They are bloodthirsty and tried to destroy the Dawa party for 35 years, and failed. Now the Dawa party is in power but is trying to do the same thing to the Baathists. They disagree, but are following the same policy. Each side is trying to destroy the other, and not trying to have a dialogue. Iraq needs dialogue. And needs reconciliation. This is the reason for the internal problem within Iraq.

As for the external problems affecting Iraq, it is the growing Iranian influence. When the last American soldier withdraws from Iraq, then Iraq will be announced an Iranian colony. It will be run by revolutionary guard. The US started an admirable project and it should finish that project to the end. But, if it were to leave Iraq in the middle, that would be a problem. It is this threat that is more dangerous than the Iranian nuclear program. This is the problem. We have started a project; we now need to finish it.

The two major dangers Iraq faces today are the internal racial issues and the Iranian influence externally.

Questions from the floor:

Question One:

I wanted to ask about the Arab-Kurd relationship and I wondered how your party plans to resolve longstanding disputes, especially over Kirkurk?

Answer One:

Socially there is no problem between the Arabs and Kurds. There is intermarriage, joint business and in Baghdad more than a million Kurds. Also in Basra and all the major cities. So socially, Iraq is OK. The problem is political.

Since the state was established in 1921 King Faisal I declared that Iraq was an Arab country. This is what started the suspicion with the Kurds - as they are not Arabs. After the new Iraq establishment was formed in 2003, it was announced as an Iraqi state. An Iraqi nation made up of many ethnic minorities. So there is no longer an excuse, or justification, for Kurdish leaders to want independence. They could try to establish a Kurdish state but, within Iraq, Kurds and Arabs have the same rights and duties. They are one. Why would they think of separating? There are human rights and equal opportunities within the Iraq state as mentioned in the constitutions. If you allow them the same rights as everyone else and allow them their power, why would they want to be independent?

Question Two:

Iraqi forces have already attacked and injured the 3,500 occupants of Camp Ashraf. What can the people of Iraq do to prevent this from happening?

Answer Two:

The Iraqi government must adhere to the international rules and regulations and the occupants of Camp Ashraf should be protected by international law and the Geneva conventions. If the current Iraqi government respects itself, it must treat the people with dignity and respect. If they thought in a pragmatic way they should maintain Camp Ashraf. Iraq has big problems with Iran. Oil, borders and the training of Iraqi forces. Camp Ashraf is a problem. I have asked the Iraqi government to resolve all of issues with Iran in one go. Iraq has room to pressure Iran over Camp Ashraf, so why is it wasting it? Ahrar condemn the illegal action of the Iraqi government in Ashraf camp. The Iraq government knows my stand.

Question Three:

Do you think positive change is possible in Iraq without positive change in Iran and. do you think Iraq has a role to play in helping with the opposition of Iran?

Answer Three:

I believe that Iranian people are different to other people in the Middle-East. The Iranian people are, unlike other Arab nations, a free race and are able to achieve positive change in Iran. 30 years ago, the Iranian people succeeded in their revolution against a very strong regime, without tanks or weapons, through demonstrations only. And they are able now to change the regime, if they so wanted. I know this because I lived in Iran for long time. In the event of any external military pressures against Iran then the people would unite behind the current leadership. They are different from Iraqi people. Leave the Iranian people alone they are more able to change their situation. It’s a great nation, they have free people, philosophers and revolutionaries. They do not need anyone else’s help. External interference will only strengthen the Iranian government, military or politics.

Question Four:

I would like to know your opinion on the future of Iraq with a strong central federal government and the impact of article 14?

Answer Four:

The federal regime can be beneficial to Iraq providing it is not established on ethnicity. Religious stances are harmful for Iraq’s administrative federal state. Political coalition is against democracy. Which means that bullyboys of tribes will agree to this, and let the general opinion of the people go to hell. Real democracy is one voice for every civilian. For political parties to be based on ethnicity would be a catastrophe.

Undoubtedly Iraq has different religious faiths but can you imagine for example football teams divided by faiths? The playing fields would be like battlefields. Political parties need to be like football teams in that they have members from many religions, as well as supporters, from different minorities. Then the political conflicts are restricted to political arenas, not to the people. Now, the bullyboy leaders from religious groups claim they represent their faiths. There is no difference between the actual people. No difference between the faiths of mother’s who have lost their sons. They all share the same feeling of loss and poverty. They want security, work and redevelopment. Currently, political leaders want to be leaders that speak in the language of their faith, which means religion is merely used as a label. No one is speaking on behalf of the human beings. Iraq is waiting for a leader of human beings, not religious faiths. I am with federalism that serves humanity and that does not divide Iraq.

Question Five:

What will be your stance for women’s rights in Iraq. Article 41 currently allows a man to hit his wife and multiple marriages?

Answer Five:

We support the human rights convention and would stand against any law that goes against that - whether it is acceptable in Sharia law or not. The current constitution is somewhat interrelated between a civilised modern law and between Sharia law.

Throughout the Islamic world the interrelation between the International law and Sharia law is mixed inconsistently. They take a bit of this and a bit of that, mix it together and present it to the people. The catastrophe is the first article in most Islamic constitutions when it says Iraq is an Islamic state. In my view, religion is for human beings, not the state. The state does not pray, fast or go to Hadj. The human being prays. We are with the establishment of law. Our first priority ,were we to win, would be to change the first article. There is no reason for a state to be a religious state. In addition, we refuse the article that mentions the official religion of the state. A state has no religion. It is the people who do.

Question Six:

Iraq’s oil reserves are rich again but is the money still being sent to a New York bank?

Answer Six:

The Iraqi development fund - which receives the majority of Iraqi oil revenues - was set up by the United Nations for the benefit of Iraq.

Until there is genuine political change and a government in power for the benefit of Iraq, not Iran, the money is far better off in the hands of the UN. Then the revenues will be in hands of government.

Question Seven:

A lot of the attention is focused on oil and gas investment that the governmnet have been receiving from global brands recently. Will these help to benefit the Iraq people? Do you welcome these new investments?

Answer Seven:

In my experience, investors look for a secure environment for their investment. For example, no one would invest in Somalia - the second most corrupt state in the world behind Iraq. I would not think anyone would want to invest in Somalia or Iraq. Investment needs security and security cannot be achieved in Iraq without reconciliation. There were 33 different nation’s armies in Iraq in 2003, and even that could not provide security.

Security will not be available in Iraq, even after the elections. It can only be achieved through national reconciliation. Corruption can only be controlled by controlling the ethnicity issues. Within the Iraqi parliament one of the MP’s mentioned a corrupt Kurdish minister, by name. In response, the representatives of Kurds in parliament got up and said “if you open our corruption files, we open yours.” It is simply one large corrupt mafia which rules Iraq. Nobody can open the corruption files because everyone is involved in it. Investment needs transparency and although we are lacking in this we hope to eventually overcome this.

Question Eight:

How do you see Turkey’s increasingly outspoken attitude towards Islam. Do you see this helping stability and security in the region?

Answer Eight:

The building of the state that the late Ataturk founded had a great role in Islam. He managed to train the ideologies that they could live in a secular constitution. It is this attitude that the Turkish people have which will save and preserve Islam in the 21st century. Turkey is the gateway of civilisation to the Islamic world, for which Ataturk is responsible. I think if Turkey were to join the EU, it would benefit the Middle East hugely. Iraq would border an EU country. This could only benefit our region. Our French and German friends should remember that.

Question Nine:

Corruption is rife in all levels of society. Political parties are corrupt and it erodes the trust of the new Iraqi projects. What is your party agenda for combating corruption?

Answer Nine:

The gateway to corruption in Iraq is that there has been no census since 1977, so no one knows the actual Iraqi population. In 1977 it was announced that the Iraqi population was almost 17 million but those against Saddam said this was a lie and that the actual number did not exceed 10 million. Saddam wanted to add numbers to build fear into hearts of Iraq’s neighbours. There has been no survey since then. After the Kuwait invasion, when the UN agreed the food-for-oil agreement, Saddam began to increase Iraqi numbers again. So, instead of saying it was 15 million, he said we was 25 million. The proof was papers given out by the shopkeepers to customers buying basic essentials.

His aim in this lie was to gain hard currency - so he buys food for 25 million people, gives 15 million Iraqis their food, and sells the remaining 10 million rations on the Syrian black market.