Africa, Headlines, Human Rights, Middle East & North Africa

MIDEAST: Arabs Court U.S. via Baghdad

Adam Morrow and Khaled Moussa Al-Omrani

CAIRO, Jun 26 2009 (IPS) - Egypt finally appointed an ambassador to Iraq earlier this month after four years without diplomatic representation in Baghdad. While the last year has seen other Arab capitals do likewise, some critics question the wisdom of the move in light of Iraq’s still volatile security situation.

“Sending an ambassador now is a strategic mistake,” Ahmed Thabet, political science professor at Cairo University told IPS. “Despite recent relative improvements, the security situation is still far from stable.”

On Jun. 16, President Hosni Mubarak appointed Sherif Shahin ambassador to Iraq. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossam Zeki described the move as “an important step forward in the resumption of the strong and vital relationship between Egypt and Iraq.”

In the weeks ahead, Zeki added, Egypt would begin “dispatching diplomats, administrators and technicians to Iraq in advance of opening its new embassy in Baghdad.”

Speaking on Egyptian television, Shahin listed his top priorities as “promoting relations and cooperation between the two countries in a variety of fields…and looking after the interests of Egyptian expatriates resident in Iraq.”

The decision was well received in Baghdad. “We welcome this step, which confirms the deep and fraternal relationship between Iraq and Egypt,” read an official Iraqi government statement. “An Iraqi ambassador to Egypt will be sent to Cairo as soon as possible.”

Ever since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, the U.S. has urged Sunni Arab states – especially regional leaders such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia – to normalise diplomatic relations with the government in Baghdad. Until recently, Arab governments had publicly conditioned the move on the withdrawal of foreign military forces from Iraq and a system of power-sharing more favourable to the country’s Sunni Muslim population.

Arab countries expressed distrust of the Shia-led government in Baghdad, seen to be on close terms with Shia-Persian Iran. Arab foreign ministries have also expressed concern over the safety of their diplomats.

In July 2005, Ihab Al-Sherif, head of the Egyptian diplomatic mission in Iraq, was kidnapped and presumed killed. Egyptian officials suggested that Al- Sherif had been murdered by Iranian agents, while the western media continues to blame ‘Al-Qaeda’ for his disappearance. No credible evidence for either allegation has ever been produced.

But over the course of the last year, Arab countries, citing improved security, began dispatching envoys to Baghdad. In the latter half of 2008, Bahrain, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates all appointed ambassadors. Kuwait followed suit, sending its first ambassador since the 1990 Iraqi invasion of that country.

In October Syria – frequently accused of allowing anti-occupation “insurgents” into Iraq from its territory – sent its first ambassador to Baghdad in decades. Diplomatic relations between Syria and Iraq, long ruled by rival factions of the pan-Arab Baath Party, had been frozen for the most part since former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein assumed power in 1979.

Saudi Arabia, which formally re-established diplomatic relations with Iraq in 2004, has continued to delay opening an embassy in Baghdad, but has expressed an intention to do so soon.

But some Egyptian critics say the trend has more to do with U.S. strategy objectives than with improved security.

“The normalisation of Arab diplomatic relations with Iraq is directly attributable to pressure from Washington,” said Thabet. “Iraqis, meanwhile, see it as a means of legitimising the U.S. occupation and extending support to the unpopular, U.S.-backed Baghdad government.

“Egyptian policy on Iraq – as on Palestine and Lebanon – reflects the wishes of the U.S. rather than any kind of collective Arab position,” he added.

Thabet was no less cynical about the U.S.-Iraq security pact signed last December providing for complete departure of U.S. military forces from Iraq as of Jan. 1, 2012.

“The agreement reflected the balance of power and is therefore entirely in the interest of the U.S., which will probably maintain strategic ‘command centres’ in Iraq even in the event of a troop withdrawal,” he said. “It provides formal cover for the continuation of the U.S. occupation, and leaves all decision- making in American hands.”

According to Thabet, the desire to please the U.S. – by way of Baghdad – is hardly exclusive to the ‘moderate’, that is, the U.S.-allied Arab camp. “Even Syria, a member of the so-called ‘rejectionist’ camp, is using its relationship with Iraq as a means of currying U.S. favour.”

Gamal Fahmi, political analyst and managing editor of pan-Arab opposition weekly Al-Arabi Al-Nassiri, agreed that Arab nations are simply exploiting their relations with Iraq “in order to score points with Washington.”

“Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia don’t enjoy independent foreign policies, regardless of the political camp they belong to,” he said. “It’s worth noting that, as soon as the new U.S. administration moved to improve ties with Syria, Saudi Arabia’s and Egypt’s relations with Damascus also suddenly improved.”

Fahmi said Arab countries, especially Egypt, should have a diplomatic presence in Iraq – but not on U.S. terms. “Our presence there should aim to support Iraqi unity and help Iraqis free themselves from foreign occupation and rebuild their country.”

Critics also dismiss the notion that a Sunni-Arab diplomatic presence is needed in Iraq in order to offset the influence of next-door Iran, which boasts a large and fully operational embassy in Baghdad.

“In line with U.S. policy, the Egyptian regime is trying hard to cast Iran – not Israel – as the main threat to the Arab world,” said Thabet. “This way, by normalising relations with Baghdad, Arab regimes can claim they’re ‘contesting Persian influence’ when they’re really only there to please Washington.”

Thabet calls it a “strategic mistake” to send an ambassador in the absence of goodwill on the part of the Iraqi people.

“Before dispatching an ambassador, Egypt should work on improving its bad image in Iraq and exploit Egypt’s talents and abilities in training, education and development to help the Iraqi people live like they did before the war destroyed their country,” he said.

“No one knows who abducted or killed Al-Sherif,” Thabet added. “But the reason for his disappearance is well-known: the Egyptian government’s tacit support for U.S. intervention in, and continued occupation of Iraq.”