Sadrist Movement: Iran Fears Iraq’s Rapprochement with Gulf 

People walk in front of a building bearing flags of Arab nations on its facade, in the Al-Ashar district of Iraq's southern city of Basra on January 5, 2023, ahead of the 25th Arabian Gulf Cup football championship. (AFP)
People walk in front of a building bearing flags of Arab nations on its facade, in the Al-Ashar district of Iraq's southern city of Basra on January 5, 2023, ahead of the 25th Arabian Gulf Cup football championship. (AFP)
TT
20

Sadrist Movement: Iran Fears Iraq’s Rapprochement with Gulf 

People walk in front of a building bearing flags of Arab nations on its facade, in the Al-Ashar district of Iraq's southern city of Basra on January 5, 2023, ahead of the 25th Arabian Gulf Cup football championship. (AFP)
People walk in front of a building bearing flags of Arab nations on its facade, in the Al-Ashar district of Iraq's southern city of Basra on January 5, 2023, ahead of the 25th Arabian Gulf Cup football championship. (AFP)

The Iraqi government has continued to ignore Iran’s protests of Iraqi officials using the term “Arabian Gulf” as Basra hosts the 25th Arabian Gulf Cup football tournament. 

Iran has protested the name, summoning the Iraqi ambassador in Tehran to demand that it be changed to “Persian” Gulf. 

The term “Arabian Gulf” has been used by Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani. 

Social media users in Iraq have continued to highlight Iran’s attempts to change the name of the tournament. They noted the cable of congratulations it sent to Iraq in wake of its national team’s victory against Saudi Arabia. 

It used the term “Persian” Gulf, in what many users viewed as Iranian meddling in internal sovereign affairs. They slammed Baghdad’s silence over Tehran’s protests. 

Observers and experts, however, said Iraq has so far ignored the complaints because it does not want to become embroiled in a diplomatic dispute with Iran, especially as Baghdad is playing a key role in achieving rapprochement between regional countries, most notably Saudi Arabia and Iran. 

While Baghdad has not officially commented on the “Arabian Gulf” dispute, the Sadrist movement, led by influential cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, rejected Tehran’s summoning of the Iraqi envoy. 

Leading member of the movement, Issam Hussein said on Wednesday that Tehran is not justified in summoning the envoy. 

Moreover, he noted that the move gives Iran’s supporters in Iraq the “green light” to criticize the naming of the tournament. 

He remarked that Iran is “greatly bothered” by the rapprochement between the Iraqi and Gulf people. 

It fears that this rapprochement could develop into an increase in tourism and later development in economic and investment, he added. 

It is therefore, seeking to hinder any progress in relations by objecting to the naming of the tournament, Hussein said. 

“Iran has problems with the countries of the Gulf and it does not want any rapprochement between them and Iraq. Rather, it wants Iraq to remain subordinate to its foreign policy,” he went on to say. 

“For 40 years, Iran has called itself the ‘Islamic Republic’ and now it objects to the term ‘Arabian’ instead of the ‘Persian’ Gulf, proving that it is a populist republic, not an Islamic one,” he said. 

Meanwhile, editor-in-chief of the Aalem al-Jadeed Iraqi news website, Montather Nasser told Asharq Al-Awsat that Iran’s complaint is a “dangerous precedent” because it is objecting to official Iraqi discourse. 

“Countries are free to name their territories, regions, waters and landmarks as they wish. No country has the right to impose their names on others,” he explained. 

Furthermore, he noted that seven Arab countries overlook the Gulf and combined, they boast a coast stretching 3,490 kms, while Iran – the only Persian nation - only boasts 2,440 kms. 



US Republicans Grill University Leaders in Latest House Antisemitism Hearing

The US Capitol building is lit at dusk (Reuters)
The US Capitol building is lit at dusk (Reuters)
TT
20

US Republicans Grill University Leaders in Latest House Antisemitism Hearing

The US Capitol building is lit at dusk (Reuters)
The US Capitol building is lit at dusk (Reuters)

The leaders of three US universities testified before a House of Representatives panel on Tuesday about what they have done to combat antisemitism on campus, saying they were committed to stamping out hatred while protecting academic freedom.

At Tuesday's three-hour hearing, Georgetown University interim President Robert Groves, City University of New York Chancellor Felix Matos Rodriguez, and University of California, Berkeley Chancellor Richard Lyons came under sharp fire from Republicans.

Many of them echoed President Donald Trump's recent attacks on universities, which he has described as "infested with radicalism," and questioned whether the presidents were doing enough to protect Jewish students and faculty.

"The genesis of this antisemitism, this hatred that we're seeing across our country, is coming from our universities," said Representative Burgess Owens, a Utah Republican.

It was the latest in a series of hearings about antisemitism on campus in which university leaders testified before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, which is tasked with higher education oversight.

Democrats on the panel used the session to question the Trump administration's gutting of the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, which probes incidents of antisemitism and other forms of discrimination. That has led to a backlog in investigations at a time when Republicans say universities are not doing enough to combat antisemitism.

The US Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the administration to resume dismantling the entire department, part of Trump's bid to shrink the federal role in education and give more control to the states.

Representative Mark Takano, a California Democrat, called the hearing a "kangaroo court."

"This scorched earth warfare against higher education will endanger academic freedom, innovative research and international cooperation for generations to come," Takano said, referring to the administration's efforts to cut off funding to some schools, including Harvard and Columbia, and impose other sanctions.

University leaders have come under fire from both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian communities for their handling of protests that broke out after the 2023 attack on Israel by the Hamas group and conflict that emerged from it. On some campuses, clashes erupted between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel demonstrators, spawning antisemitic and Islamophobic rhetoric and assaults in some cases.

During the hearing, the university leaders were repeatedly asked about their responses to antisemitic actions by faculty or affiliated scholars.

Representative Mary Miller, an Illinois Republican, asked Berkeley's Lyons about a February event in which speakers "repeatedly denied that Israeli women were gang-raped by Hamas terrorists on October 7, 2023, and argued that Israel was weaponizing feminism."

Lyons said the online event in question was organized by a faculty member but the comments that Miller cited did not come from the Berkeley faculty member. He said the school anticipated that some of the ideas discussed at the event would prove controversial.

"I did not prevent it from happening because I felt that keeping the marketplace for ideas open was really important in this instance," he said.

Previous hearings held by the panel have led to significant consequences for university presidents.

In December 2023, Representative Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican, raised her own political profile by grilling the presidents of Harvard, University of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

She asked them whether "calling for the genocide of Jews" would violate their schools' codes of conduct related to bullying and harassment. Each president declined to give a simple "yes" or "no" answer, noting that a wide range of hateful speech is protected under the US Constitution's First Amendment and under university policies.

Their testimony, which many viewed as insensitive and detached, triggered an outcry. More than 70 US lawmakers later signed a letter demanding that the governing boards of the three universities remove the presidents. Soon afterwards, Harvard's Claudine Gay and Penn's Liz Magill resigned.

Columbia President Minouche Shafik resigned in August, following her April testimony before the committee.