Many judges who served under late dictator Saddam Hussein’s Baathist rule understood the law and were legitimate legal intellectuals; however, they were not suicidal. Saddam stood above the law and any effort to assert judicial independence would be a death sentence not for the politician committing crimes, but for the judge who upheld the constitution.
While diplomats focus on the military aspect of militias, they neglect two other pillars that are just as important: the economic foundation of the Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, and the judicial protection corrupt Iraqi warlords have long enjoyed, both in Iraqi Kurdistan and Iraq proper.
At a minimum, the next prime minister and Iraqi judges should end Ali Nizar’s corrupt reign.
Unraveling the economic basis of militia power inside Iraq must begin with Ali Nizar Fayeq al-Shatari, director-general of the State Oil Marketing Organization (SOMO) of Iraq. Iraq is a rentier state, largely dependent on hydrocarbons.
Ali Nizar wears a suit and projects an image as a senior bureaucratic and businessmen. Publicly, he overseas crude sales, exports, and partnerships, including with foreign oil firms. Behind the scenes, though, Iraqi officials and former U.S. government officials say he is the node who divvies up and diverts oil proceeds to Iraqi militias, including the Badr Corps, Kata’ib Hezbollah, and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq. No one denies that the terror-linked militias profit off the state. To date, however, neither the Iraqi government nor the Trump administration have had the boldness to stop the diversion and embezzlement of oil revenue where it starts at SOMO. At a minimum, the next prime minister and Iraqi judges should end Ali Nizar’s corrupt reign; if they do not, the United States should utilize its military capabilities to ensure that Ali Nizar faces justice in New York, much as former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro now does.
Faiq Zaidan, who for the past decade has served as the president of Iraq’s Federal Court of Cassation, has led the fight over the independence of the judiciary. Because he is the face of high-profile rulings, many Iraqis slander him, blaming Zaidan rather than the law for their loss. Often, this takes the shape of suggesting Zaidan is a servant to foreign powers like Iran. This, however, is false. Zaidan’s rulings conform as much to Washington’s interests as Tehran’s for a simple reason: He bases his rulings on Iraqi law. Zaidan’s critics—especially those surrounding former Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi—also ignore an uncomfortable truth: They, rather than Tehran, initiated cases whose rulings went opposite their desire; had they not launched those cases in the belief they could weaponize law, they would not have faced the rulings with which they disagreed.
As the Coordination Framework continues to discuss a way forward—perhaps compromising on Basim al-Badri, who currently serves as the National Supreme Commission for Accountability and Justice chair, or Interior Minister Abdul-Amir Al Shammari—a key question should be their willingness to emerge from the Iranian shadow, much as Zaidan has at considerable risk to himself. Many Iraqis wrote in to suggest my previous article criticizing al-Badri was unfair; they say he has emerged as a consensus candidate on his merits and that charges against him represent the machinations of rivals.
Corruption is a cancer that Iraq no longer can afford if the system is to survive.
Regardless, while Washington may not yet have a single candidate, instead arguing that the premier should be an Iraqi nationalist who will not sell Iraqi sovereignty for personal profit or ideological loyalty abroad, the successful candidate will also need to meaningfully take on the militias. There can be no more Kadhimis who tell the U.S. intelligence one thing and then, out of fear or other motivations, do the opposite. Corruption is a cancer that Iraq no longer can afford if the system is to survive. Most Iraqis were born after Saddam’s ouster; they value clean governance and normalcy over sectarianism. Maliki, Badr Organization Chief Hadi al-Ameri, or Kurdish warlord Masoud Barzani are dinosaurs who, as far as the newer generations of Iraqis are concerned, should have no place in Iraq’s future.
To fulfill this future, however, will mandate that all Western and Arab countries seeking a secure, stable, and prosperous Iraq must also emphasize and protect the growing independence of the judiciary. Iraq needs a prime minister who respects rule of law not only in rhetoric but also in reality. If President Donald Trump and National Security Council official Seb Gorka truly want to defeat the militias striking at American embassies and kidnapping journalists, they need to recognize that, while military action has a role, they must also support those who recognize militias and their corruption represent not only a military problem, but a judicial one as well. Whether al-Badri, al-Shammari, or anyone else, a prime minister aspirant must publicly acknowledge that he is not king for a term but a servant to Iraq, subject to its laws.
