Kadhimi: Mosul’s Fall Was The Result of Wrong Policies We Are Trying to Correct

 Iraq’s Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi listens during a meeting with then- US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, US, August 20, 2020. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo
Iraq’s Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi listens during a meeting with then- US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, US, August 20, 2020. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo
TT
20

Kadhimi: Mosul’s Fall Was The Result of Wrong Policies We Are Trying to Correct

 Iraq’s Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi listens during a meeting with then- US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, US, August 20, 2020. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo
Iraq’s Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi listens during a meeting with then- US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, US, August 20, 2020. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo

Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi blamed the fall of Mosul to ISIS in June 2014 on the wrong policies that were followed at the time.

While he praised the fatwa of “defensive jihad” issued by the supreme Shiite authority, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Kadhimi warned against exploiting it for non-national projects.

In a statement on the occasion of the seventh anniversary of the issuance of the fatwa, the Iraqi premier said: “Iraq has gone through very difficult circumstances (in reference to ISIS’ occupation of about three Iraqi provinces in the western region of the country), which put it in front of a serious existential challenge.”

He continued: “All this came as a result of neglecting the security institutions and the heroic Iraqi army, and the accumulation of wrong policies that caused these disasters.”

“Divine Providence, the fatwa and directives issued by the supreme authority, Sayyed Ali al-Sistani, stopped a terrorist monster that had frightened the whole world, and led to the elimination of this organization during a period that the world could never have imagined,” he underlined.

Kadhimi went on to say that he was working “to correct the path by supporting the armed forces and guiding their performance in accordance with national military rules.”

In this regard, he underlined his government’s determination to “consolidate the pillars of brotherhood” among the Iraqi people, pledging to provide the citizens with equal rights without any form of discrimination.

Al-Kadhimi vowed to work “despite all the difficulties and obstacles to build a bright future,” adding: “Soon, you will have a role in building your future through your participation in the elections.”

In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, Dr. Hussein Allawi, Advisor to the Prime Minister, stressed that Kadhimi was seeking to “build the Iraqi forces away from political pressure so that they can perform their duties, tasks, and obligations in accordance with the military values of patriotism and professionalism.”

“Building and strengthening the work of the Iraqi armed forces per the principle of diversity will allow them to represent all members of Iraqi society, and will make them closer to the citizens,” Allawi stated.



Lebanese Parties Warn Against Hezbollah Keeping Light Weapons

Lebanese Shiite mourners gathered on Monday in Beirut’s southern suburbs to mark Ashura in a ceremony organized by Hezbollah (AFP)
Lebanese Shiite mourners gathered on Monday in Beirut’s southern suburbs to mark Ashura in a ceremony organized by Hezbollah (AFP)
TT
20

Lebanese Parties Warn Against Hezbollah Keeping Light Weapons

Lebanese Shiite mourners gathered on Monday in Beirut’s southern suburbs to mark Ashura in a ceremony organized by Hezbollah (AFP)
Lebanese Shiite mourners gathered on Monday in Beirut’s southern suburbs to mark Ashura in a ceremony organized by Hezbollah (AFP)

A recent proposal circulating in Lebanon that would allow Hezbollah to retain its light weapons while surrendering heavy and medium arms has triggered widespread political backlash, with critics warning it poses a grave threat to state sovereignty and public safety.

The suggestion, floated amid long-running debate over the group’s arsenal, argues that other political parties and armed groups also possess light weapons for various reasons. But key political factions have rejected the idea outright, citing Lebanon’s bloody past and the potential for renewed violence.

Opponents of the proposal have pointed to the events of May 7, 2008, when Hezbollah fighters overran parts of Beirut and Mount Lebanon in a show of military force, underscoring the dangers of allowing any non-state group to keep arms.

“Classifying weapons as heavy, medium or light is useless,” said Kataeb Party leader Sami Gemayel in a post on X. “If heavy arms threaten Lebanon’s regional security, light weapons are even more dangerous to the foundations of the state.”

Gemayel reiterated that only the Lebanese army and legitimate security forces should bear arms, calling for the country to be entirely free of weapons held by non-state actors.

MP Ghada Ayoub, of the Lebanese Forces-led "Strong Republic" bloc, echoed that view, insisting the state must assert full sovereignty over all Lebanese territory and outlaw any form of armed presence outside the official security apparatus.

“There is only one armed group operating outside the state, and that is Hezbollah,” Ayoub told Asharq al-Awsat. “It must become a purely political party and clearly, unequivocally declare an end to its military activity.”

Ayoub also criticized recent remarks by Hezbollah Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem, who vowed the group’s “resistance” would continue “without asking anyone’s permission.”

“The Lebanese state is responsible for enforcing a monopoly on the use of arms,” she said. “It must stop playing the role of a mediator or hiding behind the fear of war and internal strife. Time is not on Lebanon’s side.”

Ahmad Al-Kheir, a lawmaker with the “National Moderation” bloc, dismissed the proposal as “stillborn,” warning that light weapons have already been used to intimidate citizens and skew political dynamics.

“We saw yesterday how light arms were paraded through Beirut’s streets in a blatant attempt at provocation and coercion,” he said. “This is the real danger - using these weapons as leverage in political life, as we saw in the May 7 events and the occupation of downtown Beirut.”

“No one in Lebanon will accept this,” Al-Kheir added.

Additionally, critics warn that allowing any non-state entity to retain weapons threatens state authority and risks further destabilizing the country.

Al-Kheir urged Hezbollah and any other party in possession of light weapons to hand them over to the state, citing the recent example set by former Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) leader Walid Jumblatt.

“Jumblatt announced that his party had surrendered its weapons weeks ago. This is the model to follow,” he told Asharq al-Awsat.

MP Waddah Al-Sadek, of the Change Coalition, said he had no objection to a phased disarmament process that begins with heavy and medium weapons, followed by light arms. He dismissed fears of civil war, saying only one side is armed.

“Armed conflict requires two sides. The army will not engage in internal fighting,” he said. “This talk of civil war is just fear-mongering unless Hezbollah resorts again to something like the May 7 scenario to avoid disarming.”

Al-Sadek stressed that Lebanon’s response to the US proposal - reportedly outlining phased disarmament - will be critical. “Does anyone really have an alternative to engaging with this proposal?” he asked.

Deputy head of the Free Patriotic Movement, Naji Hayek, said all weapons must be handed over, rejecting the idea that civilians or political groups should be allowed to keep light arms for self-defense.

“This theory no longer holds,” Hayek told Asharq al-Awsat, adding that training camps used to militarize society should be shut down. “Light and medium weapons are not only with Hezbollah - they exist with other parties that have military structures, and these too must be dismantled.”

Political analyst Qassem Qassir, who is close to Hezbollah’s thinking, said there is no internal consensus, nor any agreement with Hezbollah, to give up its heavy and medium arms while retaining light weapons.

“The party insists the issue is still the Israeli occupation and ongoing aggression,” he said. “For Hezbollah, no discussion on disarmament is possible until those threats end.”

Qassir warned that if a political solution to the weapons issue is not reached, “we will inevitably face military risks and internal conflict.”

Jumblatt announced in late June that his party had handed over its remaining weapons, including light and medium arms that were gradually accumulated after the May 7 clashes in 2008 during a period of heightened tension with Hezbollah.

He said the weapons had been centrally stored and fully turned over to the Lebanese state.