Press conference by IRAQI SCHOLARS On attack against holy shrines

Shiite and Sunni scholars from Iraq, briefing correspondents at a Headquarters press conference today in the wake of the attacks on the holy shrines in Samarra, said they were shocked, together with all Iraqis and others around the world, to have witnessed another grave breach of the holy Islamic sites.

Participating in the press conference sponsored by the Permanent Mission of Iraq to the United Nations were Imams:  Sheikh Khaled Abdul Wahab; Sheikh Majid Ismail Mohammed al Hafeed; Sayed Mohammed Reda, representative of Ayatollah Ali al Sistani; and Sayed Ammar Abdul Azeez al Hakim, Head of Al Hakim Foundation.

One of the panellists, through a translator provided by the Iraqi Mission, said the bombing of Imam Ali al-Hadi and Imam Hassan al-Askary was a clear indication of the desire of Takfiri and Sadamist groups to “target the national cohesion and fuel sectarian tensions and ruin the feelings of Muslims”.

In the strongest terms, he condemned and denounced that abhorrent act, which contradicted the values of religion and humanity.  He called on the international community, the United Nations and the Security Council to assume their responsibilities by condemning those breaches and putting an end to those terrorist plots and sectarian actions.

He also called on the Iraqi Government to take speedy, appropriate steps to secure the city of Samarra and the routes leading to it, and to start rebuilding the shrines as soon as possible.  That would contribute to spreading calm, regaining normality and preventing the Takfiris and the terrorists from succeeding in targeting the unity of his people.

The multinational forces should also assume their responsibilities, in accordance with United Nations resolutions, in helping the Iraqi Government “spread” security and bring the terrorists to justice.  He called on the Iraqi people to stand together in the face of terrorism and terrorists, strengthen the national cohesion and exercise self-restraint in dealing with the attacks.

Responding to a question about specifically what he was asking the United Nations to do, a panellist said he expected the United Nations and the Security Council to strongly condemn the attacks.  They should raise awareness about the significance of the sites and the need to rebuild them.  The United Nations and the Security Council should also assume responsibility for putting an end to such terrorist attacks.

To another question, a panellist said the perpetrators were extremists with a local, regional and international agenda who sought to create problems on a sectarian basis.  Today’s attack was very sad for Muslims around the world.  The extremist groups worked as hard as possible to ignite a sectarian war in Iraq, and he called on the United Nations to work equally hard to rebuild those and other destroyed sites, and on all Iraqis to stay united to ensure that the terrorists did not succeed in achieving their goals.

When another correspondent pointed out that a request to rebuild the monuments should be put directly to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), a speaker said it was not a financial contribution for which United Nations assistance was being sought; the Iraqis were capable of rebuilding the sites.  He called on the United Nations to provide the “political umbrella, the political support, the political stance” needed to create the international support for rebuilding the sites.

In terms of the significance of the sites, he said they were the house and burial place of the tenth Imam in the Shiite tradition.  He lived 13 centuries ago, and the house was in a Sunni area.  For more than 13 centuries, it had symbolized unity between the two communities.  Destroying it was an attack on that unity; rebuilding it would reinforce it.  He called on the United Nations for practical and political support for that process.

Responding to another question, a speaker said that any international support under the United Nations umbrella was welcome.  In fact, any support to improve the overall situation in Iraq was welcome.  Iraqis had always looked towards the United Nations for providing that support.  The first casualty of the long series of attacks had been Sergio Vieira de Mello, the Secretary-General’s Special Envoy killed in Baghdad in 2003.

He went on to recall that the conference in Egypt at Sharm el-Sheikh had signalled international support under the United Nations banner for the political process in Iraq.  He distinguished between supportive and other roles that sought to take the political process in Iraq back to square one.  He welcomed and wanted the first type of support.  As for the second type, Iraqis were capable of handling their own situations without that sort of intervention, without derailing their political and constitutional process.

Asked whether Iraq was experiencing “an all-out civil war”, a panellist said there were a lot of complex interests in Iraq.  He sometimes wished the country was an island in the middle of nowhere to avoid that, but it was a junction for international routes, which allowed regional countries to press their interests in that particular part of the world.

He said he rejected all forms of intervention in Iraq, but if countries thousands of miles away lobbied for their interests in Iraq, imagine the interests of the countries bordering Iraq.  Still, that was not the major problem.  The problem was the two groups -- Sadamists and the Takfiris -- carrying out attacks without discrimination.  The problem was ideology that did not distinguish between people.

As for whether the United States should pull out its troops now, a panellist said that no single citizen liked foreign troops in his or her country; however, Islamists had a rule that, for certain circumstances in cases of emergency, a special need existed.

So, was he saying there was a need for American troops there? the correspondent asked in a follow-up question.

He was not saying there was a need for the troops to stay, but if the “interference” had been a mistake, pulling out without studying the situation would be a “double mistake”, he replied.

As for whether the situation in Iraq was a civil war, another member of the panel added that the way Iraqis saw it, it was a “war against civilization” in Iraq; Sadamists and Takfiris were targeting the Iraqi people.

Replying to a question about what the speakers would like to tell the region, and specifically Iraq’s neighbours, about what had happened today, a speaker said the country was going through a critical phase, the latest example of which had occurred today in Samarra.  That was a sad event for the entire world.  There had been a history of coexistence among the whole spectrum of Iraqi people, however, there were entities that had “lost out” of the new democratic process, which were now working very hard against it.

He called on all countries, particularly those bordering Iraq, to contribute positively to the situation in his country.  Iraq had suffered under tyrannical rule, which had made it impossible to build positive relations with its neighbours, but it was time for it to do so.  He appreciated the offers of help from countries around the world and from within the region.

Did the panellists think that the United Nations or any international intervention, including intervention by the “occupying Power”, could establish security in Iraq without the support of the Iraqi people and their religious leaders? another correspondent asked.

Stressing that the Iraqi people were united, a panellist said they did not need someone else to unite them.  Pulling Iraq “left, right and centre” would weaken the will of the Iraqi people, who wanted supportive, positive and unifying contributions, not divisive ones.

As for the kind of United Nations presence being sought, a member said he was looking to the United Nations for “political backing”.  The political process in Iraq would take several elections.  Whether the Secretary-General wanted to increase his staff or not was a technical question.  The panel was looking for backing in broad terms in support of the political process, the elections.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record