One pressing issue that Iraq’s Anbar-based protest movement has relentlessly stressed is that of women prisoners held by the country’s central government. Spokespersons for the movement claimed widespread torture, imprisonment and rape of thousands of women, mostly from Sunni areas. The government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki took minimal responsibility, if any, accusing their detractors of simply lying or misconstruing facts.
However, ‘No One is Safe’ is a 105-page report released by Human Rights Watch (HRW) on February 6, presenting some of the most damning and harrowing evidence of abuse of women by Iraq’s criminal ‘justice system’. The phenomenon of kidnap, torture, rape and execution of women is so widespread that it seems shocking even by the standards of the country’s poor human rights record of the past. If such a reality were to exist in a different political context, the global outrage would have been profound. Some, in the ‘liberal’ western media, supposedly compelled by women’s rights, would have called for some measure of humanitarian intervention — even war. But in the case of today’s Iraq, the HRW report is likely to receive bits of coverage where the issue is significantly deluded and eventually forgotten. In fact, this is symptomatic of the current conflict in Iraq, between mostly Sunni-tribes and a Shiite-dominated central government. Yes, it is quite tempting to blame the Sunni-Shiite interminable theological discord for all of Iraq’s ills, past and present. But it is hardly that simple. The Sunnis are outraged because they have been made the scapegoat for the last decade, paying a heavy price with blood and the highest form of humiliation by the standards of a conservative and proud society — the abuse and dishonour of women.
Al Maliki is of course fully aware of the dichotomy of the Sunni tribes, mostly in the western and central parts of the country. However, an authoritarian ruler is hardly concerned about the claims of his perceived enemies, no matter how credible or legitimate they are. He is comforted by the unconditional US political and military support and by the strong alliance between his government and Iran — his biggest fan and backer for years. Thus the war continues, although under the guise of a false narrative. While the threat of the Al Qaida-inspired Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) — formed after the US invasion of Iraq — is every bit real and lethal, to claim that Al Maliki is an anti-terror champion is a grave mistake. To a large degree, Al Maliki’s legacy, combined with the US occupation, has done much more to foment violence and terrorism than all the other factors put together.
Al Maliki seems to thrive on scenarios in which his opposition, Sunni or Shiite, resort to a level of violence. It allows him to crack down with absolute impunity since “terrorism cannot be tolerated”, and all that. In fact, he applied the tactic against Iraqi Shiite communities that challenged his dictatorship-like rule in the past. In 2008, he fought a brutal war to seize control of Basra from Shiite militias. Later, he struck the Mehdi Army of Shiite cleric Moqtada Al Sadr in a Baghdad suburb. He won in both instances, but at a terrible toll. It must have been frustrating for him to see Sunni tribes in several provinces holding massive, yet peaceful rallies for a whole year, demanding human rights, equal distribution of wealth and most importantly, the freeing of women prisoners. For that entire time, the representatives of the tribes managed to keep militants at bay and attempted to achieve a political settlement through legitimate means. The result was the arrest by government forces of a major figure in the Sunni opposition movement, Ahmad Al Alwani, on December 28. Al Alwani is also a member of the Iraqi parliament. The government’s subsequent crackdown to end the protest ushered in a civil war in some of the Sunni provinces. In some instances, tribal militias joined hands with ISIS. In others, they maintained the split. Once again, Al Maliki was claiming to fight terrorism.
True to form, the US government is incapable or unwilling to understand any other interpretation of the current violence in Iraq, but its own version of events. After all, the US invaded Iraq under false pretences. It used what is now widely recognised as lies and fabricated intelligence to destroy the country, before leaving it in the hands of its trusted allies. While Secretary of State John Kerry had repeatedly assured Al Maliki of Washington’s full support, the likes of Republican Congressman Mike Coffman is advocating a form of intervention. In a recent radio interview in Denver, Coffman decried that US troops have no presence in Iraq, which means “right now we have no influence”. He supports “boots back on the ground in Iraq,” although with an “advisory role”. However, with or without US intervention, the civil war genie is rapidly leaving the bottle and civil wars have the tendency to spiral out of control. The death toll in 2013 was alarmingly high at more than 8,000, mostly civilians, according to the United Nations. It is at its highest since 2008. This year promises to be even deadlier. According to Iraqi government data cited by the BBC, more than 1,000 people have died during last month alone, “the highest monthly toll for almost six years”.
While commanding a large army and enjoying the multiple support of the US and Iran, Al Maliki is certainly taking his country to the abyss. The sectarian nature of the fight at hand means that there can be no military solution to the conflict. While Al Qaida is making its presence clear, exploiting the Iraqi divide to its advantage, while Al Maliki is using Al Qaida to his advantage as well and insists on ignoring the legacy of the US war that had brought him to power.
While most segments of Iraqi society suffered during the last decade, Sunni regions paid a terrible price for the US invasion, which empowered political elites purported to speak on behalf of the Shiites. The latter, who were mostly predisposed by Iranian interests, began to slowly diversify their allegiance. Initially, they played the game according to US rules and acted with an iron fist against those who dared resist the occupation. But as the years passed by, the likes of Al Maliki found in Iran a more stable ally: Where sect, politics and economic interests seamlessly aligned. Thus, Iraq was ruled over by a strange, albeit undeclared troika in which the US and Iran had great political leverage where the Shiite-dominated government cleverly attempted to find balance and survive.
Iraq’s ‘bad years’ seem to be making a comeback. This time, the US has little leverage over the country to control the events from afar. “This is a fight that belongs to the Iraqis,” Kerry conveniently said in recent comments during a visit to occupied Jerusalem. Indeed, with little military and shrinking diplomatic presence, the US can do very little. In fact, they have done enough.
Ramzy Baroud is an internationally-syndicated columnist, a media consultant and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story (Pluto Press, London).
_resources1_16a45059ca3_small.jpg)
