Rain over Baghdad: A Novel of Iraq (29 page)

I asked my friend Hashim, an employee in the Guidance Department at the Ministry of Information who had lived in Egypt and attended school there with Saddam Hussein, how the Ba‘th Party came to Iraq for the first time. He explained, “The party came into Iraq via students in the early fifties. Its founder was Fuad al-Rikabi. They based its foundations on an old nationalist liberal party named al-Istiqlal (Independence), which was led by Muhammad Mahdi Kubba, which worked with the leftist National Democratic Party that was led by Rifaat al-Jadirji. As for the Iraqi Communist Party, it was at the time an underground party. In 1946 it became attractive to the youth as a revolutionary party that did not believe in working through legal channels, nor in liberal elections, but promoted instead revolutionary realism, which aimed at bringing about change by revolution or coups.”

He added, “Then suddenly after the coup of Shishikli in Syria, Michel Aflaq’s decision to run for election created confusion among the cadres of the party. Then there was another coup and Michel
Aflaq was detained, so he engaged in self-criticism and declared that running for election was wrong and that he shouldn’t have done it.”

I tried to understand something about the period between Michel Aflaq’s detention and the Party’s return to political life in Syria and Iraq almost simultaneously in 1968. I found that one of the important events of that time was the assassination of Abd al-Karim Qasim carried out by Ba‘thist young men in 1959. The union between Egypt and Syria had been established and the government of the United Arab Republic had surreptitiously set up a broadcasting service that operated on the Syrian–Iraqi borders and broadcast revolutionary communiqués. A revolt started as a military insurrection led by Abd al-Wahab al-Shawwaf in Mosul. Fierce battles took place and Shawwaf was killed. The rest of the officers were arrested and executed. I remembered Shawwaf Square and finally understood how it got that name.

I started reading the novel
The Long Days
written by the poet Abd al-Amir Muaalla, in which he told the life story of Saddam Hussein and the attempt to assassinate Abd al-Karim Qasim. When Abu Khalid, a communist university professor who specialized in modern history and politics and who was a friend of Hilmi Amin, visited the office, I seized the opportunity and asked him, “Why didn’t the Iraqi left, at the height of the communist surge in Iraq, accept a union with Egypt and Syria? And what were Abd al-Karim Qasim’s reasons for not accepting the union when he, as far as I understood, was a popular hero?”

Abu Khalid said, “Abd al-Karim Qasim’s revolution comprised several political orientations. They called themselves ‘The Free Officers’ just like those who launched the July 1952 revolution in Egypt. Abd al-Salam Arif was closer to both the nationalists and the Islamists. Abd al-Karim Qasim was somehow closer to the left. Arif supported the Arab nationalist tendency. People demanded a total union with Egypt and Syria. But the left was against that for several reasons. The most important one was the repression of the Egyptian Communist Party by the government;
most Egyptian communists were in detention camps. I think they were in the Oases.”

Hilmi Amin said, “We were in all Egyptian jails.”

Abu Khalid said, “The Communist Party in Syria was dissolved and in Lebanon, Farajallah al-Helou, the head of the Lebanese Communist Party, was arrested. It was said that Abd al-Hamid al-Sarraj, Abdel Nasser’s man in Syria, had ordered him to be tortured to death, then placed his body into acid until it dissolved.”

I said, “Oh my God! Nasser didn’t do anything of the kind.”

Abu Khalid said, “Abd al-Karim Qasim’s conditions were somewhat rational. He wanted a federation with Egypt, Iraq, and Syria, in which they would keep their autonomous structures. The slogans in the Iraqi street reflected the contradiction in opinions.” Then he laughed and said, “The nationalists shouted: ‘Full union’ and the communists replied: ‘Federation we choose! Union under our shoes!’”

I said, “Goodness gracious! To that extent?”

Hilmi Amin shook his head without saying anything. Abu Khalid went on, “The situation escalated so much that a group of young Ba‘thists decided to assassinate Abd al-Karim Qasim. They had no intention of seizing power, as they later testified. They knew that Qasim moved around by himself without a motorcade, just himself and the driver. They waited for him in al-Rashid Street and shot him. The bullet hit his hand. Qasim drew his revolver and shot back at his assailants. A traffic cop also returned fire and a bullet hit Samir al-Najm in the chest. There was pandemonium in the street. Saddam Hussein escaped to Syria. The conspirators were sent to the famous Mahdawi court. They were young men who believed in individual solutions and they gained great popularity among the people during the trial, emerging as heroes. Then Abd al-Karim Qasim pardoned them, saying, ‘Let bygones be bygones.’”

Abu Khalid continued, “In 1963 the party had become stronger and staged two simultaneous coups, seizing power in both Syria and Iraq. And because they were unionists, they formed a joint delegation and a joint command. Michel Aflaq visited Baghdad and
blessed the revolution. The joint delegation visited Abdel Nasser and demanded a full tripartite union.”

Hilmi Amin said, “But Abdel Nasser was preoccupied with Yemen. He had been stung from his experience of union with Syria, from which he emerged very bitter. So he didn’t take the matter seriously, especially since he noticed that each side was engaged in grandstanding.”

I asked, “In what way?”

Abu Khalid said, “The power in Syria was in the hands of the military Ba‘thists, but in Iraq it was in the hands of both military and civilian leaders. Then the military faction, or what is known as the Ba‘thist right, staged a coup against the Ba‘thist left. Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr in 1963 was prime minister and Abd al-Salam Arif was president. When the nationalists staged a coup against the Ba‘thists, the nationalist officers allied themselves with the Ba‘thist officers against the civilians in power at the time. The civilians had a militia that they called ‘The National Guard.’ The air force used its planes to strike that militia in what was later referred to as ‘The Massacre of the Left.’ Michel Aflaq was there at the time. Then the leadership of the Syrian regional command was arrested and exiled to Madrid and in Iraq the Ba‘thists were arrested and imprisoned.”

I held my head in my hands and said, “Please stop for a minute. I’ve totally lost track. Who staged a coup against whom? Was it a daily occurrence?”

He said, “It was called the ‘age of coups’: eight coups in twelve years.”

I said, “What I don’t understand is that the differences were minor and most of them worked together: nationalists with Ba‘thists and Ba‘thists with Ba‘thists. Let’s pause here for some time because things are now jumbled in my head.”

Abu Khalid said, “I’ll tell you an interesting story. You know Nizar Qabbani, of course. You may have memorized some of his poetry.”

I said, “‘I’ve given you the choice, so choose death in my arms or within the pages of my poems.’ Of course I know him and I love his poetry. He is the poet of our early youth.”

Hilmi Amin laughed, “And where are you now? In old age? Nizar was Syria’s ambassador at the time in Madrid.”

Abu Khalid said, “Yes, Nizar Qabbani arranged a way to go back to Beirut for members of the regional command who had been exiled in Madrid. During that time the Syrian Ba‘th Party took a stand that was different from that of the Iraqi Ba‘th Party. In 1966 military officers led by Hafez al-Assad, who was minister of defense at the time, staged a coup against the civilian wing of the party and Asad became prime minister. Then in 1970 al-Assad staged a coup against the coup which in Syria they called the ‘Correction Revolution’ and later became president. He sentenced to death those members of the national command against whom he had staged the coup. Among them were Michel Aflaq, the secretary general of the party, and his three deputies: Shibl al-Aysami, Munif al-Razzaz, a Jordanian, and Elias Farah, a Syrian, in addition to several other Syrian party officials. They all escaped to Beirut.”

I said, “I think this was a major turning point in the history of the party here and in Syria.”

He said, “Yes. Some of those who escaped continued in politics and others left it. Michel Aflaq gave up and said, ‘I’ve given up on politics’ and he immigrated to Brazil.”

I said, “What happened in Iraq between the arrest of the Ba‘thists in 1963 and the year of the revolution?”

He said, “They regrouped until the Ba‘th military staged their famous coup in July 1968 which was led by two non-Ba‘thists. One was the commander of the Republican Guard and the other the chief of military intelligence.”

I said, “Thank God we’ve finally arrived at something I recognize. You deserve to drink Egyptian tea in large glasses and not Iraqi tea in little glasses.”

Abu Khalid, laughing, said, “Not so fast. The story hasn’t ended. There must be Iraqi surprises for that to happen.”

I said, “What now? It’s enough, Abu Khalid, I cannot keep up with all the details.”

He said, “Thirteen days later, Saddam Hussein held a luncheon banquet at the Presidential Palace to which he invited the two lead participants in the coup, who were not Ba‘thists. But Abd al-Razzaq Nayif, chief of military intelligence, by coincidence, was in London on official business. The Republican Guard commander accepted the invitation. After lunch, and while …

I interrupted him, “Don’t tell me it was the citadel massacre all over again!”

He laughed and said, “Almost. He washed his hands and when he turned around, he saw soldiers aiming their machine guns at him. He said to them, ‘We’ve just eaten bread and salt together!’ They said, ‘Your turn is over. An order has been issued that you be exiled to Turkey.’ Then Iraqi intelligence killed Abd al-Razzaq Nayif in London.”

I said, “And thus the story ended. Not a happy ending at all.”

Hilmi said, “From that moment, from 1968, the Ba‘th Party in Iraq has been in power and so has the Ba‘th Party in Syria. Each party accuses the other of being disloyal, a lackey, and a traitor, and that it, each one, is the true Ba‘th Party, and the antagonism has continued.”

I said, “Take five. Tea is better. Please don’t start on other topics before I come back and tell you a real joke, one that has actually happened.”

I heard the bell ring. Anhar came in and welcomed Abu Khalid warmly.

Abu Khalid said as he bit into the cake, “This is homemade! Don’t tell me you baked it, Umm Yasir?”

I said, “Please enjoy. The story is as follows: while I was a child the radio was on and they were announcing about a coup d’état in Syria and listing the names of the participants: Staff Colonel so and so, Staff Colonel so and so, Staff Major so and so, Staff General so and so. My father came in and asked, ‘What happened?’ Amm Hasan, the cook, said, ‘It seems the Staff family in Syria had a coup.”

We laughed and Hilmi said, “He’s right. Yes, the Staffs. What’s your question?”

I said, “I want to know the difference between the two factions of the party in Syria and Iraq, briefly.”

He said, “The Syrian Ba‘th is described as the Ba‘thist left whereas the Iraqi one is thought of as the Ba‘thist right.”

Anhar said, “This is an apt description.”

I said, “Why did Michel Aflaq return to Iraq and to politics after he had washed his hands completely of it?”

He said, “The Iraqis wanted something to support the legitimacy of the Iraqi Ba‘th Party, so they sent Omar Alali, the minister of information, as a member of the regional Iraqi command of the Ba‘th Party to Brazil with a message to Michel Aflaq saying that it was Iraq that would build the Ba‘thist state. Michel Aflaq returned first to Beirut and in 1971 came to Iraq. They also invited those members of the National Command who had been sentenced to death by the Syrian Ba‘th Party and reappointed them in the National Command. They issued a resolution making Michel Aflaq the secretary general of the party and Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr the assistant secretary. This way the conflict over influence between the Syrian and Iraqi parties continued.”

I said, “During all that time hasn’t there been any relaxation in the conflict? As far as I know the Iraqi Ba‘th Party fought side by side with the Syrian army in the 1973 war. Why hasn’t this been reflected positively in the relationship between the two factions of the party?”

Anhar said, “When the war started, Iraq sent several armored brigades to Syria despite the political differences. Damascus was in imminent danger of falling because the distance between it and Qunaytra was only sixty kilometers. And, indeed, Israeli tanks were on their way to Damascus and got within thirty kilometers of it, but the Iraqi Tenth Armored Brigade repelled the attack and a large number of Iraqi youths were martyred and were buried in a cemetery that bears their name.”

I said, “That, then, was a good gesture from Iraq. Why haven’t they reconciled?”

Anhar said, “The long antagonism has caused a deep wound between the two sides. The Iraqi attitude healed the wound somewhat but it didn’t heal completely. Syria built a dam on the Euphrates river and when the low water season came, all the gates were closed, so water dried up in the Iraqi part of the river, which led to a major political crisis.”

I said, “But it was resolved ultimately and the river is flowing in the two countries.”

Abu Khalid said, “Yes and the atmosphere now is conducive to conciliation, because now the Iraqi Ba‘th Party has a leftist orientation and is opening up to the Soviet Union. There are currently two communist ministers and that is why Michel Aflaq and Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr were able to open channels for talks about unifying the two branches of the party. There is thinking among some in the party that it must learn from Abdel Nasser’s experiment of unity with Syria, because it was based on Abdel Nasser’s charisma. That is why they want it to be based on sound ideological foundations and that it should start first among the Ba‘th Party cadres and units, then the different ministries, then ultimately on the level of the people as a whole. They agreed that Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr be the number one man in the new system of the national command since his military rank is higher than that of Hafez al-Assad, who will be his assistant.”