Iraq 21 Years after Saddam’s Overthrow

Officials and experts to Asharq Al-Awsat: It has been two decades of violence, corruption and recovery

A store owner and his son watch Saddam Hussein deliver a televised speech on January 17, 1997. (Reuters file photo)
A store owner and his son watch Saddam Hussein deliver a televised speech on January 17, 1997. (Reuters file photo)
TT

Iraq 21 Years after Saddam’s Overthrow

A store owner and his son watch Saddam Hussein deliver a televised speech on January 17, 1997. (Reuters file photo)
A store owner and his son watch Saddam Hussein deliver a televised speech on January 17, 1997. (Reuters file photo)

Twenty-one years after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, the formation of eight governments and staging of six parliamentary elections, current and former officials believe that the “experiment of the new Iraq has yet to succeed.”

On this day in 2003, the United States declared the success of Operation Iraqi Freedom that ousted the regime. The lasting image from that period was the toppling of Saddam’s large statue in central Baghdad.

Washington invaded Iraq in 2003 under the allegation that the country possessed weapons of mass destruction and because its regime posed a global security threat. No evidence that Iraq possessed such weapons was ever found.

Iraq does not officially celebrate the overthrow of the regime even though members of the former transitional council had called for naming it a national holiday. Political and popular interest in the anniversary has waned drastically over the years.

Several officials told Asharq Al-Awsat that the democratic experience in Iraq has been impeded by political rivalries and regional meddling.

Uprooting Iraq

Former Electricity Minister Karim Wahid told Asharq Al-Awsat that Washington wanted to use its invasion to “uproot Iraq from the Arab national security defense system and destabilize the regional balance by establishing a new weak regime.”

Wahid, who served in Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's government, said the imbalance in Iraq began when officials took political decisions that were motivated by revenge.

“Such an approach was never going to succeed after decades of totalitarian rule,” he remarked.

In the past two decades, Iraq had to contend with security and political crises that started with sectarian violence in 2005, years of terrorism fueled by al-Qaeda and then ISIS, the spread of rampant corruption, rising regional meddling in its affairs and the emergence of militias that enjoy wide political influence in the parliament and government.

In March 2023, Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani said his government was working on combating corruption that has taken root in the majority of state institutions, leading Iraq to be ranked 157 out 180 most corrupt countries in the world.

MP Hussein Arab, a second generation politician, described the post-invasion phase as an occupation whose price is still being paid to this day.

It will take more time for democracy to be consolidated in the country, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The parties that adhere to political Islam have tarnished democracy and turned it into a system of extortion and illicit enrichment,” he went on to say.

He predicted that the first generation of politicians who emerged after Saddam’s ouster would themselves be voted out of the scene during the next parliamentary elections.

Results of the change

Head of the Kulwatha Center Bassel Hussein said the outcome of the regime change are “modest” and have not favored the Americans and others.

It did, however, pave the way for regional meddling in Iraq, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The region has become more turbulent and it is becoming worse due to Iran’s growing expansion in Iraq,” he noted.

“Since the invasion, Iraq has become an affiliate of Iran and a pawn in its conflict with the West and Arab surrounding,” he remarked.

On the future of democracy in Iraq, Hussein said the political system “teeters between various contradictory political, legal and social models. Elections have also produced a form of authoritarian competition that has nothing to do with the concept of democracy as understood in mature countries.”

Important accomplishment

In spite of this, Iraq’s most important accomplishment since 2003 has been ending the totalitarian state and one-party rule, said researcher and academic Akeel Abbas.

Aside from this, “the new regime has consistently failed because the ruling political-partisan system has sought its own interests at the expense of society,” he added.

The system has formed the state according to a “wrong and short-sighted vision”, he explained.

Head of the Center for Political Thinking in Iraq Ihssan Shmary said the political class that came to power post-Saddam should have separated powers and achieved social justice.

“Over the years, the political system has shifted from consensual democracy to one led by influential leaders, thereby destroying the essence of the change,” he remarked.

This has given way for more demands for system reforms and constitutional amendments, he noted.

The negatives, however, don’t deny the fact that Iraq gained after Saddam’s ouster the concept of the peaceful transition of power, which should be seen as a sign of recovery in the country, he stressed.



Harris Tries to Thread the Needle on Gaza After Meeting with Netanyahu 

US Vice President Kamala Harris meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House grounds, in Washington, DC, US, July 25, 2024. (Reuters)
US Vice President Kamala Harris meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House grounds, in Washington, DC, US, July 25, 2024. (Reuters)
TT

Harris Tries to Thread the Needle on Gaza After Meeting with Netanyahu 

US Vice President Kamala Harris meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House grounds, in Washington, DC, US, July 25, 2024. (Reuters)
US Vice President Kamala Harris meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House grounds, in Washington, DC, US, July 25, 2024. (Reuters)

Vice President Kamala Harris, the likely Democratic nominee for president, is attempting to bridge divides within the party over the war in Gaza, emphasizing Israel's right to defend itself while also focusing on alleviating Palestinian suffering.

She delivered remarks after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday that reflected a delicate balancing act on one of the country's most divisive political issues. Some Democrats have been critical of President Joe Biden's steadfast support for Israel despite the increasing death toll among Palestinians, and Harris is trying to unite her party for the election battle with Republican candidate Donald Trump.

"We cannot look away in the face of these tragedies," she said. "We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering. And I will not be silent."

Harris did not deviate from the administration's approach to the conflict, including grueling negotiations aimed at ending the fighting, releasing hostages held by Hamas and eventually rebuilding Gaza. She also said nothing about military assistance for Israel, which some Democrats want to cut.

Instead, she tried to refocus the conversation around mitigating the calamity in Gaza, and she used language intended to nudge Americans toward an elusive middle ground.

"The war in Gaza is not a binary issue," she said. "But too often, the conversation is binary when the reality is anything but."

In addition, Harris made a more explicit appeal to voters who have been frustrated by the ceaseless bloodshed, which began when Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7.

"To everyone who has been calling for a ceasefire, and to everyone who yearns for peace, I see you, and I hear you," she said.

Harris' meeting with Netanyahu was private, and she described it as "frank and constructive." She also emphasized her longtime support for Israel, which includes raising money to plant trees in the country when she was a young girl.

Jewish Americans traditionally lean Democratic, but Republicans have tried to make inroads. Trump claimed this week that Harris "is totally against the Jewish people" because she didn't attend Netanyahu's address to a joint meeting of Congress. The vice president was traveling in Indiana during the speech.

Harris is married to a Jewish man, Doug Emhoff, who has played an outspoken role in the administration's efforts to combat antisemitism.

Netanyahu did not speak publicly after his meeting with Harris. His trip was scheduled before Biden dropped his reelection bid, but the meeting with Harris was watched closely for clues to her views on Israel.

"She is in a tricky situation and walking a tightrope where she’s still the vice president and the president really is the one who leads on the foreign policy agenda," said Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud, a Democrat whose city is home to one of the largest Arab American communities in the nation. "But as the candidate, the presumptive nominee, she has to now create the space to differentiate in order for her to chart a new course."

Protesters gathered outside Union Station on the day of Netanyahu's speech, ripping down American flags and spray painting "Hamas is coming."

Harris sharply criticized those actions, saying there were "despicable acts by unpatriotic protesters and dangerous hate-fueled rhetoric. "

"I support the right to peacefully protest, but let’s be clear: Antisemitism, hate and violence of any kind have no place in our nation," she said in a statement.

As vice president, Harris has tried to show little daylight between herself and Biden. But David Rothkopf, a foreign policy writer who has met with her, said there's been "a noticeable difference in tone, particularly in regards to concern for the plight of innocent Palestinians."

The difference was on display in Selma, Alabama, in March, when Harris commemorated the anniversary of the Bloody Sunday march for voting rights in 1965.

During her speech, Harris said that "given the immense scale of suffering in Gaza, there must be an immediate ceasefire."

The audience broke out in applause. A few sentences later, Harris emphasized that it was up to Hamas to accept the deal that had been offered. But her demand for a ceasefire still resonated in ways that Biden's comments had not.

An AP-NORC poll conducted in June found that about 6 in 10 Democrats disapproved of the way Biden is handling the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Roughly the same number said Israel's military response in Gaza had gone too far.

Israeli analysts said they doubted that Harris would present a dramatic shift in policies toward their country.

Chuck Freilich, a former Israeli deputy national security adviser and senior fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies, a Tel Aviv think tank, said Harris was from a generation of American politicians who felt they could both support Israel and publicly criticize its policies.

"The question is as president, what would she do?" Freilich said. "I think she would put considerably more pressure on Israel on the Palestinian issue overall."