bet · GT01UU15 · 2006-03-16 00:00:00 — That was the only official human rights organization which was created in in 1960. But after the 9th we have seen an emergence of civil society which is unprecedented in the history of and in the history of the region. In Iraqi since 1992 civil society organizations and human rights groups have flourished. The situation was different in comparison to the central and southern parts of , which were under the totalitarian rule of 's regime. Everything in is not rosy, as you know and hear, on a daily basis. Mistakes were made, mistakes are taking place and mistakes will take place. But let us not forget the bigger picture. We have to have that in front of us all the time when we discuss . was one of the most ruthless types of dictatorship and totalitarian regimes that the international community had seen since the Second World War. Because of its legacy of war, repression and genocide, in the most unimaginable way, transformed into a museum of crimes and on an industrial basis produced suffering and pain to every single family in . There is no single family in that has not lost a dear member. The list of the atrocities commited is long. We have heard about Halabja and 281 villages, mountain tops and valleys gased by 's chemical and biological weapons, the Anfal Campaign when 182 000 people disappeared, the Faili Kurds, when 10 000 people disappeared, the deportation of their families, the ethnic cleansing of , Khanaqin, Sinjar etcetera and the suffering because of those policies. It was the destruction of 4 500 villages, as Ms. mentioned, out of 5 000 villages and 26 towns, with the destruction of its total infrastructure, the disappearance of 8 000 Barzanis and the suffering of their families. Recently they found a few hundred bodies of these families. It was the discovery of mass ; we have up to now discovered about 300 mass grave sites in , and each site contains several mass . We estimate that there might be up to 600 000 people who have disappeared and are missing in , and families are suffering for the fate of their loved ones. We do not have either technical or scientific expertise or means to do DNA tests or to do exhumation, examination and identification of the bodies. There is the suffering of the 'ahs in the south, with the destruction of the Marsh lands, which were supposed to be the of the Middle East. They destroyed the living conditions for this population. They displaced half a million people in those areas. They were living on their and on fishing, and it was a rare reservoir for vegetation and birds. It was given as a concession to Lukoil, Chinese oil companies and Total once upon a time. They were witnesses of the destruction, and they unfortunately blessed and covered what 's used to do against this population. Five , the highest spiritual leaders of the 'ahs, were killed. They are equivalent to the Pope in the Catholic world, and imagine what would happen in the world if the Pope was killed or assassinated! Five 'ah spiritual leaders, along with 1 100 other spiritual leaders, imams and other religious personalities were assassinated by 's regime, and we did not quite often hear a voice raised in the world or within the regional institutions, such as the , the Organization of the Islamic Conference or the GCC, neither within the UN. destroyed several communities partially. If we take even the case of the Sunnis, hundreds of Sunnis were executed, including inside his hometown . It was the case of , who's body was given to wild dogs to be eaten. It was the case of , the case of the first clerics who were executed, as Sheikh and Sheikh al-Assi, 150 officers from , some officers from Ramadi, and . single community has suffered from the atrocious genocidal policy of 's regime. I will say a few words of the . 200 villages of Assyrian Chaldean communities, or Assyro-Chaldean communities, were destroyed along with dozens of monasteries and churches, with a deportation and a persecution of their communities. Turkoman communities also suffered from deportation, from summary executions, the villages of Terkalan, , etcetera. It was a persecution of every single community, including the Sabian Mandaean community, which is an old community living in . They haven't been safe from 's atrocious policy. This museum of crimes was created when was the of the international community. He was supported from the east to the west, from the north to the south. Most of the governments closed their eyes, including the UN, to what was doing. We are grateful for what those have done who finally decided to clean the dirty laundry of what had been done in the past, by bringing to power, and to remove him from power. Those who have helped us in removing the dictatorship and those who have helped us in rebuilding will never be forgotten. I as a person am grateful for all what they have done, the countries who are participating in multinational forces in helping the Iraqi people. Mistakes, as I said, were made from both the Iraqi politicians and the Iraqi political parties, but also from multinational forces. One of the areas of mistakes was the dissolution of the army and security forces. A lot of people were pushed to be in the camps of the enemy or to be recruited by and terrorist groups. I agree that we should not, and could not, have been able to keep such an army. had five armies. For each army created a counterarmy, of over one million people, and couldn't keep such a huge army. But there were elements needed to establish peace and security in the country. It does not make any sense to dissolve even traffic or oil , that we went back and paid for certain tribal elements and certain other elements to protect our oil installations and pipelines. We have lost over in terrorist attacks against our oil installations and pipelines. 286 attacks occurred in 2004. during the discussion we will get into developing some of the areas which need to be developed more. Today, to put you in the picture, we have a campaign ongoing. Nobody could have imagined that would see such a campaign when you go back to those years when was the only candidate. He used to get not 99.99 per cent of the votes - he used to get 120 per cent of the votes. Today nobody, I assure you, will get 99.99 per cent in this election. We have four major coalitions who are likely to harvest most of the seats of the coming National Assembly. We have the religious 'ah Islamic groups. There are 18 groups, and one of the most prominent ones is SCIRI, , led by . His brother, who was assassinated in , , was the leader. Then we have 's Dawa Party. There are five tendencies of Dawa, and two of them have adopted democracy as a way of life, of doing politics. It is Izz 's group. He was the head of the and was assassinated in 2004. There is the Dawa group which today is led by , who once used to be with the and now is leading this group of moderate intellectuals and cadres. Then there is the Dawa group which is led by . And there is al-Jaafari's Dawa, which is one of the major groups. We have a group called the Sadris, 's group. The Sadr tendency is right. Dawa considers itself a Sadr tendency, going back to , who was executed in 1980 by , and the second Sadr, who was 's father. He is a young cleric, and he has an important influence particularly on the youth, the disenchanted population in , previously called Al-Thawra, in the neighbourhood of , , Kufa and some southern cities. There is another group within this group called Al-Fadhila, who split from the Sadris' movement. They are followers of , and they are considered to be more moderate. Then we have the Hawsa. They are participants of the elections. It is lead by several grand ayatollahs. One is Iranian, one is Afghani, one is Pakistani and another one is Iraqi. It is , , and al-Najafi. Then there is Kazem al-Haeri, the grand ayatollah who is based in , who is actually the spiritual leader of 's group. This is a main group among those who are present in this election. We have a second group, which is 's List, which is a coalition of some liberal, secular political parties and personalities. was previous Prime Minister, and he is the head of the Iraqi National Court. He is himself a 'ah, but he is not known for having any confessional trends, neither a racial trend. Then it is Pachachi, the communists with him plus nationalists, women personalities and secular personalities. The third group is the Kurdish group, which is composed of eight major groups. Most important is the . and the PUK of Mr. There is also the Communist Party with them and several smaller groups. Then there is a group which is the of , and from the Kurdish areas it is the only group which is presenting its candidates alone. The fourth group is the group. They have a front which is composed of three major groups. It is the Islamic Party of the , led by , and . Then it is of the People of , led by . The third group is . They are within this fourth coalition. There are other groups which are of minor importance, and they are all discussing issues such as federalism, depacification, women's role and re-scheduling of the withdrawal of foreign troups, the role of religion, state electricity, security and jobs. These are the major themes that is discussing these days through posters, banners, television panels and press conferences, in a difficult security environment. The list of complexity is long, and the culture of democracy, human rights, women's rights, and civic education has been absent in and its neighbourhood for quite a long time. is living in a hostile environment. From its eastern to its western axis it is between pest och kolera - and and most of the countries are not favouring democracy in . They don't want a successful , and they want to see as a failure. They are working day and night to undermine the security and stability in , and they have extensions and mechanisms of working inside . The Iraqi people have suffered from their policies and suffered from the atrocities permitted by these barbarious terrorist groups that are killing hundreds of people every week in . Thank you for listening to me. I am available for answering any questions. : Thank you very much. Now it is time for a short coffee break. (Coffee break) hoppas att ni tog en stor kopp kaffe och smakade på kakorna. Jag glömde att påminna er om att Bakthiyar också talar svenska. Han kunde också ha hållit sitt tal på svenska. Det förstod jag . Jag visste det inte innan. Bakthiyar : Ingen är perfekt! : Ingen är perfekt. Vi gör alla våra misstag. går ordet till , who is lecturer at at the Danish university in . has also worked with the new Iraqi constitution. I extend a warm welcome, and the floor is yours. : Tack ska du ha. Jag är också svensktalande. Sist när jag var i med ingen mindre än , som sitter här, och tidigare med , kunde vi inte prata "hemligt språk". Svenska var ju tillgängligt för alldeles för många! Vi fick gå över till tyska i stället. Så är det. Man har gjort en hel del i . Den nya eliten i regionen, framför allt i , är svensktalande. But I have to switch to English as the official language of this meeting is English, so I ask for your permission to speak in English. My idea with this is to ask a critical question: Is it possible to keep together or is it a mission impossible? It might be seen as a provocative question, but it is necessary to review from that perspective whether should remain as a country, and if so what the conditions are. the process we have seen lead to together? If not, what will be the consequences? After listening to the ministers before me, let me start by saying that in part of , at least until was removed, there was a great certainty of horror wherever you were. But now in a reverse way is living in the horror of uncertainty. You can be bombed, you can be killed, in some parts of without being able to control what is going on. This is a major change in the aftermath of 's removal. What is at stake in is the idea of recreating as a new state. It is very important to try and grasp and understand this from a few . There is an idea that in the new there shouldn't be any Kurds, Turks, Arabs or Syrians, only Iraqis. That is as far as I can read the situation the main problem of the modern . It is going to be the problem of even in the near future. One of those who could say anything against this can be seen in this quote. It is quite well-known in academic contexts: "There is still no Iraqi people, but unimaginable masses of human beings, devoid of any patriotic ideals, connected to no common tie, giving ear to evil, prone to anarchy, and perpetually ready to rise against any government whatsoever." That was said by King in 1933. You could say that is still suffering from that kind of process, and it might suffer even in the coming years. But to get away from that we have to think differently and we have to work politically different. That should be our agenda. is going through different paths. It is very important to view them from different perspectives, both to understand and also to provide sufficient assistance and help. In parts of to say that someone is Iraqi means someone is not from . is not any longer perceived as part of that we would imagine from the outside. It is very important on the basis of daily life that people see themselves in a different way. What is happening in is a great change of the situation in terms of power relations between the groups that have been forced to live together in . We might talk about a lot of norms that are important for our understanding. We might believe religion, culture, democracy, human rights should rule in . But in fact , like most countries and most societies, has been ruled by aspects of power-relations. One of the important aspects of the past, as you have heard in different stories here, is the total dominance of the former regime and the way they wanted to create a new system by dominating everyone - killing. Genocide was part of their strategies. is changing from that kind of dominance, even if the Sunnis also paid a price, but not compared with the Kurds and the Shiites. is now shifting to a different situation, a different constellation, whereby is going to have asymmetric power-relations between the groups. It is important to put it in those terms. The Shiites will try to recreate in its own image. The Kurds and the Sunnis at the best will also try to create a pact within so that they can protect their interests and their future. That is going to be very important. For a new system to emerge we have to understand that has developed from all that we have heard, from repression, from genocide, from environmental disasters and also from external wars. A new system that has already started but is not yet finished is that also has been going through different phases. For normative reasons we usually mix what has been happening in . It has gone through liberation to occupation to restructuring of the state. The question is whether this new state will be democratic, peaceful and a viable entity. That is the ultimate question for any new future of . We have to understand that there are two major parallel processes going on in . One important process is the internal struggle between the Shiites and the Sunnis. It is a power-struggle to control . The Sunnis, until the removal of , were the power-holders in . They tried to create in their own image with nationalism, with internal ideologies of socialism and some would even say fascism. But the Shiites in are now trying to 'ahfy what should be. There is an intensive campaign on the part of the Shiites to recreate in their own image. At the same time there is another element of that power-struggle which has to do with a Kurdish dimension. The Kurds would like to redefine in non-Arab terms so that will be shared even by the Kurds. Otherwise the political danger of driving that force into separation or dividing the country will be very strong. There is already a public opinion in demanding - up to 97 per cent of the voters in January voted for - an option of a separate , but not in the immediate future. That risk is already there. The Kurds would like to redefine as a state, but they are not in the position to control the rest of . It is very important to see the difference between those two power-struggles going on in . When we talk about we also mix a lot of concepts. We would like to see full democracy. We would like to see full competition for power. We would also like to see some sort of power-sharing. That's what we expect to be emerging in . But as far as I can see in my reading the process is actually in the reverse. That is important for my argument. is about to find a new system of power-sharing between the 'ah Arabs - they themselves might be internally divided as we have heard today - the Kurds and the Sunnis. They also might be divided on exactly how to achieve this. It is important that they create a power-sharing formula. Creating a power-sharing formula is not necessarily democratic right from the start. When we have these kinds of demands we have to be very careful whether it is going to be democratic immediately or whether we should see the process of democratization in after the power-sharing system has been established. The constitution now provides for some sort of sharing-power or dividing-power between the executive, the legislative and the judiciary in the longer run. But we cannot expect, we shouldn't be that naive to expect, a full democratic division of all the authorities immediately. In order to keep together the power-sharing system must function first and foremost. The kind of political competition we see is part of that power-sharing system rather than founded on a democratic basis of division of the system we expect from all democracies. Power-sharing in will be about having a joint government by 's main groups. It is very important that it is a joint government, so that different parts of or different units of will see this rising, emerging, state and government as their own government, that is that they have a share in it. Another aspect of this system will be the proportionality. We might be very critical, we might be seeing it in a negative way, saying that this is sectarianism, this is ethnic nationalism, we shouldn't accept it because it is not liberal or democratic. But it is important to keep the country together so that there is a proportional representation of those important groups that are power-holders in . Otherwise they will block the whole process and they will lead the country into deeper civil war in the end. It is also important that this power-sharing system is based on the idea of partnership. cannot be an state any longer. There has to be also others who are not Arabs who are partners in that system. They have to be recognized officially in the constitution and in the political negotiations. Otherwise we will also have a deepened conflict on the identity of what is going on. The last aspect of this power-sharing system as we saw for example in the transitional administrative law is the veto power for one region or one group. The veto power meant that three provinces could reject. The Sunnis were almost close to stopping this constitution from being adopted with the exception of a tiny minority group who didn't vote. If they had voted properly they would have been able to block the whole process. This idea of being a power-holder, having a veto mechanism, is very important for the whole process to go ahead. The threat of using a veto will also alert everyone in this game that they have to be reckoned with in the longer run. This power-sharing system, is it desirable? Of course, by the Kurds it is desirable. For the Shiites it is desirable. For the Sunnis it is not desirable. They lost their 80 years of dominance, and they will do everything they possibly can to block the emergence of a new political order. They could do it democratically, but now they are doing it violently by assassination, by suicide bombings. They will do everything they can to block the system. But eventually, my optimism within me would say that they will join the process. We have seen some signs of it. They participated, although they wanted to block the constitution. They will be part of the next election for parliament. Eventually they will be part of the normalization of politics in parliament as well. Power-sharing is realistic for . This is the only way to prevent deeper conflict in this country. It is also suitable. If these groups want to dominate, they will go back to power-politics of another genocide. The only way to prevent any further, deeper war between the participating sides will be to impose, if you like, this kind of power-sharing system on the political process - or at least support it. This power-sharing system will prevent any future government from being an ethnic cleanser, as they have been previously. It will also give a signal that what we haven't been able to achieve on the battlefield can be done politically by agreeing on specific systems. We can also share power between the units so that the country will be for every specific unit and every important group. But they do not need to dissolve, the do not need to become new Iraqis. They can be part of but they do not need to change their identities. They can still be Kurds, 'ahs, Sunnis, Turkomans or Syrians. What is important in this process is not that they have a shared vision of . I would argue that this power-sharing system is more important if it is based on the idea of not going back to previous regimes practices. Those terrified by previous examples of genocide and mass killing should support this idea of a power-sharing system. It might be jeopardized for a long period of time, but I think this is the only viable road forward for . It will also lead to the idea that is not one society. There are several societies. has not only one people. is composed of several peoples. It will demand a lot of co-operation with the groups involved in restructuring . It will also prevent any group from having an institutional superiority. It will also prevent 'ahfication, if you like, or Arabization of , if you like, from that perspective. It will also be a demanding task for the elite to co-operate on two bases. The idea of self-rule and shared rule will be very important in the case of . Self-rule will be important for the regions. 's to rule itself is very profound and politically important. For the Shiites it will also be important that they will be able to rule in a way they can mobilize a political majority for. But they also need some shared-ruling mechanisms. That is the only way they can go forward. In that context, what we have seen until now is actually this kind of arrangement. We can criticize the groups for playing too much politics, but at the same time they have been trying to come up with a system that will accommodate different groups' needs. This idea of equality is quite important. What we will be seeing in the coming years in is a shift from maybe power-games to electoral games. The majority game will be played very cleverly, if they manage, by the Shiites. If that will be a successful project for them they will try to Islamize in a majority context. They have both demografic and electoral majority, and they will be able to impose their own political order. But within a power-sharing system they will not be able to impose that kind of formula on the whole of . They might only be able to do it in that part of where they have political majority. We might be critical of what is going on in . But the federal system that has now been established is complicated. It is still in the making. It is not a finished project. It demands from a country with a centralized state system to have different levels of government.