News of the conference was warmly received in Israel, perhaps too warmly. Prime Minister Bennett and Foreign Minister Lapid rushed to welcome the news, with the latter noting that it had caught Jerusalem by surprise. The wide media coverage created the misleading impression that Iraq was offering its hand in peace, when in fact the conference communique drew widespread condemnation – from the office of Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, other politicians and the public.

The laws of Iraq, one of the few Arab states that never recognized Israel, include vestiges from the Baath Party rule that sentence to death “anyone praising Zionism”. In condemning the conference message, Al-Khadimi reiterated Baghdad’s official position advocating the establishment of a Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem and a just resolution of the Palestinian problem. The Shiite parties went even further and issued threats against conference participants, while the Shiite militias even threatened to fire rockets at Erbil.

Most conference attendees were members of the Sunni minority, especially of tribal groups. In his address to the conference (and his op-ed), al-Hardan linked normalization with Israel to the demand to grant federal status to Iraq’s Sunni regions, a highly sensitive issue accepted until 2014 after which it seemed to have been abandoned. That explains why criticism of the conference quickly deteriorated into expressions of ethnic Shiite-Sunni hostility, although none of the conference organizers are linked in any way to senior Sunni politicians. The Iraqi politician most identified with pro-Israel sentiment, former Parliament member Mithal al-Alusi, lives in Erbil but was not invited.

The timing of the conference in the lead up to the Oct. 10 elections forced Sunni politicians to issue harsh attacks against its participants, in a bid “to cleanse” the Sunni sect from any involvement in initiatives normalizing relations with Israel. Even the Sunni tribes denied any support for the event and its participants. The Kurdish hosts were also forced to deny having given permission for the event, the exposure of which placed them in an uncomfortable position on the eve of the elections and increased the security threat against them by Shiite militias. Nonetheless, the Kurds are unlikely to give in to demands that they hand over the conference organizers.

The backdrop of the conference is familiar to anyone following developments in Iraq and especially to social media activists. The attitude to Israel among the Iraqi public is mostly a consequence of concerns over Iran. For them, Israel is the antidote to the Iranian threat, reflecting the old adage of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. Therefore, support for Israel is particularly evident when Iran and its backers attack Iraqi street protesters. With the streets of Iraq calm recently, the level of hostility toward Iran has declined. Conference participants were largely motivated by hostility toward Iran, but their position was perceived as irrelevant at this time.

Relations with Iran are not the only factor influencing attitudes toward Israel; relations with the Palestinians are also at play. At the height of the suicide attack period many Iraqis, especially Shiites, blamed the Palestinians for active participation in the killing of Iraqi citizens (many Iraqis claim that 400 Palestinian suicide bombers blew up in their towns. The real number was probably about 40). The number of such attacks has declined sharply since 2017. Given this relative calm, and in the wake of the May 2021 Operation Keeper of the Walls, the Iraqi finger of blame was replaced by public empathy for the Palestinians. While official Iraq cooperates with the Palestinian Authority, the Shiite militias cooperate on various matters with Hamas and the Islamic Jihad organizations as part of the pro-Iranian resistance (muqawama) axis.

Embarrassing exposure

Nonetheless, the Erbil conference generated discourse on the normalization issue, some of it even positive. It appears to be making waves far stronger than the true impact of the event. The web sites of Israel’s Foreign Ministry have reported an increase in the number of followers and in the number of Iraqis expressing an interest in the event. The argument in Iraq is about the identities of those favoring normalization. Iran opponents claim the conference serves the goals of the pro-Iran parties with some even claiming Iran was actually behind the event. The Shiites are accusing the Sunnis (and Kurds), while others counter with a claim that even the greatest normalization opponents had contacts with Israel in the past.

Some lessons from the event could serve Israel in the future.

1. A huge gap exists between the climate on social media and declarative public activity. The networks reflect (perhaps) the personal views of users in their private space. They can always be denied and they do not constitute a plan of action. The conference at which the speakers were publicly identified and a large number of participants were photographed placed people in a difficult position and embarrassing position, perhaps even a dangerous one. One of the participants even claimed he was brought there by a ruse. Should a similar conference be held in the future, it must be conducted in secret. Public conferences could follow at more advanced stages of a rapprochement process.

1. Such an initial conference should be held outside Iraq, advisedly in Bahrain or the UAE. There was understandably special value to holding the event on Iraqi soil, but its exposure embarrassed the Kurdish regime greatly. Future cooperation with the Kurds could be impacted if Kurdish claims are true about the misleading information given by organizers in seeking permission for the conference.

1. The timing of a future conference is also important. This time it was held against the backdrop of the most important annual Shiite pilgrimage to the holy city of Karbala. Pilgrimages intensify ethnic and religious emotions, all the more so on the eve of elections. He pro-Iran parties are taking advantage of the conference for their purposes and might emerge strengthened.

1. A future conference must be a comprehensive, pan-Iraqi event. The organizers must not be pulled into the quagmire of Iraq’s ethnic conflicts or contribute to their exacerbation in any way. The emerging picture of the event suggests that organizers hooked up with elements motivated by local, ethnic and tribal agendas, which should not be linked to normalization. The link made by speakers between a renewed relationship with Iraqi Jews, Sunni federalism and normalization with Israel was forced. There are many Iraqis of all sects, even in Erbil, who support the goals of the conference and with whom cooperation is possible – politicians, intellectuals, media personalities, civil society activists, and others. They are Iraq’s future.

1. The remarks by one of the speakers, Dr. Sahar Altai of the Ministry of Culture, included practical steps for the next stage: Meetings with Israelis and cooperation in fields such as healthcare, water and tourism. This is the direction that should be pursued. Israel should organize visits of small delegations from among the conference activists, as it did in the past with various Iraqi groups.

1. Iraq, the biggest Arab country east of Israel, operates differently than all the other Arab states, and especially those that have normalized relations with Israel. It does not have a king or president who can do as they please. In every contact with the Iraqis one must remember that some of the country’s senior politicians are not at all hostile to Israel. These are the people with whom contact should be made or from whom a signal should be awaited. What is more, lacking an authoritarian regime, contact with the Iraqi public is of great importance. Such contact should be ongoing, constant, and based on dialogue and on a shared vision and culture, not only on the existence of a shared rival.

הפוסט Irbil Conference: Road to normalization with Iraq long and complex הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

הפוסט An Alternative Model of Israeli-Arab Encounters הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

Despite the local turmoil, 2019 saw no significant changes in terms of diplomatic relations between Israel and Iraq. Neither was there any development in the economic arena, where ties between the states remain non-existent.

However, Israel’s perception of Iraq as a security challenge went up a notch. After ignoring Iraq for several years, Prime Minister Netanyahu and senior defense officials changed course in 2019. They know Iraq is an important part of the supply route of ballistic and other weapons from Iran to the front with Israel. Israel also closely monitors the construction of a military base near the Syria-Iraq border, and last summer, several fatal drone attacks conducted against Shiite militia bases in Baghdad and deep in Iraqi territory were attributed to Israel. These were the first strikes on Iraq for which Israel took responsibility in almost 40 years; their predecessor is, of course, Israel’s attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981.

Yet Iraq’s official response was meek. The investigative committee that was appointed belatedly determined that Israel was responsible. However, the Iraqi government did not commit to a response. It was embarrassed and portrayed as weak. The militias, for their part, adopted increasingly harsh rhetoric against Israel, but Iraqi civilians condemned the manner in which Iran sought to turn their country into a wrestling ring with the US and Israel.

The Kurdish region has not taken part in the countrywide protests but, given its dependence on developments in Baghdad, it has been affected nonetheless. Not unexpectedly, Kurdish efforts to repair ties with Iran negatively impacted Israeli-Kurdish relations, at the same time as Israeli-Iraqi relations took tentative steps forward.

In the civilian, cultural and identity arenas some progress has been made, and there is currently more interaction between Israelis and Iraqis, although not on the official level. The Iraqi political elite is bound to Iran on the Israel issue, but this has not prevented a grassroots, people-to-people model of “winning hearts and minds”. Significantly, this trend continued and even intensified after the demonstrations in Iraq broke out. Privately, through social media and rare visits, a growing number of Iraqis express desire for ties with Israel after their country undergoes change. They also plead with Israel to support them by harming Iran. The protesters refrain from publicly identifying with Israel, due to claims by the regime that the protesters are backed and funded by Israel – but tellingly, anti-Israel expressions are extremely marginal.

Israel backs this trend. Notably, its Ministry of Foreign Affairs launched a Facebook page “Israel in Iraqi Dialect”, a unique, first-of-its-kind effort, in late 2018. The Arabic-language page is aimed at encouraging discourse with the Iraqi people, and it gained huge momentum in 2019, especially after expressing clear sympathy for the protesters, who responded with appreciation. Today the page boasts some 292,000 followers. Meanwhile, four delegations from Iraq visited Israel in 2019 as guests of the Foreign Ministry, and Iraqis were also included in another visiting Arab delegation.

In that sense, it can perhaps be said that official Israel “discovered” Arab Iraq in 2019. Whereas Israeli declarations of solidarity were previously directed mainly at the Kurds and their aspirations, no such declarations were issued in 2019. Yet July 2019 saw another leap in messages from Israel to Iraq.

First Israel’s Foreign Minister, Israel Katz, publicly wished the Iraqi people well and expressed his desire for increased cooperation with them. The nature of his Facebook video sought to bypass the government and avoid a direct appeal to the regime. In November, after the wave of protests began, Katz issued a message of support for “the Iraqi people” and their justified demands. And in December, Netanyahu condemned the massacre of protesters carried out by militias in Baghdad and blamed Iran for the bloodshed. Israel’s senior echelons view the protests as an opportunity to challenge Iran – but to date Israel is the only state in the region to have expressed support for the protesters and their demands.

A threat remains, however, After the Foreign Ministry leaked news of the visits in April, discussions began in Iraq regarding normalization of ties with Israel. Yet the militias took the most radical line against the issue, and threats facing Iraqis who meet with Israelis are both serious and tangible.

Today, Iraq stands at an internal crossroads; the direction it takes is bound to impact its relations with Israel. If the protests are suppressed with active Iranian support, Iraq will inevitably become Iran’s first “proxy state” in the region. If Baghdad is, de facto, ruled by the commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ al-Quds force, the puppet regime in Baghdad will be almost wholly unable to resist Iranian demands.

Should this happen, repercussions will be felt mostly in the realm of security. For example, Iran could move ballistic equipment to Syria without interruption – and perhaps even use Iraq as a launch pad.

A continued status quo between the government and the protesters in Iraq will further weaken the government, which is already forced to lean on Iran as its sole source of support. The little legitimacy it retains will disappear. Iraq will sink into political paralysis and selfcenteredness, and will lose even more of its importance as a factor and target for improved relations with Israel. But if the protesters succeed in overthrowing the regime, an opportunity will open up for Israel. The deep anti-Iranian sentiment underpinning the protests will lead the state’s new rulers to distance themselves from Tehran. The new Iraq will seek new regional allies that respect the change it has undergone, which would align satisfyingly with Israeli interests.

הפוסט Israel-Iraq Cooperation in 2019: Security Challenges and Civilian Warming הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

Al-Kadhimi was appointed against the backdrop of Iraq’s political crisis, which is also turning into an economic crisis with the global drop in oil prices. Widespread demonstrations were held in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities between October 2019 and February 2020 protesting political developments and Iran’s hegemony. For now, the protest has subsided due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Even before the crisis, the protesters had failed to impose an alternative on the existing political system. They failed to take advantage of the US support they received and of the assassinations of Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis to achieve their political goals.

Iraq is run behind the scenes by political blocs led by unelected figures, who divide the state’s resources among themselves and employ politicians to preserve the system. Since 2018, the main godfathers of the system have been Hadi al-Amiri (who heads the Fatah bloc of parties and commands the Badr militia) and Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Iran is the sponsor and patron of this alliance between al-Amiri, al-Sadr and the others. At the same time, the escalation continued between the Shiite militias and US military forces deployed in Iraq, prompted by attempts to avenge the killing of Soleimani and al-Muhandis, mostly on the part of the Hezbollah movement in Iraq that al-Muhandis led. The escalation perpetuated the “spin” started by Soleimani in order to divert public attention from the protests toward a “patriotic” goal of achieving US withdrawal from Iraq. That, in turn, dragged Iraq into a regional Iranian-American conflict that only few want.

In fact, until March 2020, Iran was satisfied with the status quo that prevailed in Iraq. The protest had died down and the state was being ruled by a weak acting prime minister, Adil Abdul-Mahdi, who resigned in December 2019. At that point, a new candidate entered the arena, posing a threat to the militias and Iran. Adnan al-Zurfi obtained the support of the Shiite religious establishment (the Marja’iya) and of the US (he is an American citizen). Iraq’s Kurdish President Barham Salih was quick to enthusiastically approve the appointment. AlZurfi had previously served as governor of Najaf Province. During his term, he led a determined campaign against the parties and militias that have previously ruled the province. Many in Iraq regarded him as an ideal candidate and hoped he would manage to form a government. Had he run in elections, there is little doubt he would have been elected. At the time, he laid out his guiding principles, pledging to place all weapons in the hand of the state, put on trial those responsible for killing protesters, put in place an “Iraq first” policy and keep Iraq out of regional conflicts. His candidacy was of great concern to the pillars of the existing political system in Iraq, and they were quick to act.

Initially, many in this political system supported al-Zurfi, probably due to a combination of an illusion that they could continue to rule through him and a desire to weaken rivals within the system. When they realized that al-Zurfi was no puppet, they were quick to shift course. Initially, senior Iranian officials visited Iraq and then a meeting was held of representatives of all the Shiite parties, at which a decision was made to withdraw support for al-Zurfi and hand it to al-Kadhimi, with Iran’s blessing, of course. The Sunnis and Kurds were quick to follow, also transferring support to al-Kadhimi. On April 9, al-Zurfi announced he was withdrawing, attributing his decision to “internal and external elements”.

Implications for Israel

Iraq is the largest and most populous Arab state east of Israel. Many Iraqis want links with Israel, for various reasons: Renewed interest in the now defunct Iraqi Jewish community, and admiration for Israel as a democracy with impressive scientific achievements as well as an enemy of Iran (and as such, a potential ally for the many Iraqis hostile to Iran).

Official Israel discovered this new Iraqi climate recently and started to communicate with the Iraqi public mostly via social media. Over the past year, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has joined the effort to encourage contacts and discourse. In 2019, several Iraqi delegations visited Israel as did Iraqi members of other delegations. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis follow the Foreign Ministry’s Arab-language social media pages, and most of them express positive views. One of these pages, “Israel in Iraqi dialect” is designed especially for IsraeliIraqi dialogue. In November 2019, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the massacre of Iraqi protesters by pro-Iran forces. Before him, Foreign Minister Israel Katz expressed support for the protesters and their demands. Israel thus became the only state in the region to express solidarity with the Iraqi protesters.

Al-Kadhimi is a worthy candidate for prime minister and his appointment could create an unprecedented opportunity for an Israeli link with Iraq’s top political echelons. Al-Kadhimi is essentially pro-Western, a true liberal, articulate in English and his circles offer significant potential for channels to Israel. Iran and its supporters were forced to endorse a candidate for the premiership who as recently as January was accused of having a role in Soleimani’s assassination and was dubbed an “American agent”. Several weeks ago, as head of the security services, he ordered the arrest of commanders in the Iraqi Hezbollah militias. AlKadhimi now has a month to form a government and win parliamentary approval. If he succeeds, he is supposed to govern for about a year until elections are held.

However, one must not lose sight of the fact that al-Kadhimi was not elected; he was appointed by Iran’s supporters in Iraqi politics. He will have to behave himself and avoid risks. Iran’s backers will test him over the next month, for example by engineering confrontations with US forces. He will have to restrain himself. They also have contingency plans in case he turns out not to be weak enough: They will not vote for the government he forms and try to keep Caretaker Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi in power until the elections. If al-Kadhimi succeeds at some point after his official appointment as premier in freeing himself from the binds of his sponsors, Israel will be handed a true opportunity for a new horizon in its ties with Iraq. This will not happen without greater US involvement (perhaps Israeli, too) in Iraqi politics.

הפוסט The Political Situation in Iraq: An Opportunity for Israel? הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

A 2018 study of Israel-Iraq relations, written within the framework of a Mitvim Institute project on the unfulfilled potential of Israel’s ties with Arab states, stressed that a rapprochement between official Iraq and Israel was unlikely. Its central argument was that relations between the two countries were hardly affected by the Israeli-Palestinian or Israeli-Arab conflict and that the main factor influencing relations was the conflict between Israel (and perhaps the US, too) and Iran. The events of recent months bolstered this assessment. Iran and its proxies within the Iraqi regime accuse the West and Israel of fanning the unrest. The Shiite militias, the standard bearers of Iraq’s cooperation with Iran, ramped up their anti-Israel rhetoric even before the protests broke out. Given this polarized state of affairs, another trend spotlighted in the previous study is gaining momentum – wide-ranging solidarity manifested on social media between a growing number of Iraqis and Israelis, stemming from hostility to Iran and an affinity for the history of Iraqi Jewry. Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and senior political figures contributed significantly to boosting this trend in 2019.

This article reviews the changes that occurred in 2019 in the nature of Israel-Iraq cooperation, as they relate to diplomatic, security, economic and civilian aspects.

הפוסט Israel-Iraq Cooperation in 2019: Security Challenges and Civilian Warming הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

הפוסט Israel and Iraq: Taking the Civilian Path to Improve Relations הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

Since then, the number of Iraqis making contact with Israelis has grown tremendously, mainly through social networks. Among other things, Iraqi surfers recently set up a Facebook page called “The Virtual Embassy of Iraq in Israel”. The Israeli Foreign Ministry reports that about one-third of the Ministry’s Arabic site’s followers (ca. half a million) are Iraqis, and their attitude toward Israel is generally positive and friendly. In their honor, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs recently inaugurated a unique Facebook page called “Israel in the Iraqi Discourse”, which received very positive comments and raised much interest in Iraq. In addition, other interested Israelis (for the sake of full disclosure, the author of this article is among them) maintain daily contact with many friends throughout Iraq.

A segmentation of the Iraqi participants in the discussions conducted on the Foreign Ministry’s Arabic page shows that most of the participants are educated young people between the ages of 18 and 35, an age group that accounts for about 70 percent of Iraq’s population, with about a third of them living in Baghdad. They are not afraid to disclose their real names and photographs, and they represent various Iraqi population groups: Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, Christians, and others. These young people are usually politically and socially active and constitute the backbone of Iraq’s educated class. They came to deal with Israel and Israelis out of interest in the Jewish past in Iraq or out of a certain attraction to the democratic and liberal model presented by Israel. Recently, their support for Israel has grown in the face of their hostility to Iran. Their positions on the Israeli issue are distinctly different from those prevailing in the Arab world.

Unlike other Arab countries, the interest in Israel among Iraqis is not confined to politics; it extends to the cultural and religious spheres and the daily aspects of life in Israel. Many Iraqis openly express their desire to visit Israel, but when they try to carry it out they encounter the arbitrariness of the Israeli establishment and are generally refused. The two pages of the Foreign Ministry in Arabic frequently publish non-political articles that shed light on different aspects of the Israeli way of being which raise great interest among Iraqi users. The knowledge of young Iraqis about Israel is sometimes surprising, as demonstrated through the popularity of Sarit Hadad.

It is difficult to determine whether the phenomenon is limited to social networks or whether it will also have political ramifications in future. The educated Iraqi youth in question influence the political and cultural agenda and shape public opinion. Yet in recent elections in Iraq, many of them supported the boycott movement, and others voted mainly for the parties of al-Sadr and al-Abadi, or for smaller parties on the fringe of the Iraqi national and anti-Iranian camp.

For some reason, official Israel has not yet discovered Iraq, the largest Arab state on the East. Iraq is the second largest exporter of oil in the world, after Saudi Arabia, and is a significant potential trading partner. Iraq, which is being rebuilt, is desperate for assistance with infrastructure construction, banking, irrigation, agriculture, communications, and more. It also needs indirect assistance with improving its credit rating and with encouraging foreign investments. Iraq would also welcome the assistance of Intelligence services in its fight against terrorism, in which Iraq has acquired great skill in recent years.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is of secondary importance in shaping Iraq’s official position vis-a-vis Israel. The Iraqi public is quite indifferent to Palestinian suffering, and Iraq supports the Arab peace initiative, which calls for Israeli recognition of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, whose capital is East Jerusalem. It does not recognize the Hamas rule in Gaza.

As Iraq enters the period of establishing a coalition that will paralyze the political system for a while, it is worth thinking about how Israel should approach this important country. While the Iraqi political echelon is preoccupied with its own affairs, the educated and the young people discuss the matter openly and boldly. In its attempts to establish relations with the Arab states, Israel tends to focus on forging contacts with the political elite, and sometimes only with one specific leader. This is how peace agreements were reached with Egypt and Jordan, and to a great extent this is also the story of the Oslo process with the Palestinians. The educated middle class in the Arab countries was neglected and as a result became alienated from the process and hostile to Israel. Iraq offers the opportunity for a different process which may begin with the educated class and will prepare the ground within wide and influential circles before the formal diplomatic rapprochement between the two countries begins. This different process will lay a firm foundation for future relationships.

Dr. Ronen Zeidel is a senior researcher of Iraq at the Dayan Center of Tel Aviv University and a research fellow at the Mitvim Institute. This article is based on a study on Israeli-Iraqi relations which is part of the “Israel-Arab Relations: The Unfulfilled Potential” project.

(originally published in Ynetnews)

הפוסט Laying a Civil Foundation for Cooperation between Israel and Iraq הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.