Exclusive: Iraqi Vice President: Maliki Is Becoming a New Saddam

An arrest warrant for Iraq's Sunni vice president just days after the U.S. troop withdrawal has sparked fears that the country may once again plunge into sectarian violence.

BY URI FRIEDMAN | DECEMBER 22, 2011

Shortly before a wave of 15 bombings ripped through Baghdad on Thursday morning, killing more than 60 people, Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi warned that a simultaneous political crisis in the country could spiral "beyond control." In an interview with Foreign Policy on Wednesday from Sulaymaniyah in Kurdistan, a semi-autonomous region where the vice president has fled to evade an arrest warrant, Hashemi declared that the Iraqi political system is "drifting from building democracy to building an autocratic regime" -- and implied that Iraq's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, was becoming a new Saddam Hussein.

Earlier this week, Maliki, a Shiite Muslim, accused Hashemi, a Sunni, of running a hit squad targeting government officials during the height of sectarian strife in the country. In a press conference on Wednesday, Maliki went further, casting doubt on the sustainability of power-sharing in Iraq by threatening to replace the current unity government with a majority government if Hashemi's largely Sunni Iraqiya bloc doesn't end a boycott of parliament and the cabinet. The political crisis has sparked concern about sectarian violence returning to Iraq just days after the last U.S. troops withdrew from the country.

Hashemi has vehemently denied the charges against him, arguing that they are politically motivated and yet another effort by Maliki to consolidate power. When asked if Maliki has become a Saddam-like figure since assuming power in 2006, as fellow Iraqiya leaders Saleh al-Mutlak and Iyad Allawi have suggested, Hashemi noted that "many of Saddam's behaviors are now being exercised by Maliki unfortunately." But he added that Saddam rebuilt Iraq in six months after the invasion of Kuwait and the Gulf War in the early 1990s. In contrast, under Maliki's leadership, Hashemi pointed out, the consulting firm Mercer ranked Baghdad the worst city in the world in terms of quality of life.

And there's no question in his mind that Maliki is to blame.

"Now everything is in his hands: the ministry of defense, the ministry of the interior, intelligence, national security," Hashemi claimed. He wants his case transferred to Kurdistan because he doesn't think Iraq's judicial system is independent. Instead of judiciary authorities responding to his appeal, the vice president notes, Maliki himself shot down the request during his press conference yesterday, calling instead for Kurdish officials to hand over Hashemi. "The judicial system is really in his pocket," Hashemi argued.

When asked if Maliki is also in Iran's pocket, Hashemi responded that the prime minister "is very close to Iran" and that Iraqiya's Allawi -- not Maliki -- would be prime minister now if not for the "interference of Iran." When Iraqi leaders agreed to a power-sharing deal last year, Hashemi said, "Iran actively supported Maliki, and we discovered in due course that the United States also supported Maliki. Whether this was a coincidence or deliberate or behind-the-scenes coordination I don't know. But this is what happened."

Hashemi says he had a brief telephone conversation with U.S. ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey when the American diplomat cut short his holiday vacation and rushed back to Baghdad to help resolve the current standoff. "I asked him to do his best and try to reach some sort of compromises and try to accommodate this crisis," Hashemi explained. "He promised me to do his utmost and talk to Maliki." Hashemi says Ambassador Jeffrey also suggested that he would come and meet with the vice president in person, though this has yet to happen.

Mahmoud Raouf Mahmoud-Pool/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: IRAQ, MIDDLE EAST, ARAB WORLD
 

Uri Friedman is an associate editor at Foreign Policy.

WEMEANTWELL

1:19 PM ET

December 22, 2011

Oh, now don’t go acting all surprised at this...

The US has signaled several times to the Shia majority that it was willing to trade Sunni lives for the appearance of democracy, and then to trade that appearance of democracy for anything in Iraq that is not overtly seen as an Iranian win.

The key to the lessening of violence during the Surge in 2007 was the US buying off the Sunnis, the so-called Anbar Awakening. The US paid Sunnis not to kill us, helped them eliminate rivals (all labeled “al Qaeda” to make it nice and legal looking) and claimed publicly that this was all to buy time for some sort of Sunni-Shia reconciliation. Instead, even as early as 2009 when I was involved with such Sunnis, the US made little more than happy sounds to try and get the Shias to uphold their promises to take over the payoffs and provide real jobs for the Sunnis. The US sat idle in the face of obvious fraud in the payoffs and sat idle when Sunnis were never offered meaningful jobs in the new Shia government. That bought-and-paid-for lapse in violence was good enough to start the troop pullouts that ended a few days ago. With honor.

The real sign that the appearance of a democracy alone was good enough for the US took place after the contested March 2010 elections. Though it appeared Sunni-backed elements won the majority of votes, without the support of the Iranian-backed Shias, especially the Sadrists, they could not form a government. The Iranians brokered a deal that created a Shia majority government with the Sadrists, throwing a few bones to the Sunnis and leaving the Kurds alone as they wished to be. The US, desperate to see some government, any government, be formed to allow us to finally leave Iraq, fluttered around Baghdad frantically, advising this and suggesting that, until nine lousy months later the Iranians proclaimed it finished and a government was formed, December 2010.

With one eye on the exit, the US then sat quietly while Maliki failed to fill the critical government posts of Defense and Interior, the later controlling internal security. Maliki instead put himself into both jobs. Meanwhile, the daily news in Iraq was filled with stories of assassinations of Sunni government officials, with the regular whacking of Sunni Sons of Iraq leaders. Any violence directed at Shias was quickly labeled, again, “al Qaeda,” which enabled the US to look the other way as Maliki spent a year arranging the chess board for this week’s moves.

Peter Van Buren

wemeantwell.com

 

TTURAIDERS

1:59 PM ET

December 22, 2011

And you wrote cables on this right?

And you wrote cables on all this? Maybe you offered solutions? Maybe you even said, "I can't stand by while this goes on so I'm going to resign in protest?" Or did you think, "Wow, this place is falling apart, but I think I'll just go with the flow and collect my 35% differential, 35% danger pay, 20% extra, my 17500 for Seperate Mainteance Allowance, my 3 R&Rs and my first choice on my next assignment all the while getting ready to write a book and profit off the death of so many people."?

 

RMDUENAS

11:18 AM ET

December 23, 2011

Proposal

You sound like you are jealous of the "perks" offered by the employer, Tturaiders. You should try to pass the Foreign Service exam, get assigned to Iraq, and go ahead and propose your own solutions.

 

RMDUENAS

11:15 AM ET

December 23, 2011

Democracy has to grow from within (if it ever grows)

This goes to show (for the nth time) that democracy cannot be imposed from the outside on any country or region, no matter the amounts of money poured into wars and interventions to this effect. the peoples concerned have first to want a democracy, and to work hard at building it, maybe with external assistance. But just bringing in democracy from the outside will never work. How many more times will this be tried before realizing it does not work?

 

9 VOLT

6:56 PM ET

December 23, 2011

Golem State Lumbers On

The question of whether Hashemi is guilty of the charges Maliki has brought against him is apparently not worth the author’s raising.

Seems to me the Sunnis are to blame for starting the sectarian violence in the early days of the occupation. If the US had any ability to formulate a foreign policy geared to its own national interest we would have developed constructive partnerships with the Shia community based on our shared adversary: Sunni terrorists like Al-Qaeda. Because of the Israelists subverting our national agenda with their fixation on Iran (who are Shia) this approach has not been taken. When did the American press become critical of new Shia leaders in Iraq? When they showed they were going to pursue a friendly relationship with Iran. The same is true for Karzai in Afghanistan: he plays nice with Iran and the American press suddenly start to vilify him. Maliki could be very useful to the United States if we had the clarity of purpose to realize it.

Also, the criticism by the press of Maliki and Karzai from over here where we aren’t getting the shit blown out of us everyday in a country on the brink of disintegrating is totally unrealistic. We’ve got all kinds of US government over-reach as we are now, can you imagine what they would be doing if the US was as bad as Iraq?

 

STEVE HAROLD

1:44 AM ET

December 25, 2011

Whenever a tribal mentality

Whenever a tribal mentality combines with ancient religious hatred, fighting and war will continue. We have given them the opportunity to change their thinking about government, and give democracy a try , they are blowing it! Islam is not a religion conducive to democracy, We are seeing this in Egypt, Syria, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and again in Iraq. Even in countries not currently fighting (Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc), the iron hand of dictatorship is never far from the heads of the people.

According to the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung almost 150 American companies exported dual-use materials with new licenses that were used in Saddam Hussein's WMD's which he used against Iran but destroyed after the First Gulf War of 1991. That second war was fought for (1) keep Iraq from overtaking the Saudis for regional hegemony and (2) because Saddam's former ally George H.W. Bush was settling a score for being double-crossed.

Remember all the lies about the "New Iraq" and how were going to make Iraq into a "democracy" with "freedom" and "liberty" that would transform the region? For multinational corporations headquartered in America the violent Iraq war was the Greatest War Ever Sold.

Thanks.
Steve
P90X - P90X2 - Insanity Workout

 

YOUSUF JABOURI

11:01 AM ET

December 25, 2011

This article seems all too

This article seems all too slanted. I find the comparison of Al-Maliki to Saddam redundant. I don't especially favor Al-Maliki, and there's no telling how future events will develop but the democratization process is bound to take time. It is a fatal mistake to haste into irresponsible definitions of the state in Iraq.

 

E-VINHOS

7:48 PM ET

December 27, 2011

Democracy has to grow from within...

i Agree in the peoples concerned have first to want a democracy, and to work hard at building it, maybe with external assistance. But just bringing in democracy from the outside will never work.Good Work !
massagista
avioes venda

 

YARINSIZ

7:25 AM ET

January 21, 2012

Everyone in Special Forces

Everyone in Special Forces knew in March of 2003 that a civil war would start when the US withdrew. We were removing the strong leader who held the majority of people under seslichat control using official terror. 60% of the people are Shia, 30% are Sunni, and 10% are Kurds. The Shia are going to win. They can depend on military supplies from Iran and China because Maliki is the legal and effective leader of the country.