US withdrawal from Iraq must follow the building of the country's military and security capabilities and the establishment of "some sort of law and order," says former Iraqi Prime Minister Eyad Allawi.
"The withdrawal [of the US forces] will not lead to stability; instead, it will be catastrophic," he told Gulf News in an exclusive interview in Amman, Jordan. He questioned the ability of the Iraqi government, "held hostage in the Green Zone", to function if US protection were to be lifted.
Allawi, leader of one of the biggest groups in the parliament, said that the United Nations and its Security Council should be given a bigger role in Iraq, in coordination with the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Conference.
Allawi said his parliamentary bloc, the Iraqi National List, was seriously considering "withdrawing from the political process" in Iraq, or at least from the Nouri Al Maliki government.
Gulf News: What is going on in Iraq? Things seem to get worse everyday.
Eyad Allawi: What is taking place in Iraq today is a real disaster, and its implications will extend beyond Iraq to the region as a whole as well. This situation is the result of mistakes accumulated before the 2003 war and many mistakes committed after the war. In fact these mistakes were built over many others.
Policies alien to the Iraqi people were imposed, leading to widespread violence, sectarian strife and fighting within the same sect.
The current government lacks credibility. This led to a state of chaos, lawlessness and nonexistent security. The government's inability to administer the country's economy also led to a number of issues, one of which is an unprecedented immigration to neighbouring and other countries. Another outcome can be seen in regional interferences in Iraq's internal issues.
The implications will not stop in Iraq but will supersede it towards the entire region.
If things continue in this manner, Iraq will defiantly reach the point of no return and a huge crisis will ensue in the region. That is why we have to put an end to these repercussions and give new emphasis to the re-building of Iraq based on reason and preserving Iraq and its people.
What is going on in Iraq today is dangerous for the people of Iraq, the country's future and the future of the region as well.
Don't you think we have already reached the point of no return?
I still believe there is hope, albeit slim, where we can get things back to a semi normal situation, if not normal altogether.
With every passing day, without a solution for the Iraqi dilemma, matters will become more difficult and complicated and we will find ourselves at the point of no return.
A year and three months ago, in an interview with the BBC, I said Iraq has slipped into civil war. This was such a long time ago, and I am sorry to say that matters have not improved. The repercussions are continuous. At the time, President George W. Bush said to me that things are going on well in Iraq, and that we respect you Dr. Allawi, but this issue is being blown out of proportion.
As I see it, matters are deteriorating in an unbelievable manner. Despite this fact, I do believe we have time, but this time is extremely tight. If some major solution does not take place in Iraq, we will witness a crisis which will engulf the whole region.
Do you believe US troops will withdraw from Iraq? And if this withdrawal happens, what's the use if the US is leaving behind huge bases, as being reported in Washington? Do you think a withdrawal will ease tensions in Iraq?
I believe the US withdrawal has to coincide with building the country's armed and security capabilities, and to establish some sort of law and order.
First, the United Nations and its Security Council has to be given a bigger role in Iraq, then it can cooperate with the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Conference. There will be some sort of regional and international support, which can help Iraq to stabilise.
Without this, the withdrawal of the US will not lead to stability; instead, a hurricane will engulf the country. The government is currently held hostage in a part of Baghdad, protected by international forces. How will this government function if this protection is withdrawn?
When we describe the ongoing struggle in Iraq, we hope the world at large will support the moderate forces in this crisis. When we say there is no government, we hope all moderate Iraqi forces will try to build the state and its establishments
This Green Zone which houses the Iraqi government and occupation forces in Baghdad, has become a protective shield. How can the government function behind high walls?
This zone is not a protective shield; it is being bombarded all the time. I was talking a few days ago over the telephone to a member of our Iraqi National List and suddenly the telephone went dead. After awhile, she called me and told me her house was shelled and her guards were injured. The explosion which took place at the Melia Al Mansour Hotel a few days ago killing Sunni tribal chiefs in a government meeting and several other people indicates the absence of security in the Green Zone, and even under the protection of the Multi-National Forces.
[Commanding General of MNF] David Petraeus was having dinner at my house after the last surge, and I asked him: What about the day after "the surge?"
He said it was a nightmare and if Iraqis do not solve their problems, the MNF cannot do anything for them. He added that they were trying to calm the situation down to make the country safe and secure so that a real political rapprochement can take place and allow the government to be more active. This is the MNF leader's vision, meaning there is no secure green, red or blue zone.
Petraeus oversaw the rebuilding and administration of Mosul and Nineveh provinces. He did an excellent job. He is aware politically and militarily which makes him the right person in Iraq and he has insights into the detailed Iraqi scene. I hope his appointment is not too late for Iraq.
It is extremely important to have people such as Pet-raeus in Iraq, especially as they help to explain the actual picture to the American politicians and decision makers.
After all the negative repercussions in Iraq, many Iraqis regard a federal state as one solution. What do you think?
We have never regarded Iraq from a sectarian Sunni, Shiite, Muslim, Christian, Arab, Kurdish, Turkmen or other point of view.
No doubt there were always isolated cases, which had nothing to do with Iraqi society. Today, and as a result of the previous regime's practices and the outcome of the grievous mistakes which took place after the war, we see sectarian killings. Iraq is being re-established according to sectarian quotas, and this has gone a step further by causing divisions within the same sect, hence we see fighting within these sects.
As the authority and strength of establishments and law decline in society, the middle and educated classes, the backbone of any society, disappear. As a result, people take refuge in their tribes, sects and ethnic groups to protect themselves.
Sectarian quotas will not benefit anyone. But, we find them in government offices, departments, and they were even used in the previous elections. It is not right to build a country on a sectarian basis. We must build our state on law, security, order and basic legal rights for every citizen.
Today there are those who are pushing for wide federal jurisdiction and authority in the provinces. This is done without these parties specifying what they want, or how to package it. Under Iraq's unhealthy circumstances of sectarian killings, the presence of an occupation, armed militias and the total absence of a government and its establishments, it is irrational to think about drawing up plans for the future. If we are to move to sectarian divisions, we will soon have divisions within the same sect, which will lead to fighting within the same sect. This will lead also to violent fighting in Iraq which will spread to other countries in the region.
Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki has accused you of jeopardising the security situation in Iraq and working on ripping Iraqi society apart. What is the root of this accusation?
I was surprised when I heard this accusation. It reflects the government's lack of self-confidence. I have personally offered my support to this government on several occasions. The invitation extended by the UAE government to Al Maliki's Cabinet and Iraqi government was achieved through my efforts, as I talked to our kind brothers there, and they responded by inviting the Iraqi government to discuss matters on a positive note.
Three weeks ago, Iraqi resistance groups asked for my advice, as the US government had asked them to resume talks; I encouraged them to do so, as we are all responsible for Iraq's security and stability. Therefore, I am truly amazed as to why Al Maliki spoke in such a manner.
Al Maliki knows the reality of matters, which projects his weakness. He knows there are 200,000 foreign soldiers in Iraq, nearly 160,000 of which are the US army and the rest are multinational forces. He speaks of my attempts to change the regime by force, and I ask, where is the force and weapons I am supposed to use?
This is irrational.
But are we striving to change the political process? Yes, that is true.
The political situation in Iraq is heading towards collapse. We have to correct this rout and save Iraq from this fix.
I am not in competition with Al Maliki, I am merely against his political agenda, which is based on sectarian quotas, while my political agenda is the Iraqi national programme. The two are very different, and we resort to the Iraqi people. Iraqis chose our brothers in the Unified Iraqi Coalition.
We have nothing personal against Al Maliki. Then I hear talk about my being supportive of our Arab brothers, and I ask what is wrong with that? If we support our Arab brothers, are we atheists? Aren't we Arabs? Are we Afghans or Americans?
We are Arabs, we have Arab roots, and we do respect other ethnic groups in Iraq, such as the Kurds and Turkmen ... etc, they are part of the Iraqi people and part of our family.
So I am not allowed to talk to Arab states?
But you recently met with Egyptian Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman and that has raised some eyebrows.
Omar Suleiman is an Arab national figure; he is also an important Arab official. President [Hosni] Mubarak is also an important Arab leader and I have met with him several times as well.
We meet with the Egyptians and we are proud of our relations with the Egyptian leadership and people. The Egyptian government supported the Iraqi National Accord and gave us a radio transmitting studio since 1994, so how can we ever be ungrateful?
Al Maliki himself seeks to meet Omar Suleiman, he has also met up with several intelligence services, and we do not want to enter such details.
Egypt carries a lot of weight in both the Arab and Islamic world, and the African continent as well.
I am proud to have met and sat with President Mubarak, and the last time was quite recently.
I met up with the Turkish leaders; I asked them to cooperate with Iraq and to enter negotiations with the Kurds. I announced that through a press conference with the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs.
I have to stop meeting our Arab and Muslim brothers because Al Maliki does not like it, let him not like it. We are a part of an Arab, Islamic and international whole, and we cannot hide our head in the sand. We have common problems and issues.
I would like Al Maliki to be rest assured, I do not have the intention to conspire against him, but I am against his political programme and the sectarian quota route. I have my history, my present and my future, I do not want to become prime minister instead of him and tread the sectarian road. This is not my stand and I am not his competitor.
We are considering withdrawing from the whole political process, or to withdraw from the cabinet, especially after the vote to sack speaker of the National Assembly, Mahmoud Al Mashhadani, which is in itself a secondary issue.
The main issue is the whole Iraqi situation and the route which is not serving anyone, nor peace and stability in Iraq.
If there are no real solutions here, than we cannot continue as part of the political process. We cannot wait until the next elections. The previous elections were based on violence, forgery and deceit; so what are the guarantees that the coming elections will be honest and fair?
That is why we are discussing all our options, we do not have a specified one currently, and we do not want matters to further deteriorate in Iraq.
We shall wait the next two months, and then we will say we have carried out our obligations, and no one will be able to blame us for whatever option we choose. We will be true to our conscience and programme.
Iraqi forces today are badly penetrated. Is there a way to put an end to this situation?
Of course we have a vision and solutions to this unhealthy situation. When I was in office, this sort of thing did not happen. True, there were militias who fought us in different locations, but there were no incidents where the army or the police entered a location and kidnapped people.
At the time, we inherited teams put together by Paul Bremer, there was nothing else in Iraq. We were able to re-structure security forces upon clear policies, including the army. We relied on clear policies as well, in choosing officers, military commanders and the police force.
The government can talk to experts in this field, but it needs to do this not on the basis of sectarian quotas. Iraq is for all Iraqis.
