In league with the League?
Iraqi political forces are divided over the role of the Arab League. Dina Ezzat reports
A meeting which took place this week in Egypt between Arab League Secretary- General Amr Moussa and UN Special Envoy to Iraqi Serge de Millo produced no clear picture about the role of the Arab League in occupied Iraq. The Moussa-De Millo talks reviewed the situation in Iraq and in the UN, with the two officials agreeing that both the international and regional organisations will have to make every possible effort to help the Iraqi people out of their current situation. The nature and scope of these efforts, however, will have to be consistent with the rules set by relevant UN resolutions. Additional Arab League-UN decisions on this issue will be made available within the next few days in New York when the US draft of a new resolution on Iraq is to be presented before the Security Council.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi chair in the main meeting hall on the first floor of the Arab League building in Cairo is likely to remain empty when Arab foreign ministers meet for their bi- annual council meeting in less than three weeks. "This chair will remain empty until such time as there is an elected Iraqi government in place which is recognised by both the Iraqi people and the Arab countries," Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa commented.
This stance is just one of the reasons for a split within the Iraqi political forces over the potential role of this pan-Arab organisation in the rebuilding of post-Saddam Iraq. Most members and supporters of the Iraqi Interim Governing Council (IGC) see it as a vote of no confidence in the administrative body that was formed with the blessing of the occupying forces in Iraq. They argue the point that, even though the members of the IGC were not democratically elected, this body should be recognised as the government of the Iraqi people as it brings together members of the many political and ethnic groups within the country. However, opponents of the IGC, who maintain that the governing body is merely a puppet of the occupying forces, are in support of the Arab League stance. Such an attitude, they argue, indicates collective Arab determination to only recognise an Iraqi government elected under supervision of the UN rather the US occupiers.
This debate has been going on since the IGC was formed. According to the Arab League, the establishment of the IGC does in fact comply with the requirements of UN Security Council Resolution 1483, which stipulates the that the Iraqi people should form their own ruling bodies. However in a statement issued by Arab League Secretary-General Moussa, he said steps should now be taken towards the establishment of a democratically elected government. In addition, the statement continued, the credibility of the IGC would have been greater had the members of the IGC been elected by the Iraqi people.
"We call on the Arab League not to recognise this puppet council since it does not at all represent the Iraqi people. The Arab League must bear the responsibility for deciding to deal with this illegitimate council that brought the collaborators of the occupation to rule in our country," said Harith Al- Diaei, a member of the Iraqi Organisation of Muslim Clerics (IOMC). Al-Diaei is a member of a delegation which brought together representatives of several Iraqi political forces to meet with Moussa to ask for Arab League assistance in putting the Iraqi house in order. "We believe that it is primarily the Arab League that should be providing us with assistance. After all, Iraq is a member state of the Arab League even though it is now under the US occupation," he added.
A similar view was expressed by several Iraqi delegations and independent Iraqi politicians who visited Cairo for meetings with the league.
Moussa was castigated by some members of the IGC for meeting delegations who are critical of the IGC. These members threatened to reconsider sending a delegation to the Arab League in protest against the league's unwillingness to recognise the interim council as well as the league's tolerance of criticism of the council made by opponents of the governing body -- whom Moussa has met. Others went a step further by criticising the Arab League secretary-general for having attempted to stop the US war against Iraq that toppled the regime of Saddam Hussein.
For its part the Arab League, its officials say, is not taking sides with either supporters or opponents of the IGC. "It is the role of the Arab League to keep its doors open for every single Iraqi who wants to work in the interest and for the welfare of Iraq at this crucial time," commented Hesham Youssef, Moussa's cabinet chief and official spokesman. According to Youssef, the issue today is not about "recognising" the IGC. "After all, which countries have actually recognised this council as the representative of the Iraqi people?" he asked.
The main concern of the league is not with the recognition or non-recognition of the IGC, but rather how to help Iraq to regain its independence, and its role as an active member of the Arab League. "It is precisely for this purpose that I have called on representatives of all Iraqi factions to come and meet under the umbrella of the Arab League to discuss the future of Iraq," said Moussa.
The call for this meeting was made several weeks ago, but the main stumbling block is proving to be the failure of the US to give the league a serious role in the reshaping of Iraq. Washington is still angry with the pan-Arab organisation for its efforts against and rejection of the war. And only a few days ago, US Secretary of State Colin Powell publicly criticised the Arab League for its failure to recognise the IGC.
A further obstacle in the path of this all- inclusive meeting under the Arab League umbrella is the divided views of Iraqi political forces on the role of the Arab League in pre and post-war Iraq. Some political groups of Iraq feel that the Arab League did not do enough to stop the war; others have the opposite view. Some political groups perceive the league's efforts to prevent war against Iraq as an indication of complicity with Saddam Hussein, while others believe that the Arab League did not lobby hard enough to prevent the war for fear of further anatgonising an already angry Kuwait -- who wanted to topple the former occupier of their country.
The Arab League, meanwhile, does not have a representative in Iraq to communicate with the various Iraqi political forces. The decision to send an envoy, if at all possible, would require the consent of all member states for the league to engage in direct communication Iraqi occupying forces. This itself might divide the members of the Arab League.
