Former Iraqi electricity minister urges pragmatic approach to US relations under Trump

BAGHDAD — Former Iraqi Electricity Minister Luay Al-Khatib has called on Iraq’s leadership to adopt a cautious and pragmatic approach to its relationship with Washington following the return of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency.

In a recent interview, Al-Khatib highlighted Iraq’s ongoing challenges, including an overreliance on oil revenues and a stalled political response to guidance from Grand Ayatollah Al-Sistani. He warned that these issues risk deepening the country’s economic and social divides.

Al-Khatib emphasized the need for structural reforms in Iraq’s public sector and stressed the importance of strategic engagement with the U.S., regardless of which administration is in power.

Excerpts from Al-Khatib’s interview with Al-Rasheed TV:

Iraq is experiencing difficult conditions across all security, economic, and social levels, due to a catastrophic and sole reliance on oil revenues, ignoring the country’s non-oil potential. What we currently need is to restructure and merge certain ministries, separate public companies from ministries and restructure them, close down the ones that are failing, and retrain employees with economic programs that strongly involve the private sector.

It can be said that “one cannot give what one does not have” when speaking about the political forces’ responsiveness to the guidance of the religious authority. These recommendations have been repeated in terms of both announcement and content, yet without any response. Sayyid Al-Sistani closed his doors long ago and has only intervened in critical moments, such as confronting the threat of ISIS.

The guidance from the religious authority has been clear, and any attempt to reframe it in other ways is ridiculous. Those who ignore the prescription provided by the religious authority are blind in sight and insight. Though repetitive, the advice serves as a reminder, as in the saying, “Remind if the reminder benefits.” Therefore, the political leadership must recognize the gravity of the current phase.

There is no real peaceful transfer of power in Iraq. Each government comes in to take revenge on the people of the previous government, and protection is only available for those backed by a powerful political entity. This situation is not a genuine transfer of power; it is an invisible coup, representing everything that a coup entails.

The protests have not disappeared in order to “return” — they have continued since 2010 up to this moment, driven by economic factors and the absence of social justice. There is a vast gap between classes, with extreme poverty and extreme wealth, while the middle class has disappeared.

Iraq needs economic leaders who understand global economic trends to design state policies and objectives. Even major Gulf economies have utilized foreign expertise and have, at times, granted Iraqis high-ranking positions. Yet, some ignorant people within the political class continue to speak of Iraqis “inside and outside” the country, as if being forced by the country’s political circumstances to hold another nationality is a fault.

All those who took a strong stance on Trump’s exit from power in 2020 likely did not anticipate his potential return in the next term; otherwise, they might have been more cautious and wiser in their positions. However, we must view the United States as a superpower that controls 25% of the world’s economy and influences the remaining 75%, in addition to being the most prominent military and political power.

It is unwise to oppose a superpower like America. The United States spends over a trillion dollars annually on its military, and its currency dominates and serves as a benchmark for global economies. This obliges us to be prudent and serious, regardless of whether the president is Trump or someone else.

The call between Sudani and Trump is a matter of protocol and does not lead to anything substantial. What truly matters is the government’s actions and the mutual interests of both countries. However, we must prioritize Iraq first, just as they say “America First,” which the religious authority recently advised.

The current challenges will likely surpass any exceptions in dealing with Iran. Should the war escalate and target energy facilities in the Islamic Republic, the repercussions would be catastrophic for Iraq, as it relies on Iran for about 50% of its energy supply.

We must strengthen our relationship with the new American administration as strategic allies, according to the agreement that binds us to Washington. Any negative impacts on the situation in Iraq would reverberate throughout the region and the world, given that our oil production constitutes about 5% of global output.

During Trump’s first term, we utilized all our resources to secure an exemption for energy dealings with Iran, even leveraging personal relationships. Our efforts were successful to the extent that communications with the U.S. administration were conducted via WhatsApp rather than official letters to save time.

Regional countries, particularly the Gulf states, are adjusting their policies following Trump’s return, as he aims to lower oil prices, though prices may rise due to the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.

Trump 2024 is different from the 2016 version; in his first term, he was less experienced, less mature, and more inclined toward retribution. However, we should learn from his policies during that period.

Trump is now supported by advisors who are fundamentally different from his previous team. He now views American interests comprehensively, not just as a politician but as a businessman. Since this will be his final term, he will not be concerned with re-election, which means his priorities will be entirely different.

Despite expected shifts in Trump’s policies, some stances will remain consistent, such as his approach to the climate agreement. The U.S. may once again withdraw from it, encouraging oil companies to expand their investments worldwide. Additionally, his policies on immigrants and Arab countries will continue, though we might see differences in their execution.

Trump is a businessman with a mindset geared toward reciprocity, yet I do not find him inclined toward wars but rather toward imposing or tightening economic sanctions.