What if I told you that the Iraq War was perhaps the United States’ greatest act of
strategic stupidity in the last 30 years. At least taking into account what is called realpolitik.
Think about it for a moment: what are the main threats to Washington's interests? China, Russia,
North Korea and Iran. Remember that Iran is a regional power in the Middle East. They have
almost 90 million inhabitants and tons of natural resources, with the second largest natural gas
reserves in the world and the fourth largest oil reserves. In short, Iran occupies a key strategic
position in the Middle East. What’s more, Tehran is on the verge of developing its own atomic bomb.
Well, having to deal with such an adversary in this corner of the planet, it turns out that the
greatest wall of containment against Iranian expansionism was none other than Saddam Hussein.
Saddam's Iraq was a savage dictatorship, yes, but absolutely anti-Iranian. And
then the United States arrived 20 years ago, and could not think of anything better to do
than to deliver Iraq on a silver platter to Iran. Here you go, Khamenei, have at it. You may
think that I’m exaggerating. But 20 years later, I assure you that this is the way
things went down. In fact, I'm sure many of you remember that when the Iraq war started,
memes like this one were passed around: Well, strange as it may seem, this is
exactly what has happened. Because today there is a democracy in Iraq. So, who has seized power
in the Iraqi democracy? Well, none other than the Shiite leaders closest to Iran. What’s more,
do you remember Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force? Well, this
Iranian general was at ease in Iraq, organizing the Shiite militias operating in the country.
In fact, the US succeeded in taking down General Soleimani in Baghdad. And just to
show you how things are going, the Iraqi capital has added a new place of interest
to its tourist guides. Check it out: (The wreckage from the U.S. drone strike
that killed Qasem Soleimani & Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes in Iraq last year is now a
memorial site on Baghdad's airport road) You have to admit that even Turkmenistan has
more taste when it comes to making monuments. But anyway, back to the point, the bottom line
is that Iran represents a growing threat as it gets closer and closer to having the atomic bomb.
And now it is expanding its influence over Iraq,
the world's fourth largest oil exporter and the second largest within OPEC. However,
VisualPolitik viewers, the situation could be about to change in favor of the United States.
So the question is: To what extent might Iranian influence over Iraq dissipate? What role will this
gentleman you are seeing on the screen right now, who looks more like advertising for Revenge of the
Sith than an Iraqi political leader, play? Today on VisualPolitik we are going to
answer these questions but first... let's take a look at some history.
(INTIMATE ENEMIES)
There are three key ideas that I would like to remind you of. The first one,
which we have already mentioned a lot of times, is that within the Islamic world there is an
eternal Cold War between the two main branches of Islam: Sunnism and Shiism. The struggle between
these branches of the Muslim religion dates back to the year 632, when it was decided who should
succeed Muhammad, so on this point don’t expect any agreement. About 80% of Muslims are Sunni.
However, the Islamic Republic of Iran is entirely Shiite territory. To a lesser extent so is Iraq,
where Shiites make up 65% of the population as opposed to 30% Sunni. And this brings us to the
second important idea: Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a country ruled by a Sunni elite despite
the Shiite social majority. For the third idea it is better to take a look at the map:
Here you can see that Iraq and Iran are two countries that besides having very
similar names are also neighbors. Neighbors, it needs to be said,
who did not get along at all well. They were at loggerheads for decades,
ever since Arab socialism took hold in Iraq and espoused a nationalism that
included territorial claims over Iran. In fact, Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in the early 1980s.
Then Iran launched its counter-offensive on Iraq. The war lasted eight years and served no purpose;
the borders did not change. Both countries were ruined while causing approximately one million
deaths. Then came the invasion of Kuwait, the Gulf War and the invasion of Iraq in 2003. It is then
that our man begins to take center stage. He is Muqtada Al-Sadr.
For those of you who do not know him, Muqtada Al-Sadr is a cleric and son of Grand
Ayatollah Mohamed Sadeq al-Sadr. His father was an important religious authority for
the Shiites of Iraq, condemned to belong to the most disadvantaged social classes during
the harsh repression exercised by the Sunni regime of Saddam Hussein. As an ayatollah, he
preached on social and economic issues affecting people's lives, and thus also became a political
icon for the Shiites. His popularity led to his assassination by Saddam's regime in 1999.
The Shiites were the main opposition to Saddam's regime. After his fall,
some of their leaders cooperated with the United States to work together in
the creation of the new Iraq. This was not the case with Muqtada Al-Sadr, who
was radically opposed to the US occupation. Many Shiites who had already been followers of Grand
Ayatollah Al-Sadr saw his son as a symbol of resistance to the invader.
And so Muqtada Al-Sadr became one of the best known leaders of the Iraqi insurgency, with great
power and influence in the center and south of the country, as well as in Baghdad, in the capital's
Al-Zaura suburb, known today as Al-Sadr City. Well, to fight against the invading troops,
Muqtada Al-Sadr created a militia, the Mahdi Army. Operational between 2003 and 2008, this
militia reinforced Muqtada Al-Sadr's status as one of the most influential men in the new Iraq.
However, this was not the best way to come to power. Because as I was telling you before,
the United States established a democracy in Iraq. And of course, in the Iraqi population,
the Shiites are the majority. So the Iraqi Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani called on the various
Shia parties to present a single list for the first free elections. Muqtada Al-Sadr
and the other Shiite leaders agreed and the United Iraqi Alliance won the 2005 elections.
The United Iraqi Alliance quickly betrayed its name. In 2007 the coalition collapsed,
giving rise to a new struggle for Shiite political leadership. The main beneficiary
was Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. Formerly in exile in Iran, from where he had gained
financial support for the Islamist opposition to Saddam Hussein, Nuri al-Maliki increased his
popularity among Iraqis as prime minister by improving security inside the country.
Muqtada Al-Sadr moved pragmatically in politics. He granted or withdrew the support of the Sadrist
Movement depending on the influence he could gain over the various Ministries. His ideology
has two pillars: Shiite religious thought and Iraqi nationalism. It has therefore always been
opposed to foreign interference, whether from the United States or Iran. US troops
withdrew in December 2011. However, a new threat began to spread over Iraq in 2014.
Daesh, the Islamic State, has put the new Iraqi state in check. Followers of an extreme version
of Sunni Islam, they extended the domains of their caliphate as far as Fallujah, just 69
kilometers or 42 miles from Baghdad. Faced with the inability of the Iraqi army to confront them,
the various Shiite forces formed their own paramilitary militias. Along with them,
Muqtada Al-Sadr, who recovered his former militia – the Mahdi Army.
After three years of war they achieved victory. Despite this, the Shiite paramilitary militias,
which are backed by Iran, have not been disbanded. For his part, Muqtada Al-Sadr embarked on a
strategy of opposition to the government which has paid off: the Sadrist Movement became the
largest group in the Iraqi Parliament. How did he achieve this? We are about to see.
(OPEN SESAME!) Iraqi democracy is so much
like Western versions that in just a decade people were fed up with their politicians. Since 2018,
turnout at elections plummeted to 44%. While his rivals have fallen into disrepute, Muqtada
al-Sadr has managed to keep his faithful base and increase his voters. This has so far translated
into greater influence over Iraqi affairs. In fact, in parliamentary negotiations his
coalition has obtained its share of jobs in public companies to offer them to its
followers. The creation of these clientelistic networks has been strengthening and expanding
his social base. Muqtada al-Sadr has thus gone from being a simple warlord to a master of the
political arts. Something quite surprising considering that in the last few years Iraq
is finally giving some good news. (Baghdad's Green Zone reopens to
the public after 16 years – ArabNews) The Green Zone was the only secure area within
Baghdad itself. It is where the US Embassy is located, as well as various government buildings.
Throughout all these years it has been an armored zone because since the US invasion,
Iraq has been a real powder keg. The fact that it is now open to the public again is the best sign
that the situation is relatively calm again. And I’m sure there are a few of you thinking,
but [host], what is all this discontent about? Well, the point is that many Iraqis are seeing
how their rulers are more concerned about catering to Iran's wishes than working for
national interests. Iraq is an oil-rich country. However, the population does not see the benefits
of their own dinosaur juice. This is evident if we take a look at the Iraqi state budgets.
Iraq's budget amounts to about $90 billion. Looking at the dark blue you can see how about
two-thirds is swallowed up by the salaries and pensions of public sector workers. If
we add to that the capital expenditure, the truth is that a very small part of the budget
is left for the investments that are needed to improve the living standards of Iraqis.
Precisely one sector in need of investment is the energy sector. For example,
Iraq has gas reserves five times larger than those of Oman. However, its production is four
times smaller. Its production is so low that it barely covers half of the country's consumption.
And the reality is even more scandalous. It turns out that Iraq is flaring much
of the natural gas coming out of its oil wells because it does not have the infrastructure to
capture and use that gas. So who is the main beneficiary of Iraq needing to import gas? I
bet you didn't see this move coming: (Iraq owes Iran $11bn for gas imports,
says Iranian ambassador – The National News) This suits Iran just fine. Because US sanctions
prevent it from exporting its natural resources. But Washington grants exemptions to Iraq because
the country needs Iranian gas to cover a third of its electricity production. In fact, when there
are problems with Iran's gas supply, blackouts occur. Those of you who have been watching
VisualPolitik for a long time already know that we often repeat that countries whose energy
supply is not secure have a lot of difficulties getting their economic sectors to prosper.
Everyone understands this. Even the Iraqis, who are outraged that their rulers serve
Iranian interests more than those of their own State. However, this is something that
is collapsing under its own weight. And not because of a religious issue, far from it.
As is obvious, Iraqis are wondering what the government is doing with the record revenues
gained in 2022 from the oil sector: $115 billion, to be exact. And not surprisingly,
when they do get the answers, it is even worse. ('Heist of the century': how $2.5bn was plundered
from Iraqi state funds – The Guardian) In Iraq, ghost workers are all the rage. These
are workers who do not exist, but they collect their salaries. In other words, the rulers have
fictitiously fattened the lists of public workers to pocket their salaries. It is estimated that 10%
of public employees are ghost workers. So, yes, Iraq has evolved a lot. It is getting safer and
there is a democracy. But it is a hyper-corrupt country. In any other place, people would
criticize it and say: hey, look what a scoundrel this politician is: he's blatantly stealing the
money!! But in Iraq it's not that simple. The country has oil coming out its ears;
technically its per capita income is that of a country like Jordan. However,
the standard of living is not equivalent: public services leave a lot to be desired and there are
still even power cuts. And you will probably say, ok, but is this so important? Well, this is what
brought the Taliban back to power in Afghanistan. People were fed up with the corruption and the
State institutions not working. In the case of Iraq, how could the situation change? Listen up.
(THE ENEMY OF MY ENEMY) Iraqis already erupted against
the Iraqi government in large protests during the fall of 2019. They demanded an end to corruption
and better public services. They succeeded in getting the prime minister to resign. Even so,
the protesters were brutally repressed. But not at the hands of the State security forces,
rather at the hands of Shiite militias accountable only to Iran. The same ones who were waiting for
orders from General Soleimani. In 2021, this repression took its
toll on Iranian-backed political parties, led by former Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. The
Sadrist Movement announced that it would seek a government that excluded all pro-Iranian factions.
A government by and for Iraq. It gained important allies for this: Masoud Barzani, leader of Iraqi
Kurdistan, and Mohammed al-Halbousi, leader of the Iraqi Sunnis. Al-Halbousi himself made this
statement about the negotiations with al-Sadr. (“The time for foreign interference in the
formation of Iraqi governments is over, and today the mountains and deserts of Iraq are moving
towards the honorable Najaf for discussions of a purely national Iraqi government, neither eastern
nor western.” – Mohammed al-Halbousi) "Neither east nor west" is al-Sadr's
favorite slogan to describe how the Iraqi government should be.
An Iraqi nationalist proclamation, equally opposed to both Iranian and US interference and leaving
behind Shiite religious mandates to build a new Iraq hand in hand with Sunnis and Kurds. In the
meantime, however, Iran did not stand idly by. (Iran piles pressure on Iraq's Kurdish and
Sunni leaders to crack Sadr's alliance – MiddleEastEyes)
Iran has launched missile and drone attacks against Iraqi Kurdistan. Likewise,
the Iraqi Supreme Court banned oil exports from this autonomous region, leaving it without its
main source of income. As for the Sunnis, the pressure was exerted by the Shiite militias,
who act violently and with total impunity in Sunni-majority areas. In an attempt to force
early elections, Muqtada al-Sadr ordered all his deputies to resign. A move that has backfired.
When the representatives of the Sadrist Movement gone from Parliament, their seats were taken
by members of the pro-Iranian parties. These forces succeeded in forming a new government
with Mohamed Shia al Sudani, a former al-Maliki minister. Supporters of the Sadrist Movement
held protests in Baghdad that led to violent clashes with Iranian-backed Shiite militias.
Iraq was on the brink of civil war until Muqtada al-Sadr ordered the withdrawal of his followers.
Iranian pressure also reaches the religious arena. A central doctrine in Shiite Islam is
the concept of marja. It means that every Shiite Muslim must have a spiritual leader
whose edicts are unquestionably followed. Muqtada's father, Ayatollah Mohammed al-Sadr,
did have the qualifications to be a spiritual leader. But Muqtada does not. So when al-Sadr's
father was assassinated, the followers of the Sadrist Movement were forced to follow another
cleric in religious matters and turned to Ayatollah al-Haeri. It is a lifetime job
but... it seems that that no longer applies. (Al-Haeri retires from working as a religious
authority and advises the believers to follow Khamenei's authority in Iran – Altahreernews)
No marja resigns during his lifetime. And on top of the fact that, him being an Iraqi
ayatollah, and recognizing the religious authority of Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader,
indicates that Tehran influenced his decision with the aim of reducing al-Sadr's power.
But this move to subdue the Sadrist Movement's supporters has failed. His followers have
remained loyal. And Iraqi nationalism, which puts political interests before religious ones,
has been strengthened. Clearly Muqtada al-Sadr is not the perfect ally of the United States,
but given what has been seen in Iraq, he may be the least bad option.
A strong Iraq governed by a coalition of Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds to oppose Iranian
dominance would allow Washington to divert its attention to other more far-reaching threats
such as Russia and China. That doesn't sound bad. But now it's your turn: To
what extent can there be a democratic Iraq independent of Iranian interests? Do you
think the Muqtada al-Sadr option would be beneficial to the United States?
You can leave me your answer in the comments. And as always, don't forget that we release new
videos every week so subscribe to the channel so you don't miss any of our updates. If
you liked this video, LIKE it and see you in the next one. All the best and see you soon.