What does the Iran nuclear deal mean for Iraq?
The landmark agreement leaves Iraqi public opinion divided along ethnic
and sectarian lines
Mustafa Habib for Tehran Bureau
Tuesday 28 July 2015 00.00 EDT
Last modified on Tuesday 28 July 2015 10.12 EDT
Just a few hours after the agreement was announced, Iraqis were heatedly discussing the topic on the streets, in cafes and on social media forums: did the United States sell them out? Will Iran now be able to interfere in Iraq with impunity?
As with most topics related to its eastern neighbour, with whom Iraq shares a 1,500-kilometre border and a war-tainted history, the public’s reactions to the nuclear deal were divided along the ethnic and sectarian fault lines present in Iraqi society.
Those favouring the deal were mostly Shia muslims. They suggested that a better relationship between Iran and the United States would improve security in their own country, where competition between US-backed Sunni and Iran-backed Shia proxies often contributes to instability. Detente between Iran and the United States – Iraq’s two strongest allies – could allay sectarian conflict and unify resistance to the Islamic State, their argument goes.
“I went to Tehran three months ago and I saw what suffering the economic sanctions have caused,” said Haider Kadhim, a shop owner in the upmarket Karrada area in central Baghdad. “It made me remember the problems that sanctions on Iraq caused here: poverty, disease, lack of services. They are our neighbours and we are close to them. If they’re good, then we’re good.”
But those opposed to the deal – most often Sunni muslims – argue that the agreement gives Iran the right to interfere in Iraq without any US opposition.
“The nuclear deal is against Iraq’s interests,” said Safaa Abdel-Meguid, an employee of the ministry of electricity who lives in the Sunni-dominated neighbourhood of Saidiya in southern Baghdad. “Iran and the US have allied to destroy this country. Ali Khamenei has repeatedly stated his country’s military involvement in Iraq would continue after the deal.”
Iran’s nuclear deal also brought back unpleasant memories for many Iraqis – of the nuclear programme that was initiated by former Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein. On Facebook and at family dinner tables, proponents of the agreement lodged accusations against those who opposed the deal, accusing them of covert collaboration with Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states.
“Every time there is a contentious topic like this, Iraqis come down on one or the other side,” said Majid Kathem, a professor of sociology and psychology who lectures at the University of Baghdad and the University of Mustansiriyah. “They cannot agree.”
The nuclear deal also gave critics of the Iraqi government an opportunity to vent about local politicians, especially Iraq’s foreign minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, a Shia. His dismal performance on several fronts – the fight over water with neighbouring Turkey and the dispute over Kuwait’s Mubarak al-Kabir Port – was compared with that of Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who was seen as triumphant after nearly two years of long and difficult negotiations.
Most senior-level politicians in Iraq welcomed the agreement, though some of their statements were more lukewarm than others.
“The agreement will help in strengthening security and stability in the Middle East,” Iraqi president Fuad Masum, a Kurdish politician, told local media.
Ayad Allawi, one of Iraq’s three vice presidents, said: “Unfortunately the agreement did not discuss the issue of respect for other nations’ sovereignty and Iranian interventions in the region.” Although Allawi is Shia, he leans towards the secular lobby and is well known for his antipathy toward Iran. “However,” Allawi conceded, “the agreement remains significant.”
Nouri al-Maliki, former prime minister of Iraq and now another of the country’s vice presidents, described the agreement as a “victory for those who love peace in this region and in the world.” By the end of his administration last year, al-Maliki was known for his close links with Iran.
Influential cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who leads the millions-strong Sadrist movement and who has been critical about Iran’s policy toward Iraq in the recent past, refrained from commenting on the deal.
One of al-Sadr’s counterparts, Ammar al-Hakim, a cleric who heads a major Shia political party, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, issued a statement: “We congratulate the noble Iranian people, its wise leaders and brave negotiators… We believe the nuclear deal is key to solving many of the thorny problems in the region.”
In the long term, the agreement is expected to impact Iraq’s economy by lowering global oil prices. This portends a fiscal challenge for the Iraqi government, which needs prices to rise to overcome its current budget deficit.
“The talks focused on more than just the nuclear issue,” said Ahmad al-Allusi, a local political analyst based in Baghdad. “And we will doubtless learn…whether the two sides have agreed to resolve other conflicts in a conciliatory manner, through negotiation, or whether they will simply maintain the status quo.”
This article is presented in partnership with Niqash.org
No comments:
Post a Comment