Consensus on removing Al Maliki

The naming of a new Prime Minister amid Iraq’s ongoing political upheaval and security chaos dominated the headlines in Arabic newspapers this week.

Al Bayan said that Iraq’s political crisis is deepening as outgoing Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki threatened to file a complaint with the Federal Court against President Fouad Masoum for violating the constitution. The threat was followed by the deployment of troops loyal to Al Maliki in strategic sites around Baghdad, in an act that resembled an imposition of a state of emergency.

The political and military action has sparked fears among Iraqis and irritated the United States, which sent a veiled warning to Al Maliki by declaring its full support for Masoum and welcoming the nomination of Haider Al Abadi as the new prime minister.

The US announcement comes in light of its air strikes against armed groups led by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil), three years after America’s withdrawal from Iraq.

The Iraqi scene has set alarm bells ringing about the future of the country, which is in need of unity among its rival parties more than anything else, to face all the challenges and risks.

In its editorial titled “An end to the nightmare”, Asharq Al Awsat said that Iraqi Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and Arabs, as well as Americans and the United Nations, have all agreed on removing the embattled Al Maliki. Al Abadi’s name suddenly became one of the most popular ones after he agreed to confront Al Maliki and replace him.

The new prime minister will receive unprecedented support as a result of Al Maliki’s bad actions, which divided Iraq into troubled sectarian areas and led to a struggle with the Kurds and to the seizure by terrorists of major areas and horrific massacres.

Iraqis will succeed in forming the first real national unity government and unite in fighting the Isil terrorists and restoring security and stability. Al Abadi must reassure the Kurds, reconcile with Sunnis, restore relations with angry Shiite powers, open up to Gulf countries, reactivate Iraq’s regional role and head towards reconstructing the country and improving the livelihood of all Iraqis.

Lebanon’s Daily Star said that Iraq’s new President has taken the courageous step of passing over divisive Al Maliki in a bid to see a new, inclusive government tackle an Islamist-led insurgency.

For eight years, Al Maliki wielded wide powers as prime minister, but he forgot that with power comes responsibility. He focused exclusively on elections — clinging to the refrain that his bloc won the largest number of seats — while forgetting another key aspect of a democratic system, namely accountability.

When Isil and local insurgents swept through large parts of Iraq in June and July, the divisive Al Maliki absolved himself of any blame, even though the army and security bodies that he supervises practically collapsed. Al Maliki’s knee-jerk response was to cry “foreign plot”, but few Iraqis or non-Iraqis were fooled.

Al Maliki’s final tactic involved issuing threats that Iraq would descend into the abyss if he was not retained as prime minister — an inaccurate claim, as Iraq has already descended into the abyss, and the Iraqi people deserve an inclusive, national unity government if they have any hope.

US drawing red line for Isil

On Iraq’s deteriorating security condition, the Jordan Times says that after two months of the expansion of Isil in northern Iraq, American combat planes and drones attacked the militants.

It is not clear whether the American move will change the balance of power among the combatants, but it seems that the US administration is drawing a sort of red line for the militants not to cross.

For the American administration, Arbil, a city full of American diplomats and a safe haven for religious minorities, should not be attacked.

The US has an interest in cutting Isil to size. President Barack Obama made it clear that his country has a “strategic interest in pushing back” Isil militants.

He also stressed the need to protect American personnel and to prevent mass killings of Iraqis, especially religious minorities.

Obama defended not acting before by saying that he had learnt his lesson from the events in Libya in the wake of the fall of Muammar Gaddafi’s regime. He said he had underestimated the chaos that would follow the American forces’ withdrawal.