Iraqi public opinion and decision-making are ‘Iranian creations’, says MP

BAGHDAD – In a recent interview with Al-Rasheed, Iraqi politician Sajjad Salem discussed the growing political conflict in Iraq, emphasizing Iran’s influence over public opinion and the challenges faced by Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani. Salem touched on issues such as the role of “electronic armies” in shaping public discourse, the insular nature of the Shia Coordination Framework, and what he sees as the increasing involvement of Iran in Iraq’s internal affairs.

Key excerpts from the interview:

The political conflict in Iraq is evident and present at the current time, with its parties beginning to take shape in anticipation of the upcoming elections. At its core, this conflict is one initiated by the Coordination Framework against parties it believes have stepped out of its control.

Public opinion-making in Iraq is not Iraqi but completely Iranian. Allowing one side to form electronic armies enables other parties to create similar armies that engage in extortion, accusations, and destabilization of Iraqi society.

The beginning of these electronic armies was during the 2019 protests, when the protesting youth took to the streets. Joint working groups were formed to tarnish their reputation and attack their integrity, and this process continues to this day. Thus, these armies are a creation of the political parties and class.

Currently, public opinion is, in essence and content, an Iranian creation. The shift in public opinion towards Prime Minister Al-Sudani, from satisfaction to anger, is clear evidence that the matter is a mere fabrication reflecting Iran’s agenda and strategy in general.

The Coordination Framework has become a highly insular entity, viewing Al-Sudani as an outsider because he is not among its top leaders, despite being its nominee and originating from within it. Thus, some elements within the Framework are working against his government and seeking to limit its powers.

The main problem in Iraq is that decision-making does not happen through the legislative institution, nor is the executive institution allowed to be decisive. Instead, there are four to five individuals leading some political blocs who represent the real decision-making circle. If the situation remains unchanged, it would be pointless to seek to reform these institutions. Instead, the political situation and class must change, which would be the only solution.

Politically, Iraq is a follower of the Islamic Republic, with Iranian control reaching significant and dangerous levels. This situation is clear and needs no further explanation, as the Chief of Staff of the Popular Mobilization Forces declared on television that he follows Iran’s political decision, which is the case for many parties and factions that are influential in the Iraqi political scene.

Iran benefits from the Iraqi situation. It is economically isolated and takes advantage of the chaos in the currency market. It has dragged Iraq into its conflict with the Zionist entity and the United States, even if this goes against Iraqi interests. This indicates that Iran is the decision-maker in Iraq, placing it in a politically subordinate position.

All prime ministers have tried to pull Iraq towards a balanced area between Iran and the United States, especially since Washington has imposed significant decisions on the Iraqi economy and can starve the Iraqi people if its interests require it. However, Iran refuses any gray area for Iraq, demanding either alignment with or opposition against it. Those in power now fully align with the Iranian decision.

Nur Zuheir is protected by the Iraqi political system, and the ‘theft of the century’ is a theft by the Iraqi political system. It is inconceivable that a trivial person could steal 3 trillion dinars without collaboration and cooperation among all political factions. Calls for a public trial only appeared after he left the country because his scandal reflects the political process and system in Iraq.

Nur Zuheir’s significance in the case of the theft is minimal; the money went into the pockets of political forces, and whether or not he returns to Iraq is irrelevant. He will not return or be tried, especially given that he was allowed to leave Iraq after being bailed by the judiciary. The executive authority should have kept him under surveillance.

Al-Sudani has suffered a severe blow; the political situation has turned against him, and he has no room for maneuver, as the majority in parliament and government is aligned with the Coordination Framework. This illustrates that anyone perceived as outside the ‘system’ will be targeted as Al-Sudani has been during this period, just as Al-Kadhimi was before and did not survive.

I have spoken to some advocates of the new personal status law amendments, who said they would marry off their daughters under civil law but want the poor to be subject to the new law because they seek to target a religiously hardline audience. I call on the Iraqi people to observe whether these advocates will marry off their daughters later according to the law they demand.

The issue is not related to Tishreen, but Iraqi society is currently tense. If the situation continues as it is, violent protests may erupt. This has been noted and diagnosed, and we have said from the beginning that Al-Sudani’s government represents an opportunity, but the political class’s narrow-mindedness has led to ignoring the majority of the Iraqi people’s criticisms.