Blaming the Ba’athists

The Ba’athist witch-hunt continues unabated in Iraqi politics. Whenever Iraqi politicians and their lackeys want to discredit someone, they brand them Ba’athists. Whenever the Iraqi government wants to bar someone from office, it calls them Ba’athists. Whenever Iraqi power players want to distract people from their own corruption, ineptitude and mismanagement, they blame the Ba’athists. It is an old, tired rhetoric used by insecure politicians (unsurprisingly so, considering their innumerable failings) and their apologists.

The Ba’athists are blamed for all the ills of Iraq because, quite simply, they are an easy scapegoat. After all, it was under Ba’athist leadership that Iraq suffered from international sanctions, isolation and continuous foreign meddling. Their failings range from the stifling of political opposition, disastrous and continuous intervention in the Iraqi military that extended the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War to last almost a decade, and the strategically nonsensical decision to invade Kuwait in 1990. However, to paint their rule, lasting from 1968 to 2003, as one of continuous barbarity is unfair and merely contributing to propaganda against Iraq by its enemies.

Under the Ba’athists, illiteracy was almost entirely eliminated, educational standards were raised to such levels that Iraqi experts and academics were highly sought after the world over, and the Iraqi economy and its industries flourished. Moreover, Saddam’s Iraq was arguably the staunchest defender of the Palestinian cause, providing them with financial, political and even military support. Iraq’s modern politicians can hardly be described as having done anything of use for the Iraqi people (hence the current protests), let alone the Palestinians whom they purged from Iraq with their militias post-2003. By refusing to square away the past and press on constructively with the future, Iraq’s political class is creating nostalgia for the Ba’athists.

Ba’athists are also constantly referred to as if they are one homogeneous entity, all with a unified structure and strategy, which is far from the truth. Following the illegal Western invasion in 2003, and the toppling of Saddam Hussein, the Ba’athists splintered into various subgroups, including Jaysh Rijal Al-Tariqa Al-Naqshabandiya (JRTN) led by the now allegedly deceased Izzat Al-Douri (somehow, a dead man is still releasing recorded statements), one of Saddam’s top lieutenants.

Many Ba’athists fled to neighbouring Arab countries and are not organised in any meaningful way, whilst others are active even in London and regularly appear on Arab media, such as Mazin Al-Tamimi. It is perhaps worth noting that he is, ironically, Shia – so much for Ba’athist sectarianism, when one of their leaders is not Sunni, but one of the “oppressed” Shia. Crucially, Iraqi politicians, keen on distracting the Iraqi people and the world from their corruption and failures, were undoubtedly overjoyed when they learned that a further group of former Iraqi Ba’athists were the key strategists behind Daesh. Branding someone a Ba’athist therefore clearly has no real meaning when the Ba’athists themselves are not a uniform group.

However, the facts rarely matter to those who try to detract from the utter failure of the current political process. Rather than point out the glaring fact that Sunni Arab-led protests were brutally crushed by the Iraqi government, whilst Shia Arab-led protests led to Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi taking steps to reduce corruption, leading to yet more Sunni feelings of double standards, commentators have instead chosen to focus on detractors of the political process. In effect, whenever someone criticises any of the parties, Sunni or Shia, that are involved in the government, they are branded as Ba’athists. For instance, if one was to level criticism against the Iraqi Islamic Party, a government-aligned Sunni party that has lost the support of many of its core Sunni constituents, they would be, unconstructively, accused of being Ba’athists or “bad eggs” of the Sunni community.

Irrespective of the Ba’athists numerous failures and their current political exile, is it truly helpful for those with political agendas to continue to attack them or anyone critical of groups within the political process? Surely efforts to further stigmatise Ba’athists (who need no help in this department), or to slander others as being Ba’athists or Ba’athist sympathisers, are wasted and would be better directed towards fixing Iraq’s sorry state of affairs? Rather than further alienating those who have no faith in the political process, it stands to reason that it would be more productive to try to convince these people that perhaps the current system is a viable solution to the problems afflicting Iraq today.

As it stands, the De-Ba’athification Law introduced by the American occupation is now being perpetuated by those with a stake in the current system of bribes, embezzlement, the scandalous mismanagement of Iraq’s resources and the game of jockeying for positions of high office. If someone is inconveniencing one of Iraq’s political elite, or running for an office that they want either for themselves or an ally, they merely need to declare their rivals Ba’athists to discredit them and force them out of Iraqi political life all in one go. Just like the controversial Counterterrorism Law, long misused by the sectarian Iraqi regime to arrest, torture and execute Sunnis by the thousands, the De-Ba’athification Law is now not only systematised, but socialised. It is not just a legal process, but now a social process, and used to slur and slander those whom you may disagree with.

Is this a healthy future for Iraq which is supposedly now reaching for greater inclusiveness, openness and non-sectarian politics? Al-Abadi’s reforms, passed by parliament today, seem promising at face value, however, how can they be taken seriously when such socialised laws, like the De-Ba’athification and Counterterrorism laws mentioned above, are so wantonly misused? It is no longer just a case of political elites abusing the law to serve their agendas, but this sickness has filtered down into society, encouraging brother and neighbour to denounce their kith and kin as a Ba’athist following any dispute.

This is not the kind of Iraq that Iraqis need or even want, and those who claim to want the best for Iraq had better stop their mudslinging and start taking a long, hard look at themselves.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.