Iraq council was regarded with scorn - but now it has found its voice

The Guardian
April 12, 2004
By Jonathan Steele

Like a mouse that roared, it was pressure from Iraq's previously docile US - appointed governing council which pushed the United States to agree to let mediators find a political, rather than a military end to the battle of Falluja.

Many Iraqis saw the council as a US puppet when it started work last July. The US administrator, Paul Bremer, retained a right of veto and this helped to undermine its authority. Iraqis' disdain mounted over the ensuing months when the council failed to make any change to people's lives and always seemed to agree with the US. Council members were constantly on foreign trips, meeting Arab leaders or travelling to Europe and the US. This increased the sense that they only had their own interests at heart.

When the crisis over Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army exploded last weekend, the council maintained its pro-American line. It criticised the young cleric and accused him of betraying the legacy of his father, an assassinated ayatollah. With the US onslaught on Falluja, things changed. Late on Friday at least four members of the 25-member body threatened to resign if the Americans did not stop the assault. This was backed up yesterday by a reported move by the governing council to broker a deal to end the Shia revolt by agreeing not to arrest Mr Sadr. The proposal was that he would disband his militia and the US guarantee not to harm him.

The Americans had promised an "extremely precise" offensive to catch the people who had killed and mutilated the bodies of four contractors a week earlier. Instead, the assault seemed to be wild and disproportionate, leaving hundreds dead, according to Falluja doctors.

Adnan Pachachi, a secular moderate, who is much trusted by the Americans and stood alongside Mr Bremer at the historic press conference announcing Saddam Hussein's arrest, broke the silence. He told al-Arabiya TV: "We consider the action carried out by US forces illegal and totally unacceptable."

Hashim Hassani, a leading figure in the Iraqi Islamic party, though not a council member, said: "The Iraqi people now equate democracy with bloodshed." Sheikh Ghazi Ajil al-Yawar, leader of one of Iraq's largest tribes, said he was considering suspending his membership in the council. Abu Hatem Mohhamedawi, a Shia sheikh who represents part of the southern marshes, did suspend his.

Early on Saturday the council issued a statement demanding an end to military action and the "collective punishment" of Falluja, a reference to what would be a crime under the Geneva convention. It also offered to send some of its members into the city to negotiate with the insurgents. The Americans had earlier ordered a brief halt to their attack to al low refugees out and medical supplies in. In an official statement, announcing the pause, they referred to the insurgents for the first time not as terrorists, but as "leaders of the anti-coalition forces".

On Saturday they went further and let an Iraqi team of mediators go in to Falluja for direct talks with the insurgents on a political solution. Their main demand was for the surrender of the people who mutilated the bodies.

Whatever happens in the talks, the very fact that the council has stood up to the Americans and expressed the disgust which many Iraqis feel over the killing in Falluja has given it a new strength. "It will halt the decline in their credibility," Wamidh Nadhmi, a leading political analyst in Baghdad, said yesterday.

The council rarely acts with unanimity, and has sometimes defied US wishes. In December it narrowly voted in favour of a reactionary resolution to eliminate civil marriages and put parts of family law under religious control, a move which would have denied women their inheritance rights. Mr Bremer vetoed it.

But this is the first time it has criticised the Americans on a major issue of security, an area which the US has always insisted it reserves for itself.

In the weeks until June 30, when the US has promised to hand sovereignty to an Iraqi government, the coalition authorities will have to be particularly careful not to alienate the council. It is the body which will pick the prime minister who will take over from Mr Bremer.

It is also in America's best interests to cede control to a body which commands Iraqi respect. Ultimately Iraqis are the only people who can regain stability for Iraq and end the threat of violence. So the fact that the council has at last started to flex what little muscle it started with last July can only be a good thing. It would be a disaster for Washington if the council either fell apart or was thrust back into impotence by US mistakes.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

Original link

 
_____
Nieuwe Oorlog 2004 | Ander Nieuws week 16