A Dim Light from Iraq

Despite the darkness that fills the skies of the region and the world, a faint light occasionally appears in the distance, bringing us closer to hope than to despair.

One such glimmer came recently from Iraq when the Sadrist Movement, led by Muqtada al-Sadr, announced that it was handing over its military wing, the Peace Brigades (Saraya al-Salam), to the government. The announcement was made on the morning of June 5 and quickly emerged as the most significant news of the day—and arguably of the days that followed.

Why wouldn’t it be? The movement declared that all fighters belonging to the Peace Brigades would, from the moment of the announcement, come under the command of Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi.

That was not all. There were additional details that carried symbolic significance. Among them was the lowering of the movement’s flag from its headquarters in Samarra as part of the handover process.

Accompanying the news was a photograph showing a number of Peace Brigade fighters. They were carrying their weapons, smiling for the camera, and showing no visible signs of resentment or anger. This suggested, at least in part, that they were satisfied with what had taken place, accepted it, and endorsed the decision reached by Muqtada al-Sadr.

My own impression is that their apparent comfort with the decision stemmed primarily from a sense that they had become part of a larger Iraqi military institution rather than remaining fighters serving a political movement, even one as influential as the Sadrist Movement.

Which is better for any Iraqi fighter: to belong to an armed faction that sometimes turns its weapons against the state and sometimes does not, or to serve as a soldier in a national army that fights for the security of the entire country rather than for the interests of a particular group?

Any patriotic Iraqi would surely lean toward the second option if left to his natural instincts. A person is born Iraqi before belonging to any faction. He knows no allegiance except to his homeland. If he later joins one movement or another, that affiliation should never supersede his primary loyalty, because true allegiance does not place a group above the nation or a faction above the state.

If the statement regarding the transfer of the Peace Brigades means that their fighters now answer to the prime minister, it remains unclear whether this implies their complete integration into the Iraqi national army or whether they will continue to exist as separate brigades while merely reporting to the prime minister and the armed forces.

The matter is not entirely clear. Naturally, one hopes for full integration. Yet even if such integration is postponed, the more important development is that these fighters now take orders from the head of government rather than from the leader of a political movement. That alone represents an important step deserving recognition and further development.

More importantly, however, this process should not stop with the Sadrist Movement. Iraq is home to numerous other political currents and armed factions, all of which should follow the same path. The country must ultimately reach a point where the state faces no competitor in possessing and commanding armed force.

Iraq deserves sacrifices from all factions and political movements, regardless of their names or orientations. The initiative launched by Muqtada al-Sadr should be viewed as a first step rather than a final destination. The new prime minister is only beginning his tenure, and his success will depend largely on whether other movements and factions embrace the same principle that guided the Sadrist Movement.

The decision, one assumes, was not taken for the sake of Al-Zaidi as prime minister, but for the sake of Iraq as a nation.

Anyone in Iraq who wishes to understand the consequences of allowing armed groups to exist outside the framework of the national army need only look at Sudan.

The war being waged by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) against Sudan entered its fourth year in mid-April. There is hardly a Sudanese household that has not suffered because of the existence of these forces. The devastation visible in images emerging from Sudan today illustrates the extent of that suffering.

Political movements and armed factions in Iraq can draw valuable lessons from Sudan’s tragic experience. They can choose to place the interests of their country above their own organizational interests. If they do, they may help build a cohesive nation that shelters all its citizens rather than pursuing factional gains in a country whose foundations are steadily eroding.

This may sound more idealistic than practical. Yet many practical ideas begin as ideals.

Iraq, which is still struggling to complete the formation of its government and consolidate its institutions, needs its people to support it rather than disappoint it. And one hopes that Al-Sadr’s initiative will not prove to be like the proverbial rooster’s egg—something that happens only once and is never repeated.