A Historic Document!

By: Mohammad Aburumman

تم نشره في Sat 9 July / Jul 2016. 11:00 PM
  • Mohammad Aburumman

There is an Arab political and media current that is underestimating the importance of the reports of the Sir John Chilcot Committee, the Chilcot Inquiry, also referred to as the Iraq Inquiry into the joint British-American decision to wage the war on Iraq in 2003, which overthrew former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his political regime.

In their accord, this underestimation is bound to there being no practical outcomes of the Committee’s reports that has been openly critical of the British decision making process, and the absence of the required vision to arrive well at the post-war phase. Despite the critique, the report did not infer trialling officials or holding them responsible. It did not even propose Britain pays remunerations to the Iraqi people on this terribly off decision, in light of international law.

Obviously, in this context, there will be no direct practical percussions of the report. But the importance of the report and its dangers go beyond this to providing a realistic, true story, with a backed historic timeline, supported with a tremendous amount of documents, on discussions and debates before, during, and after the war. It uncovers precise, sensitive detail in the recent history of the region, as well as the real reasons behind the war.

This is not exclusively instrumental to British politics; even though it is primarily directed at the Brits in the first place, aimed to evaluate foreign policy and learn, it did however place some 2.5 million words out there for the world to see. More so, the report, as British papers put it, requires a considerable amount of time to digest, analyse, and conclude; it is lengthy and saturated with facts, documents, and information published for the first time.

It is known that the Iraq Invasion was the turning point for the whole region, its history, and that the invasion did not —as was claimed by Tony Blair and George W Bush— lead to a better world without Saddam, nor to a legal democratic government, or a free state nurturing pluralism and growth; instead, it lead to Iran taking over the region.

This, nonetheless, does not mean that the alternative to political oppression and tyranny in the Arab region is chaos and internal warfare, and that Saddam Hussein provided the only possible module for a unifying Iraqi regime. It does, however, mean that the Anglo-American policy, which was neither thoroughly considered nor transparent, as well as based on faulty intelligence, driven by hidden agendas behind the occupation of Iraq, compounded, led to the current catastrophe there; not the desire to establish a democratic pluralist system in Iraq!

It was neither Bush nor Blair’s intention to establish a real democracy in Iraq. More so, foreign occupation is definitely, necessarily, not the ideal way to establish that. A myopic kind of fantasy dominated the perception of post-occupation Iraq; a bet on the reconstruction of the power balance inside Iraq, which led to Shiites outweighing Sunnis in confrontation, which reinforced the Sectarian issue and prefaced the birth of the Sunni predicament later on!

In the end, the report is important for us, Arabs; that we may read through documented history, and learn of what has happened and is happening. That we may learn the reality behind our official and political positions and situations, so long as our documents and facts remain withheld, perhaps, by our own, and made available by others!

Comment