Ismaili.NET - Heritage F.I.E.L.D.

The following is a free translation of an interview published in the French daily newspaper 'La Croix' onTuesday, April 8, 2003 entitled 'Il sera difficile d'organiser la démocratie en Irak'.

The translator makes no guarantees on the accuracy of this translation. Please refer to the original French
text for a precise account of the interview.

World - The war in Iraq
'It will be difficult to organize democracy in Iraq'
In an exclusive interview to 'La Croix', the Aga Khan underlines how much war
destabilizes the Middle East. He believes that democracy should be given time to
take root, and that it ought to respect the diversity of the country.

Interview
Karim Aga Khan
Spiritual Leader of the Shia Ismaili Muslims

What is your perspective on the current conflict in Iraq?

Karim Aga Khan: This conflict is the most dangerous that we have lived through in a
long time. Its consequences will be extremely difficult to manage, because they have
brought to bear many political, theological and economic structures in that part of the
world. Iraq is a fault line between two parts of the Arab world, between the Arab Muslim
world and the non-Arab Muslim world, between Shia Muslims and Sunnis, between
Wahabi Muslims and Shias. The conflict has opened a series of fundamental questions
that will have to be managed with enormous prudence. It has touched the religious
equilibriums of the zone. In Iraq you have a minority Sunni government in a country that
is majority Shia. In Syria it is the inverse. While in Saudi Arabia, their positions on a
number of points are absolutely and totally rejected by other countries in the same
geographic zone.

In this context, one must ask what it is that we wish to see take place in a post-Saddam
Hussein Iraq. Will the United Nations accept the role of being the principle authority for
the reconstruction of Iraq? Is there a movement towards a temporary colonization by the
English and the Americans? Will elections in Iraq lead to a Shia power? Would this Shia
majority ally itself with Iran and with Yemen? Will there be more empathy between Arab
Shias and Arab non-Shias, than between the Shia and Sunni Arabs? These are
fundamental questions. On the military and economic plane, an Iran-Iraq axis would be
extremely powerful. How would Saudi Arabia and its partners react to this reshuffling of
cards?

In the face of these questions, it is said that Iraqis will decide for themselves. But the
post-Taliban situation in Afghanistan illustrates the difficulty of unifying a country,
changing a regime and finding leaders to drive the change.
Many players in this war have made claims in the name of God. What is your
feeling?

I do not believe in this notion of war between the Muslim world and the Christian world.
When the lives of men and women are put into play, in any war this poses a moral
problem - that of the fate of these men and women. But I do not see in Bush or Blair the
hostility of Christianity against Islam. There is perhaps a tendency to say 'We are going
to war in the name of the ethic of our faith.' The experience of September 11 was
profoundly destabilizing for the United States. I know Tony Blair well enough. I do not
see his morals turning against the Muslim world. Furthermore, in Europe and America
there is too much of a tendency to associate a multitude of countries and positions with
the generic words 'arab' and 'muslim'. There is not enough attention paid to the
complexity of that [part of the] world, which is so poorly known. Before the Iranian
revolution, the Western world did not know the word 'Shia'. It took a war in Afghanistan
for [the West] to discover the word 'Wahabi'. [The Western world] is in the process of
learning about the complexities of the Muslim world through these crises. I would have
wished that it be by other means.

Will it be possible to effectively institute democracy in Iraq, and, more generally, in
the Arab world after the war?

Democracy has not been applied in Iraq in a very long time. Putting in place a credible
system will take time and will be difficult to organize. Afghanistan is proof. And beyond
that, one has to be ready to accept the verdict of democracy. This democracy must be
given time and stability to establish itself. In many countries, the democratic experience
has failed. It you want to put in place a democratic process in a third-world country, you
have to reflect well, not only on the process, but upon its effects and with a view to the
results [of the process]. Iraq is an educated country with a long tradition. But it is no
more pluralistic in its manner of thinking than Afghanistan. Democracy, if it is
established in Iraq, must legitimize pluralism. This is not easy to do. The fundamental
question is that of a successful democracy. And for this, leaders must be found who are
competent in matters of governance.

Is the concept of democracy universal?

The democratic model adjusts itself in accordance with the country. If a one-party regime
is changed, I would be favorable [toward democracy], but then a political system must be
put in place that adapts to the political, ethnic, religious and linguistic reality of the
country in question. For me, the fundamental problem is to manage this pluralism. This is
a notion that is fundamental in the third world.

To what extent must the international community chaperone the democratic
process?

Economic reconstruction will require long-term support to put in place a new financial
system, a freeing of the economy, and better management of public resources. Iraq has
the opportunity to have a healthy economy from the beginning, due to oil. At the political
level, Iraqis will have to decide for themselves how to refine the democratic process to
suit their own country. This is what is taking place in Afghanistan today. It is [also] what
the Iranians are seeking at this time.

At the political level, in the Arab and non-Arab Muslim world, we have the heritage of
the cold war, of that choice which was imposed upon us, between the Soviet system and
the Western system. The middle road, that of the non-aligned, was not a success. We
3
have passed through a period of centralism, based on single party [political systems].
Today, we are searching for a new road. It is destabilizing, because it is a new process.
The leaders of the Central Asian states for example, are emerging from a Soviet system,
and are in the process of exploring and learning.

What experience can you bring as the leader of the Ismaili community?

Ismaili Shi'ism has a living Imam, who lives in this world and has a large number of
contacts. I observe change, and to the extent possible I anticipate it in order to construct
institutions that respond to the needs of the Ismailis. We do not have in the Ismaili
community, a single ethnicity, a single language, a single religious history. I am in touch
with this pluralism of traditions. I situate my action in [keeping with] the times. I have
lived through decolonization, the end of the cold-war, the creation of Bangladesh, the
Iranian revolution. In the face of these situations, one had to reflect, to anticipate, to
respond to necessities [needs]. My grandfather has given, and I [continue to] give, a
certain interpretation of Shi'ism. The intellect is seen as a facet of the faith, [to be used]
in the service of the faith. Logic and contemplation are part of the decision process. This
contemplation is desirable, necessary to the interpretation of religion. This means that we
invest in the intellect of the community. It is one of the elements that has permitted the
Ismaili community to respond to problems of - [sentence is incomplete]

What comment do you make on the relatively aggressive position of the Pope
against the war in Iraq?

It is very delicate for me to comment on these positions. Personally, I am vigorously
opposed to all notions of intrinsic conflict between the Christian world and the Muslim
world. This thesis is a grand farce! It is oblivious to the [reality of the] Christian world,
which is not unique. It is just as out of touch with the Muslim world. {C'est méconna