Zinda 30 November 2005

ADM’s Nationalistic Progressive Ideology:
Political Implications

Edward Y. Odisho, Ph.D.
Professor
Northeastern Illinois University

During the last three decades or so our Assyrian Chaldean Suryani People, especially in Iraq, where their population is larger and whose conditions I am more knowledgeable about, entered a different phase of nationalistic and political awareness and maturity. There are several reasons to account for this, foremost of which are the following. First, they secured higher levels of education ranging from high school to doctoral. Second, they gradually began to sense political and social discrimination. Third, with the deterioration of the most salient features of their nationalistic identity – such as their language and culture as an indigenous People of Iraq, they began to develop the feeling that their very identity and existence were in danger of extinction. Fourth, the successive Iraqi governments officially denied their status as a people; instead, they identified them as Christians or Syriac Speakers. In face of this, when the Iraqi government, for obvious political reasons, granted the Assyrians, Chaldeans and Suryanis the so-called ‘language and cultural rights’ in 1972 which lasted only a few years, the younger generations, especially university students and former graduates, feverishly embarked on forming social, educational and cultural clubs and organizations to promote nationalistic and political awareness. Foremost among such organizations was the Assyrian Cultural Club– which was very reminiscent of the Assyrian Youth and Cultural Society of Tehran– where hundreds of high school and university graduates worked together to teach the native language, issue magazines and conduct lectures and theatrical activities. This atmosphere was very conducive for overt and covert nationalistic political activities, both within the clubs and out on the campuses of the universities. Because the Ba’ath government sensed the growth of such nationalistic sentiments, it began to monitor those activities openly and secretly. When the suppression of such nationalistic sentiment intensified, the activists went underground.

With this underground trend, clandestine networking began in the form of cells which soon developed into what is known today as the Assyrian Democratic Movement (ADM). It is my strong conviction that with the emergence of ADM, gradually, albeit steadily, the ingredients of a political nationalistic ideology and an image of a long-term strategy began to emerge.

Nationalistic Ideology?!

Has ADM really developed a nationalistic political ideology? To respond to such a critical question, one has to admit that any political ideology is in a constant state of evolution in response to the newly emerging critical situations over a long stretch of time. To use this as a yardstick, ADM does not have a fully-fledged nationalistic ideology, but it certainly does have a working framework for one. If so, what are the most salient principles of this ideology? ADM’s political literature identifies principles such as the following:

We are the descendants of Sumerians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Chaldeans and Arameans and Beth Nahrain is our historical Homeland. We are, therefore, the indigenous and the most ancient people of Mesopotamia.
We are builders of an ancient civilization which empowered us to lend some of its fruits to other neighboring peoples including Greeks, Persians and Arabs who all borrowed our alphabet the most efficient tool of human literacy.
We established our civilization using Akkadian (Assyrian and Babylonian) language and extended it after the downfall of Assyrian and Babylonia through Aramaic until this very day.
We are the first Christians and our Aramaic language is the native language of Christianity prior to Greek and Latin. We are, therefore, Christians before we became “Nestorians”, Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Catholic and Protestants.
We aspire the Unity of all Aramaic (Syriac) speakers of today including Chaldeans, Assyrians and Suryanis. Our Unity is the corner stone of our survival and success now and in future..
We believe that Nation (Umta) is the highest political institution throughout our history and the Church (‘Eeta) is a major pillar of it
We call for the recognition of our national identity as a People in modern Iraq on historical, civilizational and democratic premises not as a charity bestowed upon us by others.
We live all over Iraq and not just in the Kurdish Region. We appreciate our cordial and friendly relationships with all nationalities including Arabs and Kurds, but we reject being a subordinate or satellite of other nationalities. We have always been reliable friends and allies with those who put their trust in us.
We reject being recognized only as a Christian minority which implies the treatment of our People as Ahlu Al-Thimma (أهل الذمّة).
We are part of the National Mosaic of Iraq and we are proud of our Iraqiness; we, therefore, should enjoy all political, administrative, educational, religious privileges.
We should have a representation in any democratic government in Iraq, a reality that is compatible with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

If the above are some of the most salient principles of ADM’s ideology, then one has to ask what the strategy is, if there is one, to put the ideology into action.

Strategy?!

A careful scrutiny of ADM’s struggle during the last 26 years reveals certain actions, measures and achievements which when glued together they constitute a strategy of implementation. Some such actions, measures and achievements are:

Participating actively in coalitions with almost all loyal national political parties and organizations of the Iraqi People before and after the collapse of Saddam’s regime.
Educating our People through political and nationalistic publications and literature.
Pursuing concrete steps to unify our People, the best proof of which is portrayed in the structure of ADM’s leadership and its rank-and-file. The leadership is diversified enough to include Chaldeans, Assyrians and Suryanis. It is even more diversified at rank-and-file level so as to include members of different tribes, geographic regions and religious denominations.
Seriously attempting to solidify relationships among all Chaldean, Assyrian and Suryani churches.
Holding a Unity Conference in October 2003 in Baghdad to lay the foundation of the Unity of our People.
Sharing governance with Kurds as long as the opportunity was extended to ADM as a partner and ally.
Promoting National Unity for all Iraqis through political actions and media outlets including television, radio and newspapers.
Actively sharing in the burden of running three Iraqi cabinets in the post-Saddam era.
Enriching cooperation and unity with our People in Diaspora.
Solidifying relationships with our People in Iran, Syria, Lebanon etc…
Building up a complete schooling system in the native language to reinforce and revitalize the basic foundations of our national identity.

Academically and objectively judged, the above actions, measures and achievements do complement each other harmoniously to form an implementation strategy for the political and nationalistic ideology of our People.

If the above implies that ADM has succeeded in laying the foundations of a nationalistic ideology and has apparently also succeeded in developing the outlines of an implementation strategy, what are then the criteria according to which ADM’s success may be assessed and measured? The following are some such criteria:

The willingness of a large number of young and middle-aged people to join ADM as active members.
Even a larger number of people from all ages, men and women of different Christian denominations, different geographic regions and different levels of education have extended their support and loyalty to ADM. In fact, a large percentage of our educated people, university degree holders and intellectuals are ADM’s supporters. No political movement or political party among the Aramaic speakers has ever garnered such massive support in 26 years of political struggle.
The inclusion of ADM in all the interim governments of Iraq after the fall of Saddam is an indicator of its active political role at both nationalistic and patriotic levels.
The international recognition of ADM as a political arm in resolving the crisis in Iraq in pre and post-Saddam era. To cite examples of this type of recognition was the United States’ resolution to acknowledge ADM as a legitimate member of the coalition opposed to Hussein’s regime. Even more recently, the Arab League invited a limited number of delegations of Iraqi parties, movements and organizations to attend the Dialogue Conference in Egypt and ADM was among those delegations that received a direct invitation.

How did ADM Win the Trust of our People?

The next crucial question to ask is: How did ADM pass this test of confidence and win the trust of our Assyrian Chaldean Suryani People? I believe this is the easiest question to answer because ADM has produced the most solid and undeniable evidence to prove its loyalty to the aspirations of our People. The evidence has not been in words, as some parties have been doing for long, but rather in actions. Every person, regardless of his level of education, is able to tell that actions speak louder, much louder, than words. ADM has overcome many hurdles and some of the most stringent conditions. ADM has:

Passed the test of underground and clandestine nationalistic progressive struggle.
Vigorously participated at local, national and international levels to bring down the regime of Saddam.
Had many of its members and supporters jailed, tortured and even executed including some of its founding members.
The list of its martyrs increased as it continued its struggle.
Successfully managed to protect and establish security in our villages and towns in the Kurdish region after the fall of Saddam.
Stood steadfast as an autonomous political movement friendly with all other nationalities, but subordinate to none.
Completed many social, health and educational projects foremost of which has been its school system. This school system, which is administered in the native language, is one of the most brilliant achievements of our People during the last two centuries. The majority of our People fail to understand the significance of such a schooling system. The long-term goal of this system is not simply to teach the native language, but rather to consolidate one of the primary pillars of our National Identity– our language.

ADM: A Turning-Point in our Modern Political History

I have no doubt, whatsoever, that the political and nationalistic awakening that ADM brought about as a result of its growth in membership and the support of the masses of our People have transformed our political nationalistic struggle, that was based, until recently, on genuine sentiments of a few conscientious individuals, into a struggle that is more principled and is guided by a political nationalistic progressive ideology and driven by a long-term strategy. It is the latter fact that justifies my claim to the effect that the emergence of ADM is, in itself, the major turning-point in our modern political history. In reality, it amounts to a leap in the quality and depth of our political nationalistic thinking and consciousness.

Consequences of the Emergent Political Ideology

With this radical and far-reaching political transformation, there emerged some positive and negative consequences. Such consequences have been detected among our own People as well as beyond our People including our Kurdish neighbors, specifically the KDP authorities. Let us first handle the consequences of our nationalistic awakening upon our People. The single most impressive positive consequence of the political awakening of our People, en masse, has been the ability to tell the genuine political movements from the fuzzy and phony ones. They even began to question the unquestionable institutions in our community such as the Church. Although the overwhelming majority of our People sincerely realize that the Church is a major pillar of our national identity as a People, they also began to realize that they have the right to question the role of the Church in our political and nationalistic life. They began to raise questions such as the following: Is the Church the leader of our political destiny? Should it interfere in our political decision-making process? Should it confine its decision-making authority to matters pertinent to our religious life only? These are difficult questions because they are deep-seated in our history with all the massacres and turbulences it has undergone. Our Church has been the exclusively dominant authority and decision-maker in most aspects of our life including religious, social and political, since the collapse of our Assyrian and Babylonian political systems and the advent of Christianity.

Objectively judged, throughout its long history, our Church has played a double role of a guardian and divider. As a guardian, it has been the glue that maintained the survival of our People and our Church despite all tragedies. This is why our Church has been and still is and should remain the same binder and unifier that it had been. Unfortunately, the Church has also played the role of the Great Divider of our People. It has turned the single message of Jesus Christ into several messages, several denominations, several patriarchs and several sects – Assyrian, Chaldean, Suryani and Maronite– as a result of repeated schisms of 431, 451 and 1553, among others. As much as our Church of the East is concerned, it seems that the 1553 schism was not damaging enough to our religious and nationalist Unity. It, once again, created yet another schism in 1968 over the calendar of religious events thus yielding The Church of the East (New Calendar) and The Church of the East (Old Calendar). Later, the former section of the Church added the attribute ‘Assyrian’ to the historical name of the Church thus rendering it ‘The Assyrian Apostolic Catholic Church of the East’. It is noteworthy that the attributes ‘Catholic’ and ‘Assyrian’ are contradictory in denotation since the former indicates the universal (i.e., interethnic = multiethnic = encompassing all) nature of the Church, whereas the latter indicates a specific ethnicity– ‘Assyrian’ in this case.

Most recently, November 2005, the Holy Synod (Knushya Sunhadiqaaya) of the Assyrian Church of the East convened in Chicago for several days a major decision of which was the dismissal of Mar Bawai Soro. With all the knowledge that I have accumulated during the 67 years of my life and with all my problem-solving ability as an internationally published researcher, I failed to predict that the Synod would approve such a baseless, imprudent and unwise decision in a case that has no Sunhaadus grounds or justifications. Mar Bawai Soro has committed no sins or transgressions that are punishable according to Sunhaadus as some present members of the current Synod have, where the evidence of sin, in at least one case, is beyond any shadow of doubt because it is on videotape. This said, one should not forget that Mar Bawai Soro does indeed have a few non-Sunhaadus ‘sins’ some of which are:

The right to speak his mind and direct constructive criticism at anyone regardless of Church rank in the interest and integrity of the Church.
The right to communicate his thoughts to the Patriarch in confidence.
The right to modernize the Church and use a variety of Aramaic language that is comprehensible for the overwhelming majority of the parishioners.
The right to call for Unity of the Assyrians, Chaldeans and Suryanis.
The right to call for the resurrection of the Unity of the Church of the East as it had been five centuries ago before the schisms.
The right to be a clergy, a thinker and an intellectual.
The right to be a prelate (Eetanaaya) and a nationalist (Umtanaaya).
The right to speak out about the miserable conditions of our People in Iraq and the failure of the Shepherd to attend to the needs the wretched Flock in the native land.

Indeed the above are a few ‘sins’ that some autocratic and theocratic institutions or states punish their members or citizens for. However, according to the basic democratic rights of a human being, regardless of being clergy or lay as stated in Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations Organization, the violation of the above democratic human rights justifies the dismissal of several members of the same Synod that approved the dismissal of Mar Bawai Soro. The decision to dismiss Mar Bawai Soro was nothing but a mere autocratic solution to a democratic problem. It is a tragic decision that might add one more schism to the other previous schisms the consequences of which no one will bear but those who approved the decision. It is said that a spark can cause a conflagration. It is about time our Church realized that almost all, if not all, of the schisms and rifts within our People have started from the top and spread to the bottom and almost exclusively as a result of schisms and rifts in the highest echelons of our Church. Who split Christianity into Eastern and Western, Orthodox and non-Orthodox, Catholic and non-Catholic and Protestants etc…If someone can find me a schism within our People that was started by the people at the bottom and spread to the top and split our Church I am more than willing to withdraw this article and apologize for its contents.

The dismissal of Mar Bawai Soro should NOT be seen as an isolated religious dispute because our Church does not yet have scholarly theologians to scrutinize and thrash out theological and canonical inconsistencies, contradictions and disputes. His dismissal is the outcome of a clash of personalities, discrepancy in theological knowledge base and disparity in the interpretation of what constitutes a violation of the Sunhaadus. It is equally the outcome of the interpretation of the concept of Eetanayoota and whether the Church should be kept completely isolated from Umtanayoota (nationalism). With the recent awakening in the ideology of Umtanayoota, the days have gone when the Eeta should be separate from Umta. Of course the Church has the right not to interfere in the politics of Umtanayoota and Athranayoota; however, this right should stand when it is preached from the Qanke (Pulpit) as well as when it is whispered off the Qanke. In other words, there should not be political or religious hypocrisy. The recent secret meeting of our Patriarch with Mr. Masood Barzani would have been absolutely compatible with the freedom of assembly if it had been announced to the People and not conducted stealthily from the backdoor in semi-formal regalia (attire). The overwhelming Assyrians Chaldeans Suryanis desire to have friendly and cordial relationships with our Kurdish neighbors. We have struggled together and we want to continue that struggle in the fashion of the martyrs Hurmiz Malick Chekko, Margaret George and Franso Hariri as well as ADM’s martyrs but we reject being satellites or subordinates to any other nationality be that Arab, Kurd or Turkomani. No doubt, they are all our faithful countrymen and we share our Iraqiness with them. Nevertheless, in the modern interpretation of a democratic system, no nationality or ethnic group, regardless of its size, should be a subordinate to another. Any subordination defeats the principles of democracy. In actual fact, any practice of subordinating one nationality by another amounts to dictatorship, a practice reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s regime.

In a recent meeting with Mr. Jalal Talabani, the President of the Republic of Iraq, he stressed the fact that Kurds adore secular governments and they hold high the principle of the separation between the State and Religion. This is a magnificent statement and it should be adhered to by all and at all levels of governmental practices throughout a democratic Iraq. Therefore, the Kurdish political leaders, especially of KDP, should meet and communicate with our political leaders and their clergy should meet and communicate with our clergy. In a lighter, albeit very friendly way, our Qashas (priests) should meet with their Mullas or Imaams. As for the meeting of the Kurdish politicians with ours, it might be a somewhat difficult formula for KDP to agree upon. If our Kurdish neighbors sincerely want to identify our politicians, they can readily do that because they have recently succeeded in developing excellent information and intelligence systems. I strongly believe that KDP knows quite well that ADM is the most popular political movement among the Assyrians Chaldeans and Suryanis, especially among the younger and middle-aged generations. The Movement has deservedly earned its own political weight inside and outside Iraq. This is a political nationalistic and patriotic Movement that has won the hearts of tens of thousands of Aramaic-speakers and has some sincere and well known leaders.

I am not hinting nor am I suggesting that ADM is the sole political power among our People with whom KDP should communicate, but I am indeed saying that in order to discover the weights of political groups, KDP should genuinely apply its political scales to discover those weights. I am definitely not trying to practice political pontification because I know that KDP knows the weights of different political groups among our People. I am simply speaking as a progressive ChaldoAssyrian nationalist who happens to be an academician with intimate relationships with scores of Kurdish scholars and intellectuals. I am also speaking as an educator who is equally proud to have been decades ago responsible for educating thousands of Kurdish students in Suleimaniyah who are now distinguished political leaders. I very earnestly advise KDP to use its political scales sincerely and wisely. KDP should never commit the political blunder of applying the doctrine of ‘divide and rule’, especially among Chaldeans Assyrians Suryanis. We are one People and we have been allies with Kurds when the struggle was much harsher. ADM has always been a sincere ally when a trustful relationship was hammered out. ADM has legs with which it can walk, hands with which it can function and brains with which it can design. It is a strategic blunder to tie the legs of a sincere ally for political convenience. I end my words to my Kurdish friends with a simple and straightforward statement. Let your Mullas meet with our Qashas, let your politicians meet with our politicians. This is the only route for building sincere, trustful and democratic relationships. Our messages to each other as Peoples should be in the open. Conversely, conducting behind the screen bargains is a dangerous policy that might backfire on both sides.

As for our own Church leaders, they should understand that the Church is part of Umta and it belongs to the People and the clergy are no more than the medium to communicate the Word of God and the grace of Jesus Christ’s salvation. If a clergy desires to serve his Church and his People faithfully no one should deprive him that privilege. Mar Bawai Soro wanted to enjoy that privilege and the Knushya Sunhadiqaaya deprived him that right, a deprivation that is unjustifiable in terms of Sunhaadus.

In conclusion, the decision to dismiss Mar Bawai is wrong and to rescind an unjust and erroneous decision is a virtue. Some of the most serious repercussions of obstinate insistence on imposing an erroneous decision is the likelihood of yet another schism. It is truly an unforgivable guilt to inflict yet another schism upon our People. Our People need more Unity than Disunity and all of our churches should together stand firmly by our One Umta.

Prof. Edward Odisho is an expert in the Aramaic language and has published scores of research papers and articles in various international publications and has authored five books, the most recent being Techniques of Teaching Pronunciation in ESL, Bilingual and Foreign Language Classes (2003) and A Linguistic Approach to the Application and Teaching of the English Alphabet, Edwin Mellen Press (2004). For an interesting interview by the National Public Radio with Dr. Odisho in June 1998 click here. To read Prof. Odisho's recent speech in San Jose click here, and to read his most recent article for Zinda click here.