When politics is not humanized, as is the case of politics in our troubled world, it is difficult to control the future of the political path in local, regional, and global oceans saturated with challenges. But all of that does not make the rational person politically incapable of drawing a difficult future, not an impossible one.
As for the future of the political path and the challenges facing the Iraqi government, the matter is connected to finding answers and explanations for the titles below:

(1)

Where is Iraq within these labels?

Quoted from Francis Fukuyama, the Swedish economist and political sociologist (Gunnar Myrdal) defines the soft state as: “the state that issues laws and does not apply them, not only because of loopholes in them, but because no one respects the law. The powerful do not care about it because they possess power that protects them from it, and the weak receive bribes to overlook it. As for the poor who have no money, they are controlled by new | old methods of repression and accusations.”

The economic thinker (Jalal Amin) agrees with the American Noam Chomsky with this description when he sees that the failed state is the state that has lost sovereignty over its territory wholly or partially and is unable to meet the security of its citizens and the requirements of their daily living. It also lives in a state of continuous threat to its human security and food security, and lacks a unified concept of citizenship in rights and duties. This means the spread of corruption until it becomes a way of life. In reality, they are شبه-states, characterized by being supported by active external parties instead of relying on their own components and institutions. They are exposed to collapse either through defeat by external powers or as a result of internal chaos, which leads to a vacuum of authority within them.

There is an internal relationship and a major direct correlation between the failed state and the rogue state. The latter harms its people and other peoples, while the failed state harms its own people only. Failure in the state arises from external factors when the state loses actual security control over its territory, or loses the ability to deal internationally as the sole representative of its people, or is subjected to economic, political, or military sanctions. It also arises from internal factors when it loses its ability to provide the basic needs of its citizens, or when it revives narrow regional tendencies: sectarian, ethnic, and tribal, or when it leads to the emergence of new groups in the form of parties, movements, and organizations that perform the functions the state failed to perform. Thus, a state within the state is created, working to topple the state’s experience.

As a result, the soft state is characterized by a set of features, the most prominent of which are: it is unable to achieve control over all its territory; it dismantles and does not build, leaving the task of building to others; its readiness for corruption is very high; it cannot provide basic needs and necessary services for the vast majority of its citizens; it is ineffective in preserving order and security; it has no influence at the regional and international level; it lives in a state of inequality that divides society into opposing groups that fight without competition; it is controlled by a corrupt elite that manipulates its constitutional institutions and knows nothing except insulting the citizen and subjugating him, while being keen to revive sub-identities that obstruct the path of state-building. It turns its territory into transit areas for illegal migrants and displaced people fleeing from combat chaos, in addition to the spread of drug trafficking, currency counterfeiting, and antiquities smuggling.

Thus, in political literature, after we became used to hearing labels such as major states, small states, developed states, underdeveloped states, third world countries, and developing countries, modern labels related to describing states poured upon us, including: the failed state, the soft state, the rogue state, the deep state… etc. So where is Iraq among these labels?
A question answered by the reader after we have presented the characteristics of the state that carries some or all of the traits of these labels!!

(2)

Bits of the Defects of Iraqi Politics

We do not want to write down the major defects of Iraqi politics, foremost among them narrow regional quota-sharing and its derivatives that produced national nihilism, and the phenomenon of corruption that surpassed terrorism with merit, and the planting of despair in looking toward the future.

We want to recall bits of the defects of what we see and touch while talking about democracy and the islands of democratic action, where the misery of building a new Iraq becomes eternal.

Among these bits is the dominance of the algae of ignorance. When a person lives in a country that is intended to be ruled by the algae of ignorance, the mind contemplates the loss of balances, the overturning of values, and the mixing of truth with falsehood, where it becomes impossible to distinguish the truthful from the vicious liar. Hypocrisy becomes courtesy, deception becomes cleverness, and torture becomes intelligence.

In the center, as in the outskirts of this country, whoever speaks the word of truth is like one grasping burning coals. The one proud of his dignity becomes insane, the one clinging to his honor becomes stupid, and the one holding on to his pride becomes ridiculous. After it becomes inevitable for whoever wants to live in the loss of this country to distance himself from having any significance in life, the names that flatter shine, because they are sticky names like the belly of a gecko, soft like a lizard, twisted like a snake, and bent like the tail of a thin mangy dog.

In such a country ruled by the algae of ignorance, there is no straight line, because everything in it is curved or arched. Interests are not fulfilled except through crooked methods. Hopes are not achieved except by taking bent roads. The citizen, in order to become someone of importance and succeed in what he aspires to, is not required to be knowledgeable in his field or brilliant in his specialization. He is not required to be sincere, enthusiastic, or aware of major matters. In such a country, the algae of ignorance want the citizen to be a tail of smiling cunning, stupid malice, and sweetened scheming mixed with deceit, tricks, and changing colors, until he finally drowns in the swamp of national nihilism.

(3)

Beware of the “Democracy” of the Enemies of Democracy

In our world today, no one has the courage to openly declare hostility to democracy and its electoral mechanisms. It is true that democracy is not achieved without elections, but it is also true that elections do not automatically lead to democracy.

The electoral process may be accompanied by mistakes and stumbles that undermine the golden triad that makes elections free, fair, and honest. However, overcoming mistakes and surpassing stumbles does not happen except through continuing elections, meaning without abstaining from them or boycotting them in nomination and voting.

Elections remain the influential and effective factor in evaluating the extent of the strength of change and the reality of those who demand it. The importance of the electoral process increases, especially in granting legitimacy to the political system. Meanwhile, boycott and abstention deprive the country and the people of that importance and necessity. Without elections, no legitimacy is granted to the political system, because elections provide legitimacy in the practice of power by the elected legislative body, which has the right to enact legislation that regulates public life up to societal stability.

Elections also guarantee broad popular participation in making correct decisions. Broad political participation represents the main feature of the democratic system in the state, because it provides great opportunities for all members of society who meet the legal condition for political participation to nominate, vote, and assume public positions, thus enabling them to participate in making political decisions.

Practicing elections and continuing them without abstention or boycott reinforces the principle of freedom in the citizen’s choice process, expressing his will to choose the appropriate candidate. It also helps establish good governance, fight corruption, and reform the system, as it is the civilized mechanism of accountability and oversight over rulers by the ruled, and holding elected public bodies accountable by monitoring and following their work and observing any shortcomings that fall within their responsibilities and functions.

In addition, the electoral process produces tools for power-sharing and managing societal diversity and pluralism through peaceful competition and ensuring opportunities of rotation for all political forces according to legal conditions without discrimination between them. The electoral process is also the means to guarantee individuals’ political rights.

In Iraq, elections and continuing them gain double importance due to the crises and challenges the country is going through in its political system, which contributed to weakening public trust in its outcomes. This requires evaluating the electoral process not only as a procedural necessity but as a basic entry point to strengthen political stability. This evaluation, through insisting on participation in elections and not abstaining or boycotting them, aims to find a more suitable electoral system to produce effective political elites that express the popular will and contribute to building a state of institutions, which strengthens the stability of the political system and consolidates societal peace in an Iraq that deserves nothing but to be strong and democratic.

Here we want to say that whoever boycotts elections serves all enemies of democracy, who cling to holding power through elections and practicing soft, legalized monopolization in the interests of the country and the people.

Therefore, we call on all supporters of true democracy in the country to beware of handing democracy and its mechanisms to the enemies of democracy, because the “democracy” of the enemies of true democracy depends on the abandonment of true democracy supporters of democracy and its mechanisms through boycotting elections and abstaining from them in nomination and voting.

(4)

Iraq First… How? And When?

We hear, read, and see shiny slogans with beautiful phrases such as: Iraq first… Iraq is the foundation… Iraq is strong… and we are a nation… But how? And when?

The Iraqi political scene has been controlled since the fall of the totalitarian rule on (9/4/2003) until today by an equation: bad history (the history of totalitarian dictatorship) and a difficult-to-achieve future (the future of completing full independence and true democracy, which has not been achieved yet). Between that bad history and that difficult future stretches a set of crises, problems, and distortions that cannot be left positively except through the unity of the forces and personalities of the national movement in Iraq.

As the national movement in Iraq suffers from the pains of fragmentation and the diseases of scattering, there is no doubt that work—not merely calling—for the unity of the national movement should represent an extension and continuation of sincere national projects, efforts, and attempts that were made and are still being made to advance coalition and alliance activities and deepen their contents, reaching an organizational formula in which all true national forces and personalities meet within the context of equal partnership relations; that is, creative organizational formulas that support visions, positions, and work programs with a unified Iraqi national discourse.

Accomplishing this mission in transitional Iraq should push the forces and personalities in the Iraqi national movement, in all intellectual and doctrinal trends and schools, toward alliance to contribute effectively to addressing the urgent issues that the homeland and citizen suffer from, the most prominent of which are:

• Problems of completing sovereignty up to full independence by accelerating the end of the presence of foreign forces’ bases in Iraq, establishing good governance and a stable and just political system, and building positive relations with all countries of the world based on common interests, mutual respect, non-interference in internal affairs, and globalizing the fight against terrorism and corruption.

• Problems of the old authoritarian and dictatorial legacy, rampant corruption, remnants of violence and terrorism, and protecting the achievements of constitutional transformation, up to consolidating the democratic path.

Addressing these problems and crises makes the influential forces and personalities of the national movement in Iraq draw closer to each other and be keen on positive relations with non-influential national political forces and cooperate with them to move Iraq from a fragile political entity to a state with a stable and just political system capable of rising from the transitional phase that Iraq lives today into the phase of democratic transformation.

The content of the unity of the Iraqi national movement will be open and inclusive to all true Iraqi national projects that want the new Iraq to be an independent Iraq: an Iraq of institutions and law; an Iraq of a diverse and cohesive civil society; an Iraq with a stable and just political system; an Iraq with a serving national government that works to stop deterioration in order to achieve development, and provides everything that serves prosperity and continuous improvement in the life of the citizen and the homeland.

Thus, in order for Iraq to be first, Iraq to be the foundation, Iraq to be strong, and Iraq to be the nation, we send a message that saves the homeland and the citizen, titled: (Unity of the national movement). A message to those who are politicians, to those who will become politicians, and even to those who claim they are politicians. Without that Iraqi national unity, Iraq is heading toward dispersal, and when walls collapse—as it is said—strangers are not fit for rescue.

(5)

Taming the Coming Leviathan

Leviathan is a fierce mythical sea creature invoked by the English thinker (Thomas Hobbes) to describe the state he desired. Is it possible to describe the most important outputs of technology represented by artificial intelligence as the Leviathan of our present era that is coming?

The post-Hobbes state has its advantages when it is tamed to become a societal necessity for building a good society and producing a good human. It has its disadvantages when it comes to destroy a society that deserves construction and defeat a human who deserves civilization. The same applies to technology and its outputs: beneficial outputs that serve the earth and people, versus harmful outputs when they are stripped of moral and human values.

Over time, the Hobbesian Leviathan was tamed, and the state became an organizational political unit serving its residents. That was a good fruit of the alliance between the state and the human. So when will the intelligent industrial Leviathan be tamed to serve people, and how will the alliance between artificial intelligence and the human be achieved?

Artificial intelligence was present only in science fiction. In 2018 it became reality, not fiction. This technology grew greatly and rapidly in reality until it became central and entered the core of all aspects of life. Artificial intelligence moved from research indicators and the pages of fantasy novels to become an inseparable part of our daily life, changing the rules of the game in confronting urgent societal problems and creating a better future in fields such as agriculture, preserving resources, and achieving environmental and economic benefits.

The goal of artificial intelligence outputs is to enable computers to perform tasks that the human mind can perform. There are two basic goals for artificial intelligence: the first is technological, using computers to accomplish useful tasks; the second is scientific, answering through AI concepts questions related to humans and other living beings.

The alliance between artificial intelligence and humans gives this Leviathan meaning for humans and makes it environment-friendly according to a policy of developing trustworthy and explainable artificial intelligence. It includes ethical guidelines calling for an AI approach centered on the human, respecting fundamental rights and ethical principles that prevent harming humans. This requires every state to adopt paths and set national AI strategies that strengthen future prevention from the risks of its outputs that harm stability and affect law and social ethics.

Contributing to AI development can be effective by incorporating ethics into global technological standards, especially in designing modern technologies in a way that leads to more equality, responsibility, and transparency, so that intelligent machines observe ethical rules and avoid problems created by AI that become difficult to handle once they happen.

Perhaps the most dangerous risks of AI technology occur in politics, because democracy will be threatened when power is concentrated in the hands of a small number of wealthy people who can accumulate digital power in their hands to place obstacles before ethical AI. For power, wealth, and resource looting, these people deny the problems of climate change, global warming, and the danger of autonomous lethal weapons.

Yes, it should not be said that technology and its applications must be stopped or suspended. But let us make it trustworthy technology free of dangerous ethical defects, because AI ethics is not about preventing continued technological development and does not call for restricting it. In light of unethical political indicators in our contemporary world, ignoring ethical questions is irresponsibility. Politics must include, care about, and engage with positive ethics, including the ethics of AI policies.

(6)

How Do We Rise with Iraq?

Renaissance, meaning the rise of the human to build homelands, brings to mind every thought or action that has value and excludes every thought or action without value.

There is no value, hope, or benefit in election results without stable and integrated electoral legal frameworks that cover and regulate all stages of the electoral process. There is no value in election results without an ethical deterrent that prevents the use of corrupt money and its employment up to electoral behavior that deviates from noble values that plant trust between rulers and ruled. There is no value in election results without a deterrent of political awareness that prevents reliance on traditional motives (revenge sectarianism, ancient tribalism, extremist nationalism, and narrow regionalism) that lead the voter to vote in a box intended to produce results of a new building for a homeland and citizens, not to entrench entities and components of subjects, followers, and clientelism. There is no value in oil wealth without an oil and gas law that preserves the people’s wealth and fights the inflation of the wealth of corruption and corrupt people. There is no value in political party pluralism without activating the implementation of the parties law on Iraqi national bases and frameworks that correct the deviant pluralism into a national pluralism instead of traditional sectarian, tribal, nationalist, and narrow regional pluralisms. There is no value in national partnership without a positive parliamentary opposition that monitors the executive authority, observes its performance, and pressures for accountability and holding it responsible for its shortcomings.

Without these three deterrents (legal, ethical, political awareness), it is not strange to expect delay and procrastination in forming the three presidencies. It is not surprising to see crises breeding from: legislative scarcity, institutional dysfunction, service failure, obsession with the past, productive sterility, cognitive weakness, abandoning priorities, and playing with public money.

Without these three deterrents, it is not surprising to see an increase in the birth of “men of politics” and a decrease in the birth of “men of the state.” Without these three deterrents, the homeland remains caught in regional and international winds with no renaissance, acted upon rather than acting, and neither the homeland nor its people are intended to receive from the regional and international other any improvement, protection of money, or guarantee of a future for children.

Without these three deterrents, there is no value in a constitution or laws that do not govern their authors. There is no value in democracy without independence, and no value in independence without democracy. There is no value in a consumer economy that is sterile in production. There is no value in using knowledge technologies without contributing to producing them. There is no value in fighting terrorism without fighting corruption, and vice versa.

Also, there is no value in importing AI technologies and systems without preparing producers—smart citizens—within a solid academic science and knowledge framework capable of contributing to producing the technologies, programs, and systems of this intelligence.

We emphasize the value of these deterrents while we live in a turbulent world whose surface is smooth and soft, but whose interior is rough and savage, and whose behaviors are trivial or chaotic. It is impossible to deal with it without fortifying with political awareness, shielding with ethics, and arming with law, reaching a society governed by the logic of the state, not by the logic of a spoil’s authority and a dominance of influence.

(7)

A Map of Standards for Choosing the Three Presidencies

Away from the obsession with circulating names and labels, which has become—every four years at the end of elections—something that tears apart ears, gnaws minds, scatters thoughts, and blinds sight. Let us this time think with vigilance and work with national responsibility to choose the three presidencies according to the logic of the state and the provisions of the constitution, not according to the logic of pre-state; and according to the compass of nationalism, not according to the compass of “consensus” that was imposed, blessed, and applied by the enemies of Iraq, and the constitution is innocent of it.

Yes, what happened and what we experienced in choosing the three presidencies previously occurred through the dominance of social consensual supremacy over constitutional supremacy. Thus, the traditional social consensual triad (Shiite, Kurdish, Sunni) dominated over political pluralism (political majority, political minority, support forces, opposition forces). This traditional pre-state context has hardened election after election for a country that deserves to be a state ruled by those who build the country and serve the people.

The dominance of the logic of the state means the supremacy of law, the rule of trust between rulers and ruled, the rule of institutions, and a pluralism based on coexistence and societal tolerance, political competition, and a force of soldiers for a state armed with knowledge and science, fortified with political ethics, shielded with political awareness, protected by law, and developing through a fertile productive economy. These are the basic standards of the logic of the state. But waiting for that to happen is like waiting for Godot if matters are left to the maturation of objective conditions. So, what should be done?

Politics in our world today is led from the top, not from the base, and the top is the government. So, what are the standards of the ministerial approach and the governmental program that are implementable and capable of commitment to the logic of the state and its constitution?

The standards here should be distributed between standards specific to the brief ministerial approach, attached to it standards specific to the detailed and extended governmental program.

Institutionalizing these standards, in both types, should not go beyond the unfulfilled pledges in previous governmental approaches and programs. These standards should also consider emphasizing stopping deterioration before pledging development, to overcome every chronic obstacle that accompanied the state-building path and hindered it. More precisely: stopping the deterioration resulting from obstacles of legislative scarcity, institutional dysfunction, service failure, productive sterility, misuse of public money, and cognitive weakness. Including the standard of pledging to stop deterioration first within the priorities of the ministerial approach and the governmental program is better than filling them with rosy slogans we hear but do not see.

Also, the institutional map of standards must consider using the agenda of priorities in implementing pledges. From a realistic perspective, if political quota-sharing is tolerated inside the parliament chamber, then it—and non-political quota-sharing—are not acceptable in appointing individuals in state institutions within the executive and judicial authorities. These institutions should be managed by individuals with competence, experience, and integrity—qualities not produced by belonging to a sect, tribe, or ethnicity, but produced by loyalty to the homeland and nationalism.

The logic of the state requires the presence and dominance of legal obligation. It is naïve to bet on any other type of obligation regarding implementing the items of the ministerial approach and the governmental program. The map of standards of the logic of the state should also cover the societal dimensions of proper state-building and its achievements (political, economic, social, and cultural).

This map of standards has nothing to do with any specific person or any specific list. It is standards for every coming rule (persons and institutions) that wants political work according to the logic of the state, escaping the complex of choosing the three presidencies that put the politician and the citizen-politicized in confusion over names and labels and their obsession, due to the dominance of consensual supremacy over constitutional supremacy, so balances were lost and the logic of the state disappeared.

Beware, all beware, of sliding into the abyss of populist supremacy, where no map, no standards, no constitution, and no logic of a state will benefit.