The war against the Islamic State (ISIS) appears to be coming to an end in Iraq. Americans are again talking about winning and starting to think about what comes next.

But I can’t help but wonder if this is the same “victory” President Bush famously declared on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln with the “Mission Accomplished” banner behind him? Or even the victory that resulted from the 2007 troop surge?
​
Speaking just a few years ago about the surge, Senator John McCain was definitive, “We had it won, thanks to the surge. It was won.”

It’s not that these declarations were wrong per se, they just show the problems with the short-term policy objectives of US leaders. Removal of Saddam brought victory. Reducing violence through the surge brought victory. And now, victory is being reached by pushing ISIS out of Iraq.

Live on Mayadeen’s “Hourly dialogue” programme, Iraqi Hezbollah Brigade spokesman Jaafar Al-Husseini fired scathing remarks against the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government, Masoud Barzani.

Though only a non-state actor, the group’s reliable strategy of aggressive diplomacy reared its ugly head just days after votes were cast in Monday’s Kurdish referendum.

Dissatisfied with the defiance shown by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), Hezbollah let its position be known.
​
“Even before results came in” the referendum was “considered null and void”, Al-Husseini said, “by our resistance faction, the Iraqi government and populations of the Kurdish enclave”.

By: Tallha Abdulrazaq

In 2003, the world naively expected that, with the collapse of the government of Saddam Hussein and the eradication of nationalist rule that had held sway over Iraq since the 1960s, the United States would oversee an era of democratisation that would serve as a broader blueprint for “change” across the region. More than 14 years on, and by 2017, it has become clear to all except those in Washington who are still in denial, that the political process towards Iraqi democratisation has failed utterly, and it is now Iran that controls every aspect of power in Baghdad.
​
One of the main reasons why it failed was because it was never really about democracy to begin with. Aside from false claims of existential threats emanating from Saddam’s Iraq and bogus WMD claims, democracy was used as a sweetener for Western publics to get on board with their governments in the destruction of a sovereign country.

In the aftermath of 9/11, most people in the West – particularly Americans – were in a state of shock. They were ready to believe wildly fabricated lies that contained not a shred of truth in them, and this was spectacularly exposed by then-Prime Minister Tony Blair lying to the British public about Saddam’s alleged capability to launch a WMD strike within 45 minutes. The “Dodgy Dossier” and other lies were further exposed in the Chilcot Inquiry in July 2016 which found that the British public had been deceived, and that the war was entirely unnecessary and undermined the United Nations Security Council and international law.

“Democracy” in Iraq was therefore an added bonus to the supposed increase in security the West would enjoy as a direct result of regime change in Iraq. The British, with the blessings of the Americans, began to convene the “Iraqi opposition” in London, where they famously met in December 2002 to provide the appearance of legitimate Iraqi support for the war.

Collaboration with occupant forces has benefitted at least two-thirds of Iraq’s post-2003 political class, but the enduring affair has cost it’s people greatly.

​Power sharing mechanisms and structures imposed by occupational forces were unsympathetic of the diverse civilizational and ethnic tapestry by which Iraq is known. The lines of political difference drawn, divided a once unified populace, whose freedoms were stifled beneath clerical rule, before being led down the road of empty promises.

Against this backdrop, the dismemberment of the state is ongoing. Fourteen years since America’s invasion, and those in power are still fumbling and flailing. Their impossible task is to stitch back together the severed limbs of the Iraqi state. Each limb is ascribed to a different custodian, united only by the seats they secured with US approval. What remains is a silhouette of a collapsed system. Today’s failures are suggestive of unlearned lessons, starting with America’s ambitious plot to topple Saddam Hussein. The task — without the co-optation of men America called ‘the Iraqi opposition’, would have been impossible. “Well disposed toward the united States” — as Foreign Policy Magazine described them at the time — these men are the ruling political class in Iraq.

Even 14 years after Saddam’s passing,  their plans for effective governance and constitutional order are no clearer. The opposition parties Washington cherry picked were chosen not for what they stood for but who they stood against: Saddam. The intelligence they offered was not only proven spurious, the power they received in exchange of spun facts exposed the largest of these groups — the Iraqi Governing Council — as a US quisling. Commitment to America’s imperialist designs also secured the Iraqi National Council and Kurdish parties permanent seats in power as America’s main clients until the present day. Their sponsorship by invading forces has gone down in history as the biggest betrayal of Iraq’s people — unconsulted till present over the fate of their nation state.

The age of terror against which the Iraqi government is battling has permeated all domains of life locally, music included. Every war after all, needs its own soundtrack.

As in other countries, music in Iraq has long been in service of the state. The sounds of these state-sanctioned anthems reverberate well beyond the historic events they attested to.

Music is the carving knife state’s employ for moulding public attitudes that lean favourably towards its actions and beliefs. Production is typically high in times of war, whether in the context of the fight against the Islamic State (IS) or the 8 year long Iraq-Iran war and others fought under the pre-2003 Iraqi government.

The invasion of American troops 14 years ago, offset new musical genres in Iraq. Exactly 24 hours after US and British tanks rolled into the country, insurgency and militias rapidly formed, and musical productions were part and parcel of their rallying efforts. As the quest for power and resistance against occupant forces began, as did the search for heroic anthems, some new, others recycled chart-toppers from Iraq’s recent past.

Iraqi businessman Asaad Abdul Emir al Eidani was the latest man to be named mayor of Iraq’s richest oil province by the local council of Basra.

The decision was officially announced following an impromptu voting session on Sunday, not without unleashing a stream of controversy and speculations over the council’s choice.

So exactly who is the man handed the reigns of Iraq’s oil capital?

Fifty-year-old Eidani is a known business man and contractor and hails from one of Basra’s largest tribes. He graduated from Basra’s College of Engineering in the 90s and has previously served as a member of the provincial council.

Arms folded inwards, sternly worn expressions, skull mask bandanas and a convoy of 4 x 4 vehicles and motorcycles cruise as though in slow motion down the streets of Essen, Germany. These are the opening scenes to the promotion videos of Salam crew 313, Iraq’s very own Europe-bound Hell’s Angels. Some of its men are burly looking figures, while others are noticeably gaunt with life’s travails etched on their faces.

A backpatch of a freestanding dove is worn proudly by gang members. Their chosen insignia is borrowed from Sarayat al Salam, the Peace Brigade militia firebrand cleric Muqtada al Sadr commands.

The motif is not all that they share. Their public social media pages wax lyrical about Sadr, whom they promote as a demigod figure. Some devotees bear the tattooed Arabic words “Labayk ya Sayyed Muqtada” in an expression of predilection and commitment to the populist leader.

​The club was founded by a small ring of Iraqis who reached the shores of Europe in late 2015 in search of opportunities and liberties missing back home. Their arrival sparked the birth of a movement not entirely new, but that which has never existed in Europe.