NIQASH: That doesn’t sound particularly convincing. Is there something you are not telling us?
Al-Amiri: No. Really, the major reason behind this is the more stable situation in Iraq. After lengthy discussion, we decided to split. And we have done this in a very civilised way.
NIQASH: So none of this has anything to do with political competition for votes in the upcoming elections?
Al-Amiri: As I said, I think we complement each other rather than compete. We wouldn’t join any other political coalition before we joined the Islamic Supreme Council - it is close to our hearts. We would form one list and we wouldn’t compete against them.
NIQASH: Some analysts have noted that the conflicts between the two organizations are hardly new and that, in fact, they stem from disagreements about whether to support current Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in his second term.
Al-Amiri: To be frank, I was personally against supporting al-Maliki for a second term. But we came to realise that if we didn’t support al-Maliki, then the country would face another crisis.
Eventually I said that we should support al-Maliki for a second term but only under certain conditions. However the Supreme Islamic Council remained hesitant and even when I said I was ready to support al-Maliki, they remained neutral.
NIQASH: Others have said this split actually stems back to the election of Ammar al-Hakim as leader of Islamic Supreme Council: he replaced his father who died of cancer at a Tehran hospital in August 2009. They say that the two organizations’ opinions differed on this – and, in particular, that the Badr Organization was against it.
Comments are closed.