Geagea to Asharq Al-Awsat: Arabs Are Not Concerned with Lebanon of Qassem Soleimani

Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.
Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.
TT

Geagea to Asharq Al-Awsat: Arabs Are Not Concerned with Lebanon of Qassem Soleimani

Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.
Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.

The Lebanese Forces’ main slogan for its electoral campaign – “We want and we can” – has emphasized the political party’s willingness and determination to bring about change in the upcoming polls, as stated by the LF leader, Samir Geagea, in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The Lebanese people today are facing a very big problem; we know how to solve the crisis, and we are able to do it,” Geagea said, stressing that for the first time in the country’s history, voters will not take into account “partisan or family considerations in the narrow sense of the term,” but would focus instead on public affairs and living concerns.

According to the LF chief, the “opponent” in the elections scheduled for May 15, is the “hard core” of the ruling system, which is represented by Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), led by MP Gebran Bassil, President Michel Aoun’s son-in-law.

He noted in this regard that this political bloc could see weak results in the elections, which would make it lose impetus and strength.

“This is an undisputed fact… despite the varying estimates of the extent of the loss. Consequently, the previous system will collapse, and this election will bring about a new majority,” Geagea told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Underlining his belief that the parliamentary majority would not be held by a single political party, he stated that the elected group of forces, parties and personalities would be able to forge a new path

Asked about the experience of the March 14 forces, which held the parliamentary majority in 2005 and 2008, but failed to achieve their desired goals, Geagea said: “Truthfully, we were about to achieve something in 2005, but we failed ourselves.”

“We had a government recognized by the whole world, and when (Hezbollah) carried out its operation on July 11, 2006 (the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers and the outbreak of the Second Lebanon War), the government negotiated for a ceasefire even though everyone was aware that it was not responsible or aware of the party’s plans,” he continued.

“The government was able to obtain a ceasefire on the best possible terms for Lebanon, and all Western countries responded to its request, including Arab and Gulf states,” Geagea stressed, noting that despite the wave of assassinations that rocked the country in 2005 and 2006, economic growth registered a rate of 4 to 7 percent.

“The repeated attacks, assassinations, and the barbarism of the other party made some of the parliamentary majority hesitate and abandon its march… So we were in the majority, but we exercised governance as a minority,” he remarked.

Geagea emphasized that the experiences of the so-called governments of national unity should not be repeated.

“We want a defined government that has a very clear and coherent policy. A government of real experts, not advisors,” he stated.

The LF leader noted that Hezbollah and Amal Movement might be able to maintain “their full parliamentary representation.”

“But even if this happens, their public representation will be poor compared to the previous elections,” he said.

With simple calculations, Geagea talked about other confessions, saying: “In the Druze scene, the situation will remain the same… because the Progressive Socialist Party, headed by Walid Jumblatt, is still by far the strongest within the sect.”

As for the Christian arena, he affirmed that a major shift would take place.

“Change will vary between 40 and 60 percent, as no one can know how people will act out of their sufferings over the past two years,” he underlined.

In the Sunni street, and despite the withdrawal of former Prime Minister Saad Hariri from political life, Geagea stressed that many figures “still carry the ideology of the Future Movement and share our visions and aspirations.”

Asked about the lack of cooperation with other components, such as the Kataeb Party and the forces that represent the civil movement, he replied: “There are continuous attempts to gather as many of these figures, if not all of them. What unites us at least is a view of the current situation and how to get out of it.”

“I tell you frankly, all those do not represent the hard core of the regime (Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement). Thus, the convergence of necessities and visions objectively will allow us to form a large bloc in parliament, regardless of the organizational status of this bloc,” he stated.

Geagea said he was confident that the elections would take place on time, “despite the intentions of some, especially the hard core.”

He noted in this regard that the FPM would do anything to delay the elections, “but I do not see that they are able to find a way to postpone or cancel them.”

On whether a parliamentary majority of around 65 deputies out of 128 would be able to elect a new president at the end of October, Geagea said: “No, but it is certain that others will not be able to bring their president, and this is important. You start by preventing anything harmful and keep trying to do useful things.”

The path out of the crisis following the elections, if things went as expected, is also clear to Geagea.

“Our crises are intertwined. Economics and politics are interconnected…The main problem we have is political, which has resulted in economic crises. The ruling group combines corruption, inefficiency, and chaos…” he remarked.

All of this is due to the actual decision-making authority, which is the Lebanese government, and behind it the successive parliamentary majority during the past five and six years, according to Geagea.

“Therefore, anything is possible if change happens at the political level,” he stated.

The LF leader stressed that his party was the right alternative for the FPM on the Christian arena.

He explained: “The work of the Lebanese Forces is completely opposite to all the practices that we have seen from the FPM while in power.”

On how to resolve Lebanon’s crisis with the Gulf, Geagea stressed that Arab and Gulf states would reconsider their position when the authority is no longer in the hands of the corrupt.

“Certainly, they are not interested in the current Lebanon. They will not be interested Qassem Soleimani’s Lebanon (the IRGC general who was killed in a US raid), but in the country of Charles Malek, Camille Chamoun, Rafik Hariri and Bashir Gemayel,” he concluded.



Fakhri Karim: My Complaint to Sistani on Corruption Spurred Suggestion of Saddam-Era Minister

Fakhri Karim, senior adviser to late Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Fakhri Karim, senior adviser to late Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT

Fakhri Karim: My Complaint to Sistani on Corruption Spurred Suggestion of Saddam-Era Minister

Fakhri Karim, senior adviser to late Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Fakhri Karim, senior adviser to late Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)

In post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, the prime minister's office gained significant power. It became customary for the prime minister to be Shiite, the president Kurdish, and the speaker of Parliament Sunni.

This power-sharing arrangement, focusing on sectarian representation over institutional structure, has remained strong.

Attempts to break this norm have failed, including when former US President Barack Obama and his Vice President Joe Biden tried to support Ayad Allawi, a Shiite politician, for the presidency. The aim was to keep Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in power with support from both Washington and Tehran.

Despite Allawi’s parliamentary majority win, he didn’t become president.

Arab states were slow to react to changes in Iraq, allowing Iran to step in. Iran supported the US-created Iraqi Governing Council and sought to bring together Shiite factions to join the political process.

Its influence grew due to its backing of groups that opposed Saddam Hussein. Iran gained a key role in Iraq, effectively having veto power over decisions and a say in forming governments, while also expecting an eventual US military withdrawal.

Fakhri Karim, senior adviser to late Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, said Iran stepped in to fill a vacuum in Iraq, solidifying its role and protecting its interests.

This made Iran’s Quds Force commander Gen. Qassem Soleimani a key figure in Iraq, shaping everything from the reduction of US military presence to the formation of governments.

A foreign power’s influence in a neighboring country grows only if locals accept its role.

Soleimani and deputy leader of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis were killed in a US strike near Baghdad airport in January 2020.

Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Karim noted that Soleimani “was dedicated to serving his country’s interests, and the other side should have defended its own role and interests.”

He recalled Soleimani as being “skilled, effective, and able to earn trust, shifting from flexibility to rigidity when needed.”

This was clear in a letter Soleimani sent to Talabani when he considered supporting a no-confidence motion against Maliki’s government.

Karim also mentioned that al-Muhandis was deeply trusted by the Iranian general.

Talabani assigned his senior adviser various missions in Iran, focusing on forming Iraqi governments and relations with Kurdistan.

During a visit to Tehran, Adil Abdul Mahdi, who would later become prime minister, informed Talabani and Karim that “Soleimani’s claim that Iran supports Nouri al-Maliki for prime minister is false.”

“I was told that Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei supports me,” argued Abdul Mahdi at the time.

Talabani felt awkward despite being close to Abdul Mahdi. He asked Karim to visit Tehran, where he met Soleimani and al-Muhandis. Soleimani denied Abdul Mahdi’s claims, saying he could take Karim to the Supreme Leader to hear the truth.

For his part, Karim said the Supreme Council didn’t support al-Maliki and that influential cleric Moqtada al-Sadr’s stance was hardening. Soleimani assured that the Iranians were in contact with al-Sadr and would handle the issue of the Supreme Council.

When Karim returned, he informed Talabani and Kurdish leader Masoud Barzani that the Badr Organization, led by Hadi al-Amiri, had left the Supreme Council to join Maliki, shifting the balance and allowing the formation of a government without the Council’s interference.

Karim remembered that Iran initially supported Ibrahim al-Jaafari for prime minister (2005-2006). However, Jaafari quickly became a burden on the political process and Shiite leaders then signaled the need for change.

The US Ambassador advised Jaafari to resign, threatening him if he didn't comply.

Maliki’s name wasn’t initially considered; Ali al-Adib from the “Dawa” party, of which Maliki was a member, was the favored choice. But Maliki didn’t support Adib, so after deliberations, the party settled on Maliki instead.

Breakfast with Soleimani

Karim remembers a breakfast meeting with Soleimani and al-Muhandis. He brought up Maliki’s performance during his second term and the widespread corruption in Iraq.

Soleimani suggested discussing it further, but Karim insisted the issue was urgent.

He questioned why, if all major Shiite forces agreed, change couldn’t happen. Soleimani indicated that decisions within the Shiite alliance were made by those who remained in it, prompting Karim to ask if Soleimani was implying it was him. Soleimani then replied : “Think what you wish.”

Sadr’s misstep

In the post-Saddam Hussein era, Sadr emerged as a major political force in Iraq. He led a large popular and armed movement.

Dealing with Sadr was challenging for political factions, especially among Shiites. Some disputes even culminated in armed conflicts. Managing Sadr’s influence was difficult both internally and for external interests, especially given his unpredictability.

When asked about Sadr’s decision to quit politics in 2022, Karim called it a major mistake.

He believed Iraq suffered greatly from this move, as it left parliament without any influential Shiite force capable of standing up against decisions not aligned with common goals.

Karim highlighted that filling seats with losing candidates seemed odd and turned the minority into the majority, undermining the constitutional process. He also noted the Shiite community’s fragmentation, with many Shiites not participating in recent elections due to their disenchantment with the political parties.

Karim warned against underestimating the potential for renewed protests and uprisings among the marginalized against the government and ruling powers.

Sistani’s unexpected proposal

When discussing top Shiite Religious Authority in Iraq, Ali al-Sistani, Karim highlighted his political astuteness, surpassing the majority of other Shiite leaders. Sistani’s Friday sermons, delivered by his representatives, reflect this forward-thinking approach.

Karim noted a key observation about Sistani’s mindset. Despite corruption concerns, Sistani surprised Karim by suggesting bringing back the former Minister of Trade for his effectiveness in managing the ration card distribution.

He even proposed considering a Christian minister if they were honest and prioritized the people’s interests.

Furthermore, Sistani emphasized the importance of inclusivity in the new Iraq, advocating for the rights of Sunni and Kurdish components. He rejected marginalization and insisted on their participation and rights.

Sistani’s fatwa and the PMF

Karim believes that Sistani issued a fatwa on “jihad” to rally people against the significant threat posed by ISIS in 2014. He didn’t specifically mention the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) or any other organization but referred to volunteers.

“Many responded to Sistani’s call and made significant sacrifices alongside the armed forces and Peshmerga. Volunteers participated in liberating areas once occupied by the terror group,” said Karim.

Karim further noted that there was a belief that those who made sacrifices had the right to be part of the armed forces and receive state support.

“The idea of integrating militias or military entities into the armed forces is not new,” explained Karim.

“US diplomat Paul Bremer [the first post-invasion governor of Iraq] proposed something similar to factions and organizations under the banner of integration into the army, and steps were taken in this direction,” he added.

“The goal was to eliminate the threat of ISIS, not to create a parallel army or establish another institution.”