Zinda 21 January 2006

Political and Nationalist Lessons in the
Aftermath of Iraqi Elections

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

Now that the December 15, 2005 Iraqi elections are over, what political and nationalist lessons our Assyrian Chaldean Suryani People has to learn in the aftermath? I presume foremost of all those lessons is the bitter fact that we set a pathetic example of political, religious and national disunity which is, regrettably, a lesson that should never be repeated because it only evidences our political and nationalist immaturity and naiveté. Prior to dealing with the lessons, it is worthwhile trying to identify the causes of this disunity which stood in the way of generating the so-called ‘Unified Dream Slate’ (to be abbreviated hereafter as UDS). This, in itself, is the most compound complex question to answer; nevertheless, an attempt will be made at answering it as objectively as possible. Below are some of the most relevant reasons.

First and foremost, is the absence of clear conceptualization of our historical identity as the indigenous People of Mesopotamia (Iraq).
Failure to distinguish between the Deep Structure (primary or foundational) and the Surface Structure (secondary or supplementary) of our nationalist identity.
Deficiency in our general political awareness and specific nationalist awareness.
Disparity and discrepancy among our political parties and organizations.
Misconceptions in the assessment of political weight, caliber and power.
Overflow of religious discord into the political arena.

Let’s consider each of the above reasons and briefly comment on them.

1) Failure to Conceptualize our Uniform Identity as the Indigenous People of Mesopotamia.

We still, unabashedly, argue among ourselves very sentimentally, subjectively, unscholarly and unscientifically as to whether we relate to Sumerians, Assyrians, Babylonians or Arameans. No scholar in the world can definitely and categorically connect our lineage exclusively to one single People of the many peoples of Mesopotamia. My own research which began in 1985 has convinced me that the most objective argument with regard to our connection to the ancient Peoples of Iraq is that the connection should be based on historical, ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic premises rather than on genealogical and blood premises; moreover, we have to approach the connection holistically rather than separately. In other words, we should cease linking the Assyrians of today exclusively with the ancient Assyrian genealogy, or tracing the Chaldeans of today exclusively back to the ancient Babylonian genealogy and ascribing the Suryanis of today exclusively to the ancient Aramean states. After all, the Assyrian and the Babylonian empires and the Aramean states were some of the most ethnically diversified entities. Specifically, both Assyria and Babylonia were massively ethnically diversified because of their strategic geographic location, persistent wars and displacement and relocation policies pursued in dealing with their enemies. I am extremely delighted that during the last decade Professor Simo Parpola has demonstrated similar views with regard to the connection of today’s Assyrian-Aramaic speakers with those of yesterday. If Chaldeans Assyrians Suryanis seek a pragmatic unity rather than a sentimental or even emotional one, they better claim their identity as Beth Nahrainians (Mesopotamians) first and Assyrian, Chaldean or Aramaean second. The Beth Nahrainian identity is a key to Unity. This analogy reminds me of the Holy Trinity which is not a powerful symbol of Christianity only because it is composed of three (God, Son, Holy Spirit), but rather because of the Unity of the three in one Faith.

2) Deep versus Surface Structures of our Unity.

Unfortunately, we seem to be lost in the argument of names, religious denominations, churches, regionalisms and village and tribal identifications which are no more than surface indexes (secondary) of our identity. Instead, we should be highlighting the deep pillars (primary) of our identity which include: a) Our history as the indigenous People of Mesopotamia; b) Our Christian Faith rather than our after-the-schisms denominations (Catholic, Eastern, Orthodox, Protestant); c) Our Aramaic language rather than our dialects; d) Our historical role as civilization providers for other peoples of the Middle East. With this pathetic loss of our priorities and persistent futile arguments, we seem to be losing our focus and placing our cart before our horses. Do we have to wait 612 + 2006 = 2618 more years to understand that when the cart is before the horses we are left with only two options for ‘progress’? At best, it is zero progress and at worst it is backward regression.

3) Deficiency in our General Political Awareness and Specific Nationalist Awareness.

In assessing our modern political record, especially in the aftermath of the World War I and the ensuing international treaties, we seem to have failed miserably primarily because of the lack of a comprehensive knowledge base in political communication and maneuvering which were further impoverished and disabled by our disunity in ranks and discord in political stands. No doubt, since then we have had individuals from our People (Chaldean, Assyrian, Suryani) who assumed roles of leadership in non-native political movements and parties such as the Communist Party, Ba’th Party and other Arab nationalist parties; in fact, some of them acted as founders, thinkers or ideologues of those parties. The above role of some of our People does not deny the fact that we also have had individual thinkers and writers within our ranks who espoused the notion of Suryani Assyrian Chaldean nationalism; however, that never evolved into an indigenous Pan-Mesopotamian nationalist ideology with a comprehensive implementation strategy. The Assyrian Democratic Movement (ADM) has recently espoused such an ideology and it has been striving during the last three decades to implement it in real-life political situations that are, at times, too difficult to surmount with the persistent disunity. This should never imply that ADM’s nationalist ideology is completely mature and immaculate; I will not be revealing secrets if I say that ADM is yet to have an established theorist or philosophical thinker within its ranks; it does not even have political literature to portray the ideology, let alone to enrich it and refine it Conversely, ADM’s ideology is still in an evolutionary stage and will only be refined through rough and tough struggle in the political arena, especially in Iraq. There are three major elements that will contribute to the refinement of a progressive nationalist ideology. First, is the continuous day-to-day political struggle and interaction with other local, regional and international political powers. Second, is the systematic political education and awareness campaign of the leadership, rank-and-file activists and the masses of our People through political literature, political dialogues and actual political interactions. Third, is the continuous feedback and interaction between the masses of our People and its political leadership.

4) Disparity and Discrepancy among our Political Organizations.

Recently there emerged so many Assyrian, Chaldean and Suryani organizations, especially after the downfall of Saddam’s regime that the political and nationalist disparity and discrepancy have outgrown and metastasized beyond any reasonable and pragmatically manageable limit. Presently, there are more speakers than listeners in our political arena and more voices than ears to hear them. It is truly shameful to see that when a group of individuals disagree with the majority within a political entity, they immediately form a splinter group and form yet another party. The agendas, goals and even names of our political parties are too diversified to be reconcilable within unity or coalition. Even the names of organizations or their election slates were and still are so similar that even the smartest among us had difficulty telling one for the other. Imagine, because names and words such ‘Chaldean’, ‘Assyrian’, ‘National’, ‘Rafidain’, ‘Democratic’, ‘Beth Nahrain’, ‘Movement’, ‘Party’ etc…ring a bell, almost all organizations or slates had one of those words in their names though in a different order. In light of this inflated, redundant and unwanted ‘malignant’ growth in political entities, large and small, legitimate and phony, it is practically impossible to accommodate every Partner-to-Be (PTB) within the so-called Unified Dream Slate (UDS). Evidently and very realistically, not all PTBs would have been or should have been accommodable within a UDS. In such political and nationalist situations, there is always a struggle between unanimity and strategy. Unanimity implies the unanimous consent of all PTBs and strategy implies a unified vision for current and future political action in matters of future survival. The majority of our people who, on the one hand, are very sincere in their nationalist sentiment, while, on the other hand, are politically unsophisticated and unsavvy, dream of unanimity. Regrettably, unanimity is impossible to achieve when the PTBs are too many and too diverse to be reconcilable. If one pressures the PTBs to reconcile, the reconciliation will almost always be achieved at the expense of strategy. The approval and adoption of a comprehensive strategy for future political action with the loss of some PTBs is much better than a contrived (artificial) unanimity without a nationalist strategy. Consequently, the next question should be:
What about the rest of the organizations which were, and are, viable and legitimate?

5) Misconceptions in the Assessment of Political Weight, Caliber and Power.

There certainly should be a given number, regardless of how small, of political organizations of our People that share the same or similar nationalistic goals. What then are the causes of their failure to produce the UDS? Based on the observations of the political activities, behaviors, attitudes and declarations, the stumbling block in the way of unity seems to be the misconceptions or miscalculations on the part of these PTBs in the assessment of their political weight, caliber and power. These misconceptions portray themselves in different forms some of which are stated below:

Sayfo: the Assyrian Genocide in International Law by Ninos Warda, is a profound book that provides a coherent insight into the experience of the Assyrian people during the atrocious events of WWI in Ottoman Turkey. The author’s expert and meticulous understanding of the legal and historical dynamics of the Assyrian Genocide of 1915 makes this book a primary source of reference for students and scholars interested in the applicability of international legal instruments such as the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948.

Shamiran Mako
Council for Assyrian Research and Development

CLICK POSTER TO ORDER YOUR COPY

a) Some of the PTBs are foolishly reluctant to admit to their very limited or even infinitesimal actual political weight both in the size and number of their rank-and-file as well as their political, social and educational achievements. Similarly, there are others which unjustifiably exaggerate their weight. The first group of PTBs demands that they be treated on equal basis with a PTB that has scores of times and even hundreds of times more numbers and achievements. Realistically, logically and logistically this is unacceptable in terms of the so-called realpolitik approach to solving political problems. As a consequence of the above misconception, those PTBs with negligible weight because of a membership of no more than ten or hundred individuals, most of whom are relatives, beneficiaries of some sort or tribe-members, with hardly any recognizable base in Iraq have no legitimate logistic right to demand to be granted political weight and status on a par with organization(s) whose membership is in thousands and whose support base in Iraq and outside it is in tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands. To insist on such Don Quixotic demand proves either their political foolishness or nationalist insincerity. In one negotiation session among PTBs, one PTB proposed to the rest that they identify the names of two or three candidates from each PTB and place them in a lotto bag and draw the names from the bag, the first name will be listed first and highest on the slate. This in terms of realpolitik is no more than a Don Quixotic maneuver.

b) Obviously, political weight does not only hinge on sheer numbers, but also on the strength and orderliness of the political machine at both leadership and rank-and-file levels as well as on the extent of achievements and sacrifices. One PTB repeatedly insisted on claiming that its organization represents 70% to 80% of our People, consequently, it should be granted more candidates and be placed higher on the slate. However, in the elections, this particular PTB jointly with other PTBs received votes that were considerably lower than the claim. This was attributed to the fact that the majority of those potential voters cast their votes to slates from outside our People’s slates, either Arab or Kurdish. It was a really embarrassing defeat though a very sad one.

c) It was already revealed above that misconceived or inflated numbers are not the only yardstick for assessing political weight and stature because political awareness, both patriotic (اترايا = وطني) and nationalist (اومتنايا = قومي) are equally important –if not more important– in determining the extent of enthusiasm to involve in political action. It is not important how nationalistically fanatic you are and how much you stress your nationalist identity as Ashuraya, Chaldaya, Suryaya or ChaldoAshuraya if in politically critical situations you demonstrate a very superficial nationalist awareness or you do not comprehend the political and nationalist implications of voting for or enlisting with slates of parties or organizations that may or may not recognize your patriotic aspirations and totally marginalize or even deny your nationalist identity.

d) Equally important is the presence of hierarchical political structure within a party or movement that possesses all the necessary logistics, strategies and techniques to mobilize its supporters and attract them to the ballot boxes. Political parties or organizations that have no hierarchical or pyramidal organizational structure and have no broad rank-and-file orderliness are doomed to failure and even bankruptcy. This is precisely what happened to some slates, especially the one which was, more or less, tribal-based.

e) Finally, of paramount significance is the existence of a demonstrated record of political, educational and social achievements supported with sacrifices in the form of community servers, political prisoners, guerrilla fighters and martyrs who altogether constitute authentic evidence to different forms of political struggle. It is only achievements and sacrifices such as those that grant credibility, validity and reliability to a political movement or party. No group can claim political party status within a year or so by selecting a sentiment-arousing name and recruiting all interested neighbors, cousins, village-brethren or tribal-acquaintances and renting a single-room office as party headquarters.

6) Overflow of religious discord into the political arena.

As if the political squabble among our parties and organizations was not enough to breed discord and dissention within our ranks, our religious leaders poured more fuel on fire. They pushed their dissensions, overtly and covertly, into the political circle thus further inflaming the political discord and nationalist disunity. In other words, the internal denominational fights– which are against the message of God and Jesus– among our Patriarchullahs, were, unfortunately, transplanted within the ranks of our People. If Jesus were to return today his first words would be to our Patriachullahs and would read: “I was One and had One Church, how did you dare to become Five, Six or Seven with hundreds of scores of churches?” It is about time our Patriachullahs understood the difference between God’s work and Caesar work. When they understand this difference they will receive more reverence.

Lessons to be Learned

• Foremost of all, and with the advent of the 21st century, we should learn that there is a desperate need for more solid general knowledge base, followed by general political educational base and crowned with specific political education pertinent to our progressive nationalist awareness. We need to groom high level politicians who have high skills of communication and negotiation. We need thinkers who can deepen and enhance our nationalist progressive ideology and design long-term strategies for implementation. We need to establish think-tanks institutions to guide our political literacy campaign and to replace our crowded chat cafés, pal-talk rooms and idle clubs.

• We should learn that we are not important because today we identify ourselves as Chaldeans, Assyrians and Suryanis, but rather because we are the descendants of those giants who built up a civilization and transformed Mesopotamia into the cradle of that civilization. Consequently the Mesopotamian (Beth Nahrain) umbrella is spacious enough and protective enough to accommodate us all. Let’s, therefore, be and behave as Beth-Nahrainnians first and then as Assyrians, Chaldeans and Suryanis. The Beth Nahrainian umbrella will bring us Unity. It is in reverence of our forefathers– the builders of civilization– that we should unite.

• If we sincerely want to unite, we should find the right path to Unity which requires that we value our Beth Nahrainian identity more than our Assyrian, Chaldean or Suryani one. We should value our Jesus more than our Patriarchs because my Patriarch is mine alone and your Patriarch is yours alone, but Jesus is for all of us. Jesus was our Unifier, but, sadly, some of our Patriarchs have been our Dividers. Remember the schisms of 431, 451, 1553, 1968 and the one Not-to-be-God-willing of 2005, among others. All these schisms are anti-Christ and anti-Christianity and are created by none other than some of our so-called religious shepherds. It is about time our religious shepherds learned how to preach along the lines of People’s Unity and Church harmony.

• In our political dialogue, we should understand that arguments over our Land are more important than arguments over our Name. A People without a Land to dwell on is like a flock of sheep without a pasture.

• When we claim nationalism (Umtanayoota), we should remember that the claim is not realized by words but rather by deeds and not by promises and claims, but rather by achievements, sacrifices and even martyrdom. If you persist on claiming yourself as Athuraya, Ashuraya, Chaldaya or Suryahana, you have to remember that those are not just names, they are rather your passport to your Beth Nahrainian identity and culture. If you claim to nationalism (Untanayoota), you should not claim your identity as an Arab or Kurd and your native language as Arabic or Kurdish because you are indigenous Beth Nahrainian and your native language is Aramaic not Arabic, Kurdish or Farsi. Also remember, if you do not know you native language or cannot speak it, you should learn it because it is part and parcel of you nationalist identity. When you lost your language you begin to lose part of your national identity. Those schools that ADM has established are not just teaching the native language, they are, more importantly, building and maintaining you native identity.

• If any Assyrian Chaldean Suryani party or organization that is contemplating Unity, it should know its political weight and behave accordingly. You cannot pretend what you are not and cannot be, if you insist on pretending then you are no more than Don Quixote who was not strong, but pretended strength and was not a knight, but pretended knighthood.

I beg you my People to wake up and unify. Do we need more than 612 + 2006 years of sleep?

Notes

I am using this political term in a specific sense to denote political realism meaning that in seeking solutions to political problems each partner should be realistic in making demands and imposing conditions that are congruent with its political weight, caliber and power.
I had to coin this term after the Islamic (Ayatullah آيه الله)