ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - Former Iraqi prime minister Haider al-Abadi (2014 - 2018) has warned that Iraq's upcoming parliamentary elections will be heavily influenced by the misuse of state resources and vote-buying, suggesting that financial power, rather than public support, will determine Iraq’s next prime minister.
Abadi announced in June that his Nasr (Victory) Coalition would not field candidates in the November 11 elections, citing concerns over manipulation of the electoral process through the use of "public funds, foreign money, and state resources."
In a Friday interview with Rudaw, Abadi said that while his coalition remains “within an electoral alliance,” it has decided to withdraw after realizing that “the electoral process has deviated.
“It has become [a process of] buying votes, using state resources in elections, and the funds being spent are enormous," he said, stressing, "We didn't want to be part of this type of competition," the ex-premier continued. "We don't want to compete with others in seizing state resources. I am against this."
Describing the widespread use of money and state influence as “unhealthy,” Abadi accused political actors of “distorting the elections” and said his coalition’s withdrawal was intended as a form of protest.
"I won't present candidates, but I still call on people to choose who is best in the electoral process," he added.
Despite not contesting the election directly, the Nasr Coalition is backing the National State Forces Alliance, led by influential Shiite cleric Ammar al-Hakim. Abadi had joined forces with Hakim in the 2021 legislative ballot.
Abadi had initially formed the Nasr Coalition in 2018 after splitting from the Islamic Dawa Party, led by ex-premier Nouri al-Maliki (2006 - 2014). In the 2021 vote, Nasr and Hakim’s Hikmah (Wisdom) Movement united under the National State Forces Alliance, campaigning on the slogan “We want a state” - a centrist alternative aimed at combating corruption and political fragmentation. The alliance, however, secured only a small number of seats.
Below is the full transcript of the interview with former Iraqi prime minister Haider al-Abadi.
Rudaw: In your opinion, will the upcoming elections change the strength of political parties in the Iraqi Parliament?
Haider al-Abadi: Ultimately, the electoral system is primarily based on parties, and democracy doesn't succeed without a party system. Democracy needs parties to facilitate dealings in parliament for legislation and oversight. All democracies in the world are based on parties. But the question is: are these parties genuine? Do the parties have a proper program? Do they have a program to improve citizens' lives and advance the country? This is the strategic question. Otherwise, electoral work is party work. Individuals alone cannot unite on one approach and one program. Democracy needs harmonious human groups to achieve what is required.
Will small or new parties rise? And will the major parties shrink in size?
I hope new youth faces will rise, but new youth faces are not enough - they should have a new program. But so far, I don't see that previous parties will retreat. This prediction could be due to weak electoral participation. You know these parties have their base, and their base is mostly ideologically aligned with them. So when other participation is weak, certainly the main parties get good votes.
According to your assessment or expectations, who among these main parties will take the largest share of votes?
I don't see… if the electoral system is properly implemented and there's no manipulation, I don't imagine there will be a major change in the electoral map.
What do you mean?
There won't be a major change. Maybe one gains two seats, another loses two seats, perhaps. But if manipulation occurs, I think this is a real problem. If there's major manipulation and fraud in the electoral process, it will create a new crisis we don't need.
Do you have concerns about fraud occurring in the elections?
Yes, there are concerns. And we warn those who would do this. The Commission must be careful of its responsibility to protect voters' voices. Ultimately, if the electoral process fails and real disagreement occurs, it creates a crisis in the country. We have no choice but elections. We have a peaceful transfer of power. Thank God, we're proud that all former officials are present. All of them, not to praise one over the other. If a non-peaceful transfer of power occurs, God forbid, I don't know where we'll go. Electoral integrity is necessary, and the responsibility of the Commission and parties is to pay attention to the integrity of the electoral process.
Can you explain the stance of the Victory Alliance not to participate in the elections?
We're still within an electoral alliance, but after discussing our candidates, we had a list of about fifty candidates. But, after reviewing, we said the electoral process has deviated; it's become [a process of] buying votes, using state resources in elections, and the money being spent is enormous. We didn't want to be part of this type of competition. First, we don't want to compete with others in seizing state resources. I'm against this. I was prime minister and didn't use state resources, so now that I'm outside the premiership, for me to use state resources? I don't accept such a thing from myself. The other thing, this vote-buying method is unhealthy. This distorts elections, so I wanted to register an objection to this way of spending money and political spending in this manner. So I said I won't present candidates, but I still call on people to choose who is best in the electoral process.
Who is best in your opinion?
There are blocs. We're with [the National] State Forces [Alliance], Victory Alliance entered State Forces, so there are many good candidates in the State Forces alliance. People choose them. We don't do it. But as an organization, we'll choose good names and call on people or our followers to vote for them. Even if there's a good candidate in another bloc, we'll support them too, because the better the candidates, the better the political process, and it moves forward.
In your opinion, how will things be for Prime Minister Sudani's list?
Honestly, we're waiting for results. It's hard for me to predict because I'm not within the electoral machine.
Do you support him?
Yes, ultimately, he's the prime minister. I certainly won't be against him. I supported him previously as prime minister; he has previous experience and was also a minister in my government, as you remember. He was previously a minister, was a member of parliament, was a deputy governor then also a governor. This progression in these positions qualifies such a person to succeed in their work. We also didn't want to experiment with several people. He ultimately came by choice. His failure would add another failure, God forbid, and people would distance themselves from the political and electoral process. So I hoped he would succeed in this [Coordination] Framework.
Now there's disagreement perhaps about government performance for elections, and everyone tries to take something for their benefit, so they attack the prime minister. I don't want to be part of this electoral process because I don't have candidates, but I hope voting will be proper. Those close to brother Sudani or within his bloc see they'll get perhaps fifty or fewer or more than fifty seats. That's their prediction. How will voting processes be in Baghdad and other provinces? He also has blocs participating in provinces, not just southern provinces, in northern ones too in this bloc. How many votes and seats will they collect for him? We wait and see.
Between Sudani and former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who will take a higher percentage of votes in Baghdad?
Difficult. I haven't done a study on this topic. Ultimately, as I mentioned, it won't depend primarily on popularity. It depends on spending money, and depends on vote buying. And this is unfortunate.
A personal question Dr...
Both are friends, you know.
Who will you support between Mr. Nouri al-Maliki and Mohammed Shia al-Sudani?
We're waiting for results.
Meaning before elections you don't nominate or say…
It is not proposed. You know the political process and choosing the prime minister is through the largest bloc, the largest bloc chooses the prime minister. So, now is there a largest bloc? They form the largest bloc, gather votes after elections, and the largest bloc nominates the prime minister.
There were talks that you too would be among the names nominated to form the government. Is this true? And you didn't participate in elections, let's say as candidates and as a party.
We're present as a party in an alliance. But originally throughout history, the prime minister hasn't been chosen based on votes. The prime minister is chosen based on an agreement between political blocs. Yes, this is on the table, and we don't want to jump ahead, because if we jump ahead now, then where are the elections? We see the size of blocs and which blocs will decide that, and then based on what citizens give in votes. I think we will wait. Now there's no race to nominate the prime minister. It's not on the table and hasn't been discussed.
Yes, there are people who offered themselves, and there are people in the political process who perhaps offered themselves as candidates and hope to be part of this nomination to perhaps gain support. There are forms. I hear names, but honestly don't know their acceptability, and who will support them in that. There are [candidates] from the first line, and also from the second line of candidates. There are nominated names, and certainly, my name is among those circulated, especially regarding two main topics.
The perception among political blocs and people is that the coming challenge is a financial-economic challenge, because the country seems to have entered a difficult problem in financing, and now revenues don't cover expenses, and perhaps don't even cover salaries, and this is a real problem. They say we need someone who can solve this problem and has the ability and vision to solve this issue. The other point is balance in Iraq's relationship with the region and the international situation. Perhaps some are looking for a person capable of achieving this balance successfully for Iraq's interests. So selection will happen here. Of course, blocs have their interests. Everyone wants a bigger share of government and state resources, too. This will be part of the calculation. Of course, the first calculation is for the country's interest, a balance between international and regional situations, and the economy and finance issues too. This is an issue for citizens' and the country's interest. But blocs have their special interests and will think: this one is with me, this one against me, this one will prevent me from benefiting from the state, won't prevent me from benefiting from the state, and so these are complex calculations.
Before we move to the Kurdistan Region file, I have three or four questions about the Kurdistan Region's situation. Let me ask you a personal question, doctor. You mentioned earlier that Mr. Sudani was a minister in your government, and now he's Iraq's prime minister. In your opinion, was he a more successful minister or a more successful prime minister?
He was a good minister, I remember him, and really in files I assigned to him, because I consider him systematic in work and administratively good. The premiership doesn't just need good administration. It needs leadership and vision, and this is a question. It needs a type of tactfulness. But tactfulness is not for my personal interest, tactfulness for the country's interest. You don't want to enter battles with everyone and lose the country. You must be realistic and deal with others in the country's interest. This needs leadership, and leadership must be wise.
The problem you fall into is when you think about a second term from now. When you think "I want to win for myself" from now. This enters you into complications that sometimes don't achieve the country's interests greatly. It might achieve its interests. And most leaders fall into this problem. They prioritize their interest or what they see as correct at the expense of the country’s interests. Brother Sudani certainly has successes. One of the man's positives is progression in responsibility. But in other issues, I think he might gather enemies for himself.
So, as a minister, 9 out of 10?
As a minister, perhaps 9 out of 10.
As prime minister?
It's difficult for me to give him [an evaluation], because there would be deep disagreement about this topic, especially regarding spending. The spending method, and now we've reached having no money, and we can't cover spending. I think this is one thing. He says I had no choice but to employ this number of people to satisfy people, but now we've fallen into a problem, meaning it's a problem you look at in the future. So it should have been calculated at the time. Of course, I'm not against hiring people in this matter. To hire someone and give them a future, you must protect them. But to hire them when I don't have money and then be forced not to give them a salary, this is torture for the citizen, and this is honestly cheating the citizen.
Let me ask you the first question about the Kurdistan Region file. You met President Masoud Barzani. What did you discuss?
About the Iraqi situation in general, and my vision about the possibility of agreeing on something. Because things are the same, we might differ on details, but things in the Region and rest of Iraq are the same. There's dissatisfaction from people, there's mismanagement, wealth distribution is unfair and unscientific, so we waste wealth on many things, and essential things are left. The issue of stimulating and supporting the private sector so that it performs many tasks. We discussed all this. Of course, in addition to the relationship between Baghdad and Kurdistan, and which is almost an eternal issue since the [establishment of the] constitution, and the distance and relationship between the two sides must be governed by legal and constitutional articles.
He has dissatisfaction about many issues that happened in the relationship, and so I think exchanging views helps us find a solution. I ultimately look for solutions. What does the Region want? I don't want to enter all the details. Other complex details are done by entities, but address the origin, and what is the origin that concerns you? What did President Masoud Barzani say?
He talks about justice, for example, it pains him, one of them he raised as a contentious issue, that for example during Eid, they stopped salaries. He says, isn't the Kurd an Iraqi citizen? He sees this as a shortcoming and considers it hurt him greatly. There's another narrative in Baghdad that says: deliver the oil, get the salaries. If the oil is yours. You know it's another narrative. But this should be addressed. I raised it myself in Baghdad. I say, if the salary is for the Iraqi citizen, why do I discriminate? He's a citizen.
In 2018, despite what happened, I paid the Region’s salaries. Without agreement. But I saw citizens hadn't had salaries for a long time, and the economic situation could collapse, and if it collapses in the Region, it affects the rest of Iraq. We're not enemies, we're one country. The same citizens matter to me. When you're Iraq's prime minister, you should care for citizens anywhere in Iraq. You're responsible for them, regardless of their identity, nationality, religion, or sect. One should think this way. The problem that occurs is that thinking is sometimes populist. What is populist? I satisfy my people at others' expense. This isn't a justice approach. Yes, satisfy your people, but satisfying your people isn't at others' expense.
Is this what's happening in Baghdad?
I think it happens from all sides, and so there's a feeling of injustice. The citizen in Basra feels injustice and tells you I export 90 percent of Iraq's oil, but I don't get 90 percent or even 20 percent of revenues, and I live in poverty, come see me. I live in poverty and need and have no services, so he considers it an injustice. Someone in the Region says you paid salaries for all of Iraq, but because I'm in the Kurdistan Region, you don't pay my salary. Am I not Iraqi? Everyone feels from their position injustice and that they're wronged.
So amid all these changes and talks, how do you see the future path of relations between the Region and Iraq?
From my perspective, there are wise people and professionals. The country can't be led by non-professionals, to be clear. Whoever proceeds without vision will distance us from the goal, and take us elsewhere, while we want to reach prosperity and progress, but whoever lacks vision and knowledge doesn't realize they'll take us to the wrong place, and divert us from the path. So we must gather those with vision and professionals, and also leadership personalities. This is my ambition.
It's possible to gather enough of these to sit and draw again and know where we erred, where previous mistakes were, and what could lose our country. You know we've passed through several dangers. Al-Qaeda, [the Islamic State] ISIS, economic crisis, financial crisis, deep political disagreements at certain stages occurred, but despite that, we emerged from them. Now will we continue another 20 years or 23 years in the same direction? It becomes two generations. Now almost a generation.
You talked about 20 years before and 20 future years. Is Iraq still a federal system or more centralized now?
According to the Constitution, it must be federal.
Of course. But in reality?
I think the Kurdistan Region is federal, and we also have federalism in provinces, meaning provinces, even if not a region, have powers. Now, governors act with their powers. But I hope there's an oversight role for institutions within provinces and regions. I talked about the topic. Decentralization and federalism require that in the region and province, there be independent oversight bodies. You know the Iraqi state was built from the beginning as a centralized state, so most oversight authorities are in Baghdad. When you have a region and provinces, where are your independent oversight bodies? This is a fundamental point. Because there must be oversight bodies within you monitoring spending money, distribution of money, and monitoring justice in appointments.
Judicial Council, parliament?
In the Region. But does parliament work in the Region? It's been suspended for a long time.
There's a flaw. I'm not talking only here, but even in provinces and provincial councils. I don't want to be biased against the Region in this sense. The problem is everywhere, not just in the Region, and not just in the Region's relationship with Baghdad, but we have a problem in provinces' relationship with Baghdad, and it's the same problem.
Do you expect forming the next Iraqi government to be easy or difficult? Will the situation be smooth or will we take more than 10-11 months for the government to form?
We have a problem that in every election we're supposed to progress forward, but we regress. More problems and obstacles occur. I hope that in the next phase, we can facilitate the matter and compromise a little to speed up government formation. The faster we form the government, the fewer accumulations, and problems become less, giving the government a chance to work for four years. If a year is taken from the government's life, three years remain, and in the last year, they prepare for elections, so it doesn't have time to achieve accomplishments.
Will it form easily?
I hope so, yes. I hope so.
Thank you very much.