Self-governing Sunni regions without Baghdad interference the only solution for Iraq

Sunni forces are capable of handling the security of their provinces after ISIS and this task should be given only to them, says prominent Sunni leader and former deputy prime minister of Iraq Rafe al-Essawi. However, says al-Essawi, Baghdad does not want Sunnis anywhere near Iraq’s security and military institutions. In this interview with Rudaw al-Essawi warns that unless the Iraqi government lets the Sunnis run their own provinces there will always be radical groups like ISIS.

Al-Essawi who fled Baghdad as finance minister after being chased by the Maliki government, proposes that self-governing Sunni regions is the only solution to the problem, especially after Iraqi courts have issued arrest warrants for him, and all other Sunni leaders.

“If you kick Sunni leaders out, it means you are encouraging people who boycott the political process,” says al-Essawi. “So it is not the absence of Sunni leaders, but the illegal behavior of the government and political intimidation. The government then says the next day where are the Sunni leaders to sit with them, to negotiate with or reconcile.”

Rudaw: What is the role and level of participation of the Sunnis in the current offensive to liberate Mosul?

Rafe al-Essawi: Since the fall of Ramadi and Fallujah to ISIS and later on Mosul, Sunnis including tribes tied to the government have tried so many times to recruit their guys against ISIS. But unfortunately there is suspicion. The government is afraid that the Arab Sunnis may infiltrate the security forces, and the weapons that they receive from the government can go to ISIS the next day. But the question is: who surrendered their weapons to ISIS? Was it the tribes or the Iraqi army? So unfortunately this justification to kick out Arab Sunnis from participation makes all Iraqis lose a few years since the ISIS occupation.

Regarding Mosul, there is the Nineveh Guards headed by Mr. Atheel al-Nujaifi. They are participating now. And there are some tribes who participated in Qayyara and other places. So there is participation. And we have been very frank with the government from the beginning that this is mainly the job of the Arab Sunnis because this is their own provinces.

Are the Nineveh Guards and tribal forces an effective force in the Mosul offensive?

They are effective but the question is whether the government accepts them as a partner or not. That is why I keep repeating that you cannot reach good results by repeating bad models and behavior. It is the marginalization of Arab Sunnis, refusing their recruitment in the military forces and this suspicion that they might be close to ISIS, while the first who fought al-Qaeda and now ISIS are the Arab Sunnis. So there is a Sunni partner ready. Are they enough? No, they need support from the Peshmerga, from the Iraqi army and the international coalition and to me the priority should be to them.

Can the Sunni forces handle the situation in Mosul and other areas after ISIS?

The answer is yes. They are ready and capable to take the ground and they are very familiar with the situation. They are the best to defeat ISIS.

Sunni leaders often say that the Sunnis are able to defeat ISIS as they were able to defeat the Al-Qaeda. My question is, why when a group like ISIS comes to the area you don't stop them in the first place?

The government refused very early on to arm the Arab Sunnis. I remember very well five meetings of people who went from Fallujah and Ramadi and met with former prime minister and later on with Mr. Abadi, focusing on one point: arm the Arab Sunnis to fight against ISIS.

Did they tell Abadi that there is a group named ISIS that will come and take control and he refused?

No, I am talking about after ISIS took control of big cities like Ramadi and Fallujah. They went and told Maliki and later on Mr. Abadi, go and arm the people who are committed to fight against ISIS. But no one listened to them, unfortunately. And even now, when they are talking about arming popular mobilization forces, they are focusing on arming one and ignoring others. There is no one standard in dealing with different Iraqi groups, Sunnis and Shiites.

Why are there the Nineveh Guards and tribal forces? Why is there not a one united Sunni force?

This is really the mistake of the government. From the very beginning, when ISIS took our cities, we suggested a national guard for each province. It could be connected directly to the government, the governor and ministry of the interior and financed by the central government. In the beginning that notion was accepted, but later they totally shifted towards the Hashd. So the question is: will the Sunnis accept the Shiite militia that is part of Iran? The answer is no. That is why they are trying their own model. For the government to have a Hashd, it has to have one model: institutionalization of the security forces.

We don't want Sunni tribes armed, Shiites armed, because the second day after liberation you will see inter-Sunni fight, inter-Shiite fight, Sunni-Shiite fight, everyone will be fighting each other. You have to institutionalize and this is the job of the government who refuses to listen to our advice.

There is this criticism that the Sunnis do not have a decision-making center. If someone wants to go to the Sunnis with a solution who will they go to?

The story is about the fragmentation of everyone and I call it management of fragmentation. All the components are fragmented. Shiites are fragmented, Sunnis are fragmented, Kurds are fragmented.

But the Sunnis more so than others.

I agree, I definitely agree. But there are two parts of this Sunni division. Since 2003 until now, some of them accept participation in the political process and some of them refuse the participation. But regarding people who participated in the political process like me, Tariq al-Hashemi and Adnan al-Dulaimi, where are they now? They are in exile and accused of terrorism. So if you kick Sunni leaders out, it means you are encouraging people who boycott the political process. People will say what is the benefit of participation if you the participant, are outside the political process. So it is not the absence of Sunni leaders, but the illegal behavior of the government and political intimidation. The government then says the next day where are the Sunni leaders to sit with them, to negotiate with or reconcile.

Some people say that you were the one who started all the trouble. When you were finance minister you got into trouble with the government of Maliki, then you went back to the Sunni region and called on people to take to the streets which led to public protests and then to ISIS.

Is a demonstration which is legal and constitutional trouble? I was supporting the demonstrations. And I think this my and my people's right to demonstrate and call for their rights. Am I a troublemaker if I demand my rights according to the law and constitution? The government used its tanks to hit people in Hawija, Kirkuk, Ramadi and Fallujah. They are the ones violating the law and constitution, not me who is asking for his rights according to the constitution.

After the arrival of ISIS there were some changes in the Iraqi government and even Maliki was asked to step down. Do you think the government of Haider al-Abadi is in any way different from the government of Maliki?

The government of Mr. Abadi has taken some good steps regarding the liberation, and some bad steps. The good step is that he tried to restore cities that fell under his predecessor not him. But the bad step about him is that he accepted the chaos of weapons and arms. He accepted dozens of militia groups outside the law and he keeps saying that they are under the control of the government, the law and popular mobilization forces while we know that they are totally outside the control of the Marjaa and the government. So this was the mistake of this chaos and weapons on the streets which as I said will be a threat to all Iraq the day after ISIS. And some Shiites thought that this popular mobilization forces (PMF) will protect them and their state, but I said this is wrong, they will threaten your own state because they are an illegal body.

The Iraqi government does not trust the Sunnis to arm them and task them with security and the Sunnis see the Shiites the same way. So what is the solution?

There is no trust between the different components of Iraq since 2003. Up until this moment there is no national consensus. So, part of the post-ISIS is to have a consensus and a real economic and political partnership especially on security. If you keep saying security is my job as prime minister, the former prime minister also said the same and the result was the fall of the Sunni provinces to ISIS. I don't think anyone will accept this exclusive control over security. So there must be real partnership and regionalization. Now Nineveh, Anbar and Salahaddin call to be changed from province to region.

Is there a project to establish an autonomous Sunni region from Nineveh all the way to Anbar?

Well, it has been proposed for the last few years, even now as part of the liberation of Nineveh. We are talking about geographic regions rather than ethnic or sectarian region. The region of Nineveh and Anbar. No one is presenting a sectarian Sunni region Vs. Shiite region.

But these are Sunni areas, so why is it so bad to name it a Sunni region?

We are not afraid to say this is Sunni, but each province is different. For example Mosul is different from Anbar or Diyala. Yezidis, Christians, Sunnis, Shiites. So they want to select their own model. You cannot impose on them one mode. The representatives of these provinces have proposed regions rather than region. Our partners say that regions maybe the beginning of the division of Iraq, but we are against the division of Iraq. Iraq is a federal unified state but you have to respect the constitution to keep it unified.

Atheel al-Nujaifi is forming a force to take part in the liberation of Mosul. The normal behavior of the government should be to deal with Atheel to be part of this liberation process, but they accuse him of belonging to Turkey. The question is: you have dozens of people who belong to Iranian militias. So why are you accusing Atheel who is committed to fight ISIS and who is from Nineveh and who has the right to protect his province and participate in its liberation.

The Sunnis say the Shiite militias belong to Iran and they say you belong to Turkey.

It is not the Sunnis who say that. The Shiite militias themselves appear on TV and say we belong to Iran. Some of them even have press conferences in Iran with clerics there.

At this stage, do the Sunnis need Turkish support in order to liberate Nineveh?

Whether the government accepts the Turks or not, or whether Nineveh people or the Kurds accept it or not, I think many of these actors asked them for help and now they tell Turkey why have you come. Why is the Iraqi government paying the salaries of the PKK and PYD in Sinjar and they know they threaten Turkey. The Iraqi government violates its constitution which does not allow any terrorist organization in Iraq. The government kicked out MEK [Mojahedin-E-Khalq] because they are against Iran, but why are you keeping the PKK? Because they are against Turkey. If you want mutual respect and no Turkish interference, you have to prevent terrorist organizations that are working on the ground.