Amr Moussa to Asharq Al-Awsat: The Wound has not Healed, Political Miscalculation Led to Iraq's Fall

The former Arab League Sec-Gen, Amr Moussa (Getty Images)
The former Arab League Sec-Gen, Amr Moussa (Getty Images)
TT

Amr Moussa to Asharq Al-Awsat: The Wound has not Healed, Political Miscalculation Led to Iraq's Fall

The former Arab League Sec-Gen, Amr Moussa (Getty Images)
The former Arab League Sec-Gen, Amr Moussa (Getty Images)

Meeting the veteran diplomat, Amr Moussa, always clarifies historical events, especially that for decades, he was a maker and a witness to the course of Arab politics, whether as the head of Egyptian diplomacy (1991-2001) or during 2001-2011 when he was the Arab League Secretary-General.

In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Moussa discussed the two decades that followed the US invasion of Iraq (2003), "the defining event," noting that its "wounds have not yet healed," and contemplating the path that led to the invasion and its impact on the Arab structure.

He reviewed the event, combining the skill of the politician, the diplomat's wisdom, the intellectual's rationality, and the enthusiasm and pain of the Arab citizen.

Amr Moussa bases his recapture of the US invasion of Iraq on a previous one, which he deems necessary for a correct understanding of the developments.

He reviewed the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (1990-1991), which "revealed the truth about Saddam Hussein's expansionist project" that afflicted the Arab system and spread a state of skepticism among the countries that Saddam sought to attract to form an Arab cover for his ambitions, namely Egypt.

Moussa believes the Arab and international coalition formed to liberate Kuwait established a new reality regarding the region's security and ended Saddam's ambitions.

He stressed that Saddam's aspirations "did not stop at Kuwait and that Syria was the next stop," adding that there were common assumptions among politicians and diplomats that he would move later towards all the Gulf states.

Profound transformations

Mousa reviewed the changes that followed the invasion of Kuwait, leading to the US invasion of Iraq, saying that September 11, 2001, was at the forefront of those transformations "which the Iraqi regime at the time misinterpreted," stressing that it changed the course of US policy and led to the use of force.

Asked whether the Arab countries were aware of the seriousness of the situation before the US invasion, Moussa explained there was clear information, some of which even appeared to the public.

He indicated that Washington was preparing for the invasion, coordinating with Iraqi opposition leaders, and the Arab intelligence services were active in this direction.

Saddam Hussein believed Washington would not carry out its military intervention, which was strange and risky.

Meanwhile, most Arab leaders either did not care about Saddam's fate or thought he had it coming and expected it, according to the diplomat.

The gates of hell

Asked about his position as a Secretary-General of the Arab League racing against time trying to avoid the US invasion, Moussa said he acted upon considerations stemming from the role of the League and its mission in defending Arab interests.

He recalled his famous statement warning of the invasion of Iraq, which he believed would "open the gates of hell."

The second path was 14 months before the invasion, when he met the Iraqi President in January 2002, confirming that "Iraq does not possess weapons of mass destruction or nuclear reactors." The meeting also stressed the need to resume visits by international inspectors.

Saddam told Moussa that he trusted his nationalism and Arabism, and that he would not conspire against Iraq.

Moussa told Saddam that he would report that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction to the UN Secretary-General at the time, Kofi Annan, who told him he was authorized to speak on behalf of Iraq.

The third track was based on implementing several Arab and international consultations and plans to save the situation while the US was moving towards mobilizing global public opinion for the war, said Moussa.

Regarding the atmosphere within the Arab League during the invasion on the night of March 19-20, 2003, Moussa said the organization was in permanent session at his request.

He recalled that on the day of the invasion, the officials were following the news with mixed feelings, noting they were enthusiastic about reports of resistance. However, the comments of the former Information Minister, Mohammad Saeed al-Sahhaf, made them laugh.

"Kidnapping" Iraq

The former Sec-Gen touched on the "state of complete chaos" that Iraq entered after the invasion, believing the plan to "kidnap Iraq" and forcibly erase its Arab identity was done by political components and the neighboring countries, referring to Iran.

The Arab League played a pivotal role in bringing together all the Iraqi components for the first time. Moussa recalled his intervention to preserve the Arab identity in the Iraqi constitution, which was being discussed at the time.

He coordinated with Iraq's new leaders, regardless of their political and sectarian affiliations, aiming to preserve the Arab identity of Iraq, adding that they all acknowledged it was not in the country's interest to deny its reality.

Moussa asserted that after 20 years of the invasion, its wounds have not yet healed, noting that reconstruction requires time and the country is moving in a clear path towards reform.

Moussa called for presenting a new vision of Arab nationalism that fits the 21st century, based on the common interest.

Moussa called for a new vision of Arab nationalism that fits the 21st century based on the common interest, noting that the future should be based on common interest, reforming the conditions of the Arab citizen, and good governance.

The absence of good governance made the Arab world fertile for creative chaos, said Moussa.

Asharq Al-Awsat asked Moussa whether the invasion of Iraq could be repeated regionally, he explained that political miscalculation leads to the same results.

"It is inconceivable that anyone would commit the same mistakes and expect positive results."

He indicated the Israeli government and others are demanding to target Iran, noting that the lesson of the US invasion of Iraq remains valid for all: no ruler or state should overestimate their power.

Moussa stressed that Tehran's destabilizing behavior in the region is unacceptable, adding that reports claiming that Iran is running four Arab capitals are "an insult to Arabs."

The diplomat believes the world would witness a "cold war," whether a Western-Russian war or a US-Chinese one, adding that Arab countries are currently weak regarding global political weight.

"We must be part of a larger global movement, which is the Global South movement, and we will find countries like India, Brazil, and others next to us in this path," said Moussa, noting that these groups are still maturing.



Goldrich to Asharq Al-Awsat: No US Withdrawal from Syria

US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
TT

Goldrich to Asharq Al-Awsat: No US Withdrawal from Syria

US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich has told Asharq Al-Awsat that the US does not plan to withdraw its forces from Syria.

The US is committed to “the partnership that we have with the local forces that we work with,” he said.

Here is the full text of the interview.

Question: Mr. Goldrich, thank you so much for taking the time to sit with us today. I know you are leaving your post soon. How do you assess the accomplishments and challenges remaining?

Answer: Thank you very much for the chance to talk with you today. I've been in this position for three years, and so at the end of three years, I can see that there's a lot that we accomplished and a lot that we have left to do. But at the beginning of a time I was here, we had just completed a review of our Syria policy, and we saw that we needed to focus on reducing suffering for the people in Syria. We needed to reduce violence. We needed to hold the regime accountable for things that are done and most importantly, from the US perspective, we needed to keep ISIS from reemerging as a threat to our country and to other countries. At the same time, we also realized that there wouldn't be a solution to the crisis until there was a political process under resolution 2254, so in each of these areas, we've seen both progress and challenges, but of course, on ISIS, we have prevented the reemergence of the threat from northeast Syria, and we've helped deal with people that needed to be repatriated out of the prisons, and we dealt with displaced people in al-Hol to reduce the numbers there. We helped provide for stabilization in those parts of Syria.

Question: I want to talk a little bit about the ISIS situation now that the US troops are still there, do you envision a timeline where they will be withdrawn? Because there were some reports in the press that there is a plan from the Biden administration to withdraw.

Answer: Yeah. So right now, our focus is on the mission that we have there to keep ISIS from reemerging. So I know there have been reports, but I want to make clear that we remain committed to the role that we play in that part of Syria, to the partnership that we have with the local forces that we work with, and to the need to prevent that threat from reemerging.

Question: So you can assure people who are saying that you might withdraw, that you are remaining for the time being?

Answer: Yes, and that we remain committed to this mission which needs to continue to be pursued.

Question: You also mentioned the importance of humanitarian aid. The US has been leading on this. Are you satisfied with where you are today on the humanitarian front in Syria?

Answer: We remain committed to the role that we play to provide for humanitarian assistance in Syria. Of the money that was pledged in Brussels, we pledged $593 million just this past spring, and we overall, since the beginning of the conflict, have provided $18 billion both to help the Syrians who are inside of Syria and to help the refugees who are in surrounding countries. And so we remain committed to providing that assistance, and we remain keenly aware that 90% of Syrians are living in poverty right now, and that there's been suffering there. We're doing everything we can to reduce the suffering, but I think where we would really like to be is where there's a larger solution to the whole crisis, so Syrian people someday will be able to provide again for themselves and not need this assistance.

Question: And that's a perfect key to my next question. Solution in Syria. you are aware that the countries in the region are opening up to Assad again, and you also have the EU signaling overture to the Syrian regime and Assad. How do you deal with that?

Answer: For the United States, our policy continues to be that we will not normalize with the regime in Syria until there's been authentic and enduring progress on the goals of resolution 2254, until the human rights of the Syrian people are respected and until they have the civil and human rights that they deserve. We know other countries have engaged with the regime. When those engagements happen, we don't support them, but we remind the countries that are engaged that they should be using their engagements to push forward on the shared international goals under 2254, and that whatever it is that they're doing should be for the sake of improving the situation of the Syrian people.

Question: Let's say that all of the countries decided to talk to Assad, aren’t you worried that the US will be alienated in the process?

Answer: The US will remain true to our own principles and our own policies and our own laws, and the path for the regime in Syria to change its relationship with us is very clear, if they change the behaviors that led to the laws that we have and to the policies that we have, if those behaviors change and the circumstances inside of Syria change, then it's possible to have a different kind of relationship, but that's where it has to start.

Question: My last question to you before you leave, if you have to pick one thing that you need to do in Syria today, what is it that you would like to see happening today?

Answer: So there are a number of things, I think that will always be left and that there are things that we will try to do, to try to make them happen. We want to hold people accountable in Syria for things that have happened. So even today, we observed something called the International Day for victims of enforced disappearances, there are people that are missing, and we're trying to draw attention to the need to account for the missing people. So our step today was to sanction a number of officials who were responsible for enforced disappearances, but we also created something called the independent institution for missing persons, and that helps the families, in the non-political way, get information on what's happened. So I'd like to see some peace for the families of the missing people. I'd like to see the beginning of a political process, there hasn't been a meeting of the constitutional committee in two years, and I think that's because the regime has not been cooperating in political process steps. So we need to change that situation. And I would, of course, like it's important to see the continuation of the things that we were talking about, so keeping ISIS from reemerging and maintaining assistance as necessary in the humanitarian sphere. So all these things, some of them are ongoing, and some of them remain to be achieved. But the Syrian people deserve all aspects of our policy to be fulfilled and for them to be able to return to a normal life.