Novo Patriarca para a Antiga Igreja do Oriente

A Antiga Igreja do Oriente tinha de escolher o seu novo Patriarca entre seis candidatos.

Calculo que tenham seguido o critério mais lógico para a escolha, optando pela barba mais fixe e mais comprida.

Longa Vida a Mar Yaqoob III Daniel! Que conduza a sua Igreja com sabedoria e ajude a pôr fim ao cisma com a Igreja Assíria do Oriente, contribuindo assim mais um pouco para a unidade total dos cristãos que todos desejamos. 

A Antiga Igreja do Oriente separou-se da Igreja Assíria do Oriente em 1964, numa disputa sobre a forma de escolher o Patriarca. Até então, na IAO a escolha era sempre hereditária, passando do Patriarca para um sobrinho. Infelizmente, a separação reflectiu também divisões internas tribais/familiares. Antes desta eleição falou-se novamente numa tentativa de aproximação e reunificação. Esperemos que isso agora ande para a frente. 

Os seis bispos do sínodo. Mar Yaqoob à
direita, ao centro, com a barba mais fixe.

Estas igrejas servem fiéis sobretudo da região do Iraque, Turquia e Síria e, hoje em dia, uma grande diáspora no Ocidente, nomeadamente na Austrália, Nova Zelândia e Estados Unidos. São igrejas canónicas, isto é, têm ordens e sacramentos válidos, mas por razões históricas não pertenciam a nenhuma comunhão de Igrejas, nem as ortodoxas bizantinas, nem as ortodoxas pré-calcedónias, nem a Católica. Esse facto deixou-as num isolamento fragilizador, que levou a terríveis perseguições e massacres, mais do que as restantes igrejas cristãs na região. São João Paulo II referiu-se à Igreja do Oriente como "Igreja dos Mártires" e isso aplica-se a qualquer destes ramos que entretanto, infelizmente, se separaram entre si. 

Mar Yaqoob III Daniel, (Yaqoob vem de Jacob, que em Português pode ser Tiago) torna-se assim o 110º Patriarca  desta Igreja (uma vez que eles contam com os patriarcas anteriores ao cisma). Era até agora o bispo para as comunidades na Austrália e Nova Zelândia.

Para mais informações sobre a importância religiosa da barba e do cabelo, vejam este artigo que escrevi há mais de 10 anos. 

“The future of Iraq should not be buried by the conflicts of the past”

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my interview with ambassador Hussain Sinjari, former representative of Iraq in Portugal and founder and president of Tolerancy International. The published interview, in Portuguese, can be read here. 

---

How important is this visit for Iraq and for the Iraqi state?

As everyone else, I do believe that this is a highly important visit. The Pope comes to Iraq after the first papal visit was cancelled for many and difficult reasons [in 2000] and now the Iraqis from different religious backgrounds are all waiting with great hope for this visit.

We do need not only the blessings from the Pope, but also to strengthen the moderate voices in Iraq. In fact, not only in Iraq but in the Middle East at large. We hope also that the visit will encourage the young Christians to stay home rather than to immigrate to Europe and to other places. 

This is a visit of hope and we do appreciate the Pope, at his old age, making this effort to come all the way to Iraq in these difficult times. 

Many people advised against the Pope's visit, for safety reasons and also because of the pandemic...

Probably for other reasons as well. Many people believe that the past will decide about our future and this visit shows that our future shouldn't be buried by the past and the conflicts of the past. This is the most important thing. We shouldn't allow our past to decide our future and to bury it in the sands of the Middle East. 

 The coexistence among faiths and the different religious and ethnic backgrounds in Iraq and beyond, in the Middle East, is very important for building a future for everyone to have a place in it. Myself, as founder and president of Tolerancy International (tolerancy.org), I have great hope that this will bear fruit, good fruit, and to plant seeds, this Spring, in the soil of the Middle East for brotherhood, fraternity and equality and human rights for individuals and communities.

 Do you have any doubts about the Government's ability to keep the Pope safe during this trip?

No! Everybody is concerned about this, including the two governments, in Baghdad, and the regional government in Erbil, in Kurdistan. I have seen myself that there are guards along the streets and everybody is making sure that the Pope returns to the Vatican safely, and in good shape. 

 One of the highlights of this visit will be the Pope's visit with Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. How important is this religious leader in Iraq? 

For the Shiites he is very important, he is the supreme religious leader and grand ayatollah among the Shiites, not only in Iraq but beyond as well, but also Ayatollah Sistani is important for other Iraqis because until now he has shown himself as a guardian of peaceful coexistence among different minorities and people from different backgrounds in Iraq and for peaceful solutions whenever there is a conflict or a problem, as well as being a moderate voice. 

The meeting with between these two great religious men is important to establish peace among people and understanding, and tolerance and building tolerance, the thing we most need in the Middle East.

There was a serious conflict between Baghdad and Erbil a few years ago. Have things been resolved?

The problem between Baghdad and Erbil is not resolved completely. We still have serious problems between the KRG and the Government in Baghdad. The issues of oil and gas, budgets and state employees are all very important issues for the living standards of the people, and are still not solved completely. There are still serious problems. 

But somehow, if this is what you mean, there is a better military and security coordination between the Kurdish forces and the federal forces of Baghdad. Any understanding will help, and we hope this Papal visit will also help to find common ground between Baghdad and the regional government.

 

“We hope the Pope puts his diplomatic machine to work 100%”

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my interview with Metin Rhawi, from Suroyo TV and the European Syriac Union, regarding the importance of Pope Francis’ visit to Iraq. Excerpts of this interview were used here and here.

How important is this visit for the Christians in Iraq?

The Christians in Iraq, we have good knowledge about what they are thinking, and regarding this visit many people find it important, of course, because they belong to the Catholic Church, they are Chaldeans or Syriac Catholics, and that gives them a possibility to see their supreme leader in faith. But at the same time there are also clear voices from the same community who have reservations. 

We know the situation of our people, the Christians in Iraq. We are out in the diaspora, we have lost everything, it is about existing or not in their homeland. Since Daesh no rights have been acknowledged. We are happy that they are talking a bit more about the Yazidis now, and also remembering that there were Christians who suffered very much, and so they are also mentioned, but we have lost properties, our land, our cities, our villages, our rights and there has also been a very bad influence in the civil society, with people thinking that they do not actually need the Christians, they are not part of the system, part of the culture, and also some voices from Muslim leaders asking why the Pope should come to Iraque, since he is an infidel. 

Of course, Al-Khadimi and Barham Salih have expressed their gratitude and they are happy he is coming, they are doing their best and trying to show a good face, but both sides exist, in general, among the society, and also among the Christians. Some are very happy, but others are raising issues. We have been victims of genocide for over 100 years. The last big genocide was in 1915, prior to that, 1895 and then Daesh 2014. Nobody demanded acknowledgement or liability for what happened then and now. Rights do not exist. Nobody talks about the possibility of educating our children in our language, the right to be Christian and if we want to produce and consume alcohol it should not be a problem, but instead we see bombing of the stores that sell alcohol in Baghdad. So there are many rights that have been left out and it seems to those people that the Pope should ask about this situation before coming here and making sure that the rights should be acknowledged and given to the Christians, the Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs, because it gives some kind of legitimacy to the Baghdad regime, as if they had been successful in dealing with this sort of thing. But obviously the Pope will be having diplomatic discussions with them, I believe. 

But of course we know the Vatican has always had a very pragmatic approach to diplomacy, and have in fact been able to achieve successes and rights precisely through dialogue with regimes that are not always friendly, such as China.

Obviously, the Pope’s administration is very powerful and he is in a position that he can, indirectly, influence some foreign ministries. Obviously, the countries that are Catholic, and proud of it, listen to the Pope when he has something to say, we know that! That is why we, as the European Syriac Union have not expressed reservations about this visit. We think it is good, it is very important that he visit our homeland, because some of our people belong to his church, they are faithful to his church, and to him, and he should be asking about their rights. We hope that he will do that, we understand also that he is not a leader of a country who has an army to invade, or to impose sanctions, but we know that he has the capacity, when he wants to, to draw a line in the sand that should not be crossed. We hope that is his intention, because we see a lot of concern from the Pope and the cardinals and bishops around him have expressed this, that Christianity should not vanish from the Middle East, from Iraq. They are trying to do their best, but their strongest weapon is prayer... But we know that he has diplomacy and we believe that he will use it, of course. 

I am trying to show you the full picture. There are people on the ground with both opinions. I know that in Baghdedi and Bartella for three months a choir has been practicing singing hymns in Italian and in Latin, as well as in Arabic and Syriac, to show that they are proud to be Assyrian/Syriac/Chaldean, they have their own language, but they belong to Iraq at the moment, they are Iraqi and they are also Catholics. 

Disunity has always been a problem for Christians in the Middle East. Following the persecution by the Islamic State, has the situation improved?

If you look internally, when it comes to Christianity, the persecution woke us up from this strange dream that we are different empires living on the ground. In fact we are hospitalised on the ground, we are close to dying on the ground, but still the church leaders are not trying to find us a common line on the ground for Iraq. The Patriarchs and leaders of the different churches should cooperate much more. They are all Christian, but they have the same roots, they are the same people, there is no doubt that they are the same community, but they are divided in different "isms", when it comes to faith some are Catholics, some are Orthodox. They should have done much more.

Watching the political leaders, I can see that they are trying, but the ones who have more power, with seats in Parliament, consider that they are big enough to decline any interest that does not benefit them directly, they are not thinking as a community, but rather as parties. We are still divided, unfortunately, in that sense. It is tough to say that, it hurts, but it is the reality.

There are many reasons for the Pope not to visit at the moment. A recent bombing in Baghdad, the pandemic… The Pope has personally insisted on going. In your opinion is he being foolish, brave, or both?

We have seen in the news that even the previous Pope has expressed his fear and called upon Pope Francis to be careful and maybe not visit because of the security, and the Pandemic. I think that the Pope is not stupid, he is not foolish. He is doing a very good thing to show that he is with his people and that he has interests in Iraq because of the people and because the societies in the Middle East are based on faith and religion and he is a leader that mush show that he is close to his people. And he is doing that and we should really give him credit for that.

We hope he will get home safe and secure, and I think that will be arranged, I am not worried that something might happen to him. His faithful love him, and they won't get too close because of Covid. I think all this will be respected, and he knows how much this means to his people, because even if some say he should not visit before rights are guaranteed, there is a part of the community that is really insisting, and rightly so, that he is showing courage and showing that he is with them, that he knows that they exist there and that nobody should be able to force them out. So much so that he is even willing to visit them himself. It is an act of being with his people, and that is good, and we should give him credit. 

But of course, above all, we really hope he will run his diplomacy machine to work 100%, because it is a very critical situation, in Iraq and in the Middle East in general. 

In Iraq there are about 300 thousand Christians from different churches, of the Chaldean/Assyrian/Syriac people today. So, from being about 4 million 20 years ago, maybe more, to 1.8 million in 2003, or 1.5, according to the figures, now people say 200 thousand, others say 300 thousand, so we can see that it is like 10% left. We are not far away, in time, it could be in our lifetimes... This is frightening, and we need to be awake and I think the Pope is acting on that. 

"Nineveh is not a 'disputed area', it is our home"

Metin Rhawi

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my conversation with Metin Rhawi, of the European Syriac Union, about the situation in the Ninevah Plain and expectations for after the liberation of Mossul. The interview was used for several articles on the subject.

Esta é uma transcrição completa, no inglês original, da minha conversa com Metin Rhawi, da União Siríaca Europeia, sobre a situação na Planície de Nínive e as expectativas para depois da libertação de Mosul. A entrevista foi usada para uma série de artigos sobre o assunto.

Could you please introduce yourself and your organization?

I am head of Foreign Affairs for the European Syriac Union. What we do basically is advocacy for the Chaldean/Syriac/Assyrian people in our homeland, Old Mesopotamia, or Bet-Nahrain, as we call it, today Iraq, Turkey, Syria, parts of Lebanon and parts of Iran.

Our work is basically trying to raise the issue and the situation for this minority who have been the indigenous people of this region for the past 8.000 years or something. The situation for Christians is currently very crucial, losing almost everything they had, many having gone abroad.

Originally I was born in the Southeast of Turkey, in Midyat, and I belong to the Syriac Orthodox Church. But among our people we also have the Chaldean Church, the Apostolic Chuch of the Assyrians, the Maronite, the Melkite Church and the Orthodox... So there are many denominations.

How familiar are you with the situation in Iraq? Do you travel there frequently?

I have been in Iraq four times in the past one and a half years, and once to Syria. Unfortunately I couldn't make more trips to Syria because they closed the border from Iraq, so we need to go through the regime controlled airports in Syria, and that is not possible for me because I have taken a stance against the regime in Syria.

So I am well informed and I have seen with my own eyes and I have a network of political parties, NGOs, different associations and military militias in Iraq.

Why is there so much division among Christians? I counted 12 political parties and several militias.

I don't know if you could necessarily call this division, these are political views of the current situation, or at least how to solve the current situation, and as within any country or nationality you have many political views, many parties, among our community we have also many parties, at least 13 or 14 parties, so even more than the ones you discovered, and five of them have their own militias. I think this is due to the fact that you have the Baghdad regime on one side and the Kurdistan Regional Government controlled by Kurdistan Democratic Party on the other. These local politics are benefiting from the situation when you have political groups which are split, rather than joining forces.

In this case they can, at any time, play the situation against each other and this is what we are facing, unfortunately they are giving us some kind of hope from different sides, and at the same time our community, and the political parties, are in really great need of doing something for the people who have been tossed around in different directions, in order to reach their goal, to give something to the people, some kind of security and hope for the future in their homeland.

Then you see the big policies between these big nations who are interfering, Iran with the Shia concept, Turkey with the Sunni concept, and the Syrian regime and the United States and Russia, so it is quite puzzling situation and you need to have all the facts, trying to understand why these communities are so divided.

But you would agree that it is negative for the aspirations of the community to have so much political division?

It is, in one sense, if you don't have a common strategy and agenda, of course it is. Today what we can see with these political parties, different members of the European Parliament, different political associations and foundations, and us, we have reached an agreement between all of them among the community to have some common demands for the Nineveh Plain.

For instance, we are starting to have the same agenda in some very important and common issues, and that is the positive thing today that I would like to focus on. But of course it is quite frustrating that there are so many different factions within a small community like ours, because from two million ten years ago, we are today close to 400 thousand. So we can understand that we should not be so divided, because we are losing the grip, while discussing among ourselves what to do as the next step.

After the liberation of Mosul, do you expect to see conflict between Baghdad and Kurdistan over the disputed areas?

As for the “disputed areas”, that is their term, but we don't agree with it... The Nineveh Plain is not a disputed area, even though Baghdad and Erbil many times tried to make it appear so, this is the land of our ancestors since many thousands of years back. Bartella city has been home to Syriacs since about 5,000 years before Christianity, so how can it be a disputed area?

But, having said that, what is actually happening on the ground today is that you can see the regime trying to take the Northeastern part of the Nineveh plain, and the Peshmerga controlling the Southeastern part, so they have already, more or less, in practice, split the region, so now for us as Christians it is very important to really make it obvious that the Nineveh Plain is not open to be divided by these two political powers of Baghdad and Erbil.

As for the future, whether they are going to have an armed fight, I don't know, that is difficult for us to say. Until now they have been quite good at talking, they respect each other, but you never know... They have had ISIS in their faces for two years, what will happen in the future is very difficult to say. But for us, at least, we know that they are interfering on the ground, in a region which belongs to us and which they call a disputed area.

However, you can also say this is a totally disputed area, because even Turkey talks about being involved, so it is quite a difficult situation...

Miliciana cristã acende velas numa igreja no Iraque

So can I gather that you would prefer to see the Nineveh Plains not directly under the control of Baghdad or Erbil, but autonomous?

The situation in all of Iraq and also in Kurdistan is a great lack of democratic process. It is still the strong people who make decisions, there is empowerment of powers which are already quite strong and the local minorities are more or less powerless. So what we need to do is work to empower the local minorities, like the Yezidis, like the Shabaks, the Turkmen and the Assyrians, in order to have this autonomous region together, with different provinces within it. Whether it is going to be connected to Baghdad or to Erbil… I think this is a question of what the law says in Iraq today. Obviously it should be closer to Baghdad, but with very good relations with Erbil.

In our opinion we should have an open book with each other as a province or autonomous region both with Erbil and Baghdad and explain that this region can be an autonomous region. The ministers’ council of Baghdad, two years ago, declared that the Nineveh Plain can be an autonomous region for the Chaldean/Assyrian/Syriac community, but we have not seen anything more than talk. Erbil shows the same willingness: "If the community want their freedom and self-government in an autonomous region in the Nineveh plain, we will help them”, but still we cannot see more than one autonomous region and that is Kurdistan, and the rest is Iraq.

So we hope, really, that all this talk becomes real policy and for this we need the support of the United States and the European Parliament to support this region becoming an autonomous region, with the good help of Kurdistan and the very, very good help of Baghdad.

In the future, how it develops, I truly don't know, because you never know, in this region, what is going to happen a year from now, it is very difficult to say.

This scenario you described only seems to work if Kurdistan remains in Iraq. If Kurdistan becomes independent and the Christians are forced to choose between joining an independent Kurdistan or remaining in Iraq, what do you think the majority would choose?

I think it is very difficult today to say, and it would not be good for me to do that.

I think it is quite obvious that the Chaldean/Assyrian/Syriac people are in great need of support from both places. Even if Kurdistan declare themselves an independent country and sovereign state, for us the issue is to have good relations with Kurdistan, as a country, and also with Iraq, as a country. In that case we would have borders with both Erbil and Baghdad, so for us that is the big policy of the local strong powers today, what they decide to do and how they decide to do it, unfortunately there is a risk that could go to civil war, of course, because it would be a civil war, Kurdistan is an autonomous region in Iraq.

So it is quite difficult. I don't know which side people would like to choose, because unfortunately we have bad experience today from both sides.

Many people tend to think of the time when Saddam was ruling the country as a more peaceful time than today, although they knew he was a dictator. So you are familiar with the situation in Iraq and you can understand that the situation today is not good. Everybody was treated very badly under Saddam, but today it is not everybody, but certain groups are treated worse than others, certain groups are not given democratic rights, certain groups are not being defended the right way, certain groups have to rely on themselves even if they are not powerful enough. And if you take their powers from them, more and more, their situation is going to be very frustrating.

The more recent waves of persecution of Christians in Iraq have come from the Islamic State, but I remember at the time the people said that the ones who had taken their houses, were not IS, they were their Arabic neighbours. So it would seem that in the more recent years the more severe persecution came from the Sunni majority, whether Islamic State or the local Arabs. But I have also spoken many Christians from the region, many of whom off the record, and I asked them if they trust the Kurds, despite the fact that they fled to Kurdistan and the Kurds were the only ones who seemed determined to fight IS on the ground. And many of them answered saying that they remember that the Kurds also persecuted them in the past, so they are cautious. Is this your feeling as well, is there a feeling of suspicion between the Christians and the Kurds, or is this something of the past...

When you are looking forward to the future and to establish something you have trust in, and believe in for the future, you calculate with the past and your accumulated knowledge of what happened.

Of course we have very, very bad experience from each other. Both Arabs, Sunni and Shia or Kurds. In the Ottoman Empire, when Iraq was part of it, there were also Kurds persecuting us, as well as Arab Sunnis and Arab Shia. So I don't know today if we need to bring all those fears with us into the future, but at least we should know that this happened, not forget it, but we should forgive and continue to build a future together, along with the people living there, because obviously we cannot expel the people from there, the majority living there are Arab Sunni or Arab Shia or Kurds, so what we have to do is reconciliation.

Igreja vandalizada no Iraque

This is really important and we are working with that as the European Syriac Union also, along with other communities there, it is important to trust in the future, to trust in each other, what the Kurds and the Peshmerga did during the Islamic State invasion of the Nineveh Plain… Of course without them we would probably have lost everything, so we have to be thankful for that. But at the same time we know that they could obviously have done more for us, they could be standing there in the frontline, they could have given us weapons to defend ourselves along with them and probably, together, we could have fought ISIS before they became stronger, but to go into that issue of how and for what reason did ISIS become stronger and have the possibility to become stronger, as they have been for the past two years, that is a question which will take us too long to answer... And there are many conspiracy theories to look into of course...

Obviously people on the ground, whether Sunni or Shia, have also hurt us and whether Kurds or Arabs, they have also hurt us, but we need to trust in each other in some way, because we will be neighbours anyway, we need to build a common future together and that can be done with respect and democracy. And that quality type of living today does not exist in Iraq, nor in Kurdistan, really, because you can feel the tension, I have been in Kurdistan many times, and you can feel the tension, where you feel that you are not a first rate citizen, because you are not Kurd, because you are Chaldean, Syriac or Assyrian. And because you don't feel you belong to a strong party, because parties dominate Kurdistan today. More than the government dominating Kurdistan, it is the KDP that dominates Kurdistan. And that is also an issue...

What we would like to have is Mr. Barzani should stand up and say OK, if this is what the Chaldean/Syriac/Assyrians want, this is not a disputed area, this is your area, we give it over to you, we can help you, in what way do you need help from us?

And the same thing from Baghdad, because they have a decision from their ministers’ council from two years ago, they should say the thing: This is what you want, tell us how we can help you.

And then, I think the European Parliament, the United States Government and even the Russians would understand that this is ok, this is a good situation where we can also be supportive and find common solutions.

Of the five different militias that I found in my research, the Nineveh Plain Forces, the Nineveh Plain Protection Units, Dwekh Nawsha, Qaraqosh Protection Committee and the Tiger Guards... Are some of these considered pro-Kurd and others Pro-Baghdad?

In the end, whether they like to say that or not, some of us must be more pro-the side that gives us the permission to be a military militia.

The Nineveh Plain Units answer to the Government of Baghdad, the Ninevah Plain Forces are from Peshmerga ministry, from the Kurdistan region. This is why we operate in different places. If we belong to Peshmerga, obviously we cannot move in the areas where Baghdad moves, and vice versa.

Dwekh Nawsha is unfortunately a very, very small group and there are also the Nineveh Plain Guards Protection Units from Barzani's side also, the Chaldean Syriac Assyrian Popular Council. That is pro-Kurdistan, more obviously than the others.

Then you have the Syriac Falcons, newly established, by Salwon Momika, of the Syriac Democratic Union who was held hostage for almost two weeks recently, in fights. He established himself as a political party and also militia. The first movement within the Syriac Chaldean Assyrian group established in the liberated areas, and he faced problems, of course, and he was held captive, but now he was released.

But what is not working there, what we are obviously being stopped from, we made it clear to our militias, on behalf of the Syriac European Union, and along with Mr. Lars Adaktusson, that we need to find a common agenda for the military unification also, in order to become an army for the Nineveh Plain in the future. But of course neither Baghdad nor Erbil like this, and that is obvious. Maybe they don't like me to say that, but I will do it anyway.

Related: "Kurdish independence is necessary to avoid further atrocities"

"Kurdish independence is necessary to avoid further atrocities"

Mohammedali Taha is a member of parliament in the autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan for the Kurdistan Democratic Party, and spokesman for the KDP fraction in parliament. This interview was recorded in January, in Lisbon, and used in a series of articles about the situation in Iraq published at the end of June. This is an edited transcript of the conversation, in the original English.

Mohammedali Taha é deputado do Parlamento da região autónoma do Curdistão Iraquiano pelo Partido Democrático do Curdistão e porta-voz da bancada parlamentar. Esta entrevista foi gravada em Janeiro, em Lisboa, e usada numa série de artigos sobre a situação no Iraque, publicadas no final de Junho. Esta é uma transcrição editada e no inglês original, dessa conversa.

Could you tell us about the history that has led up to this point?

Since 1992 we have been able to run a semi-autonomous region, because before that there was the no-fly zone status which applied to the Kurdistan region, so we started a form of self-government. That continued until 2003 and in 2003 the US led coalition intervened in Iraq, toppled Saddam's Ba’ath regime and after that the Kurds of Iraq decided to be a part of the so-called democratization of Iraq. We took part in drafting the Constitution, which included the status of regional government within the federal Iraq, so we have that, but we were supposed to have our rights according to the constitution that we voted for, more than 90% of the people in the Kurdistan region voted for this constitution, so that means they want to be a part of this so-called democratization.

But unfortunately that never happened and we had problems with the Central Government of Iraq since the beginning. Our budget share was supposed to be 17% of the whole revenue of Iraq, but it never arrived, and since January 2014 they have cut our budget share, our employees’ wages and salaries... So this decision was taken by Iraq and it was also complemented by some threats from the central government. The prime-minister Maliki bluntly uttered, both as PM and as Commander in Chief of the army in Iraq – this is a threat – that they were not sending any budget to the Kurdistan region.

So after that we had no more choice. We are an oil rich region and we were sending all the oil to be sold out through the Iraqi part, but they were not going to give us our budget share. So we took our decision to sell our own oil by ourselves, and we have some constitutional and legal basis to do so and have international oil companies and friends who deal with us in the oil business.

But in 2014 another crisis started in Iraq, the rise of ISIS, which began in 2010, but in 2014, after the fall of Mosul in June it brought with it many other problems, like IDPs, the safest place in all of Iraq is Kurdistan, so all these IDPs from the surrounding region started to head towards the Kurdistan region, besides the fact that the budget is cut from Iraq, we are facing a wave of about two million IDPs and at the same time already had around 300 thousand refugees from the Syrian crisis. All the crises in these areas bring the IDPs and refugees to Kurdistan, because it is the safest place.

And all of a sudden the only income that we have, which is the oil revenues, the oil prices also went down.

Yet it still seems to be one of the only stable zones in the neighbourhood…

Fortunately we managed to keep this stability and this security until now and I hope that we continue. The institutions are working, but the people themselves care, they care about the stability of the place and they cooperate with the security institutions.

Almost 15 years after the fall of Saddam, is there a future for Iraqi Kurdistan within Iraq, or is independence inevitable?

Well, I would say the second. Independence has been the dream of every Kurd and it has been the slogan of the Kurdish movements in all four parts, but the part in Iraq had more advances since the beginning, until now, and more opportunities to reach where we are today.

I always give this example. We have many Kurds in the diaspora, I have cousins in the US. They probably say they are US citizens, but originally Kurdish. And I know people in Europe who say the same. But you will not find a single Kurd, in Turkey, Iran, Iraq or Syria, saying they are proudly Syrian, or Iraqi or Iranian or Turkish. They are not proud to be part of these states simply because they do not have their basic rights.

We, as a party in Iraq, have never been able to have our rights when we were united to Baghdad. Before 2005, you know what happened in this region, all these atrocities, the massacres, the genocides, the mass graves, the chemical weapons... Everything has been tried against the people of Kurdistan by successive governments of Iraq.

From the Monarchy to the Republic, and to Saddam. Even after 2005 we tried our best to tell them that we were ready to cooperate and try our best to be a part of this democratic federation. We entered the federation after 2005, but we never had the opportunity to get our basic rights. So it seems that to avoid any other atrocity, to avoid other mass killings, bloodshed and conflict, another position for Kurds is necessary.

Is this the position of your party, or is it the position of most of the mainstream Iraqi Kurdish parties?

I would say of most of the mainstream. Let’s talk about the election campaign, one of their main programs is to do everything towards an independent Kurdistan. And in the bylaws of the political parties, if you go to them, most of them are nationalist based.

Turkey is often portrayed as being hostile to anything related to Kurdish autonomy, anywhere... Will Ankara put pressure to stop the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan?

The position of Turkey has changed recently. I'd say within the past five years we have been dealing with Turkey... A huge deal in terms of trade, and at the same time Turkey is only dealing with the Kurdistan region when it comes to oil. We are selling our oil using the Turkish harbours, our main route to reach the international oil market.

The position of Turkey regarding the autonomous Kurdish region is totally changed. Once, in Turkey, of course, it was forbidden to say Kurd. They called them the Turks of the mountains. And the Kurdish language was forbidden. Meanwhile they had 20 million Kurds. Of course they are scared of having these 20 million Kurds, and their national movement is a rebellion movement which is going on in Turkey, that is something different, but when it comes to Iraq our leaders are being received in Turkey with the Kurdish flag behind them. For example, our president, when he goes to Turkey, is received as other Heads of State, the same goes for our Prime-minister and our delegations.

Not only that, but Turkey's position nowadays has totally changed and the main factor behind that is the economy. There are a couple of thousand Turkish companies working in the Kurdistan region, and that is not the case in other parts of Iraq.

We often hear about the dream of a United Kurdistan. How does your independence and your drawing closer to Turkey affect this and is it even a dream still?

We have been separated for a century. So we are now four different parts, and we have differences, and those differences are deep. In terms of the states we are divided between and in terms of the opportunities that the people have.

In Iraq we are more advanced towards self-determination. But that is not the case in other parts of Kurdistan. So we are very clear that when we speak of independence it is the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Has that led to conflicts with other Kurdish groups? I know things are difficult between Iraqi Kurdistan and the PKK.

We have different takes... PKK, which is nowadays considered the main political Kurdish party which fights for the Turkish part – although they have fighters from other parts also – but their main goal is not Kurdish independence, and they do not even call for any Kurdish entity.

They have different goals, which are their own, and I don't agree with them, but we have been in conflict with the PKK. The first bullet against the Kurdish Government in 1993 was fired by the PKK. That conflict, whether cold or warm, is ongoing until today. And it is not over our position to declare independence. There are many other differences, many other powers. For example, the PKK, as a political party, is supported by some regional powers to be against certain politics in the region.

What are your relations with Kurds from Syria and Iran?

After the situation in Syria – the Arab Spring and what happened in 2011 – we have a good relation with Syria. Syria borders the Kurdistan region, when the Kurdish administration, in the Kurdish parts of Syria started for the first time we had two parts of Kurdistan that were administered by Kurds, sharing the same border.

But the situation now is different, because the PKK started taking over the situation in Syria, and PKK does not accept any other Kurdish political power in Syria. So as a result all these political powers are nowadays in Erbil because they can't breathe there, they can't be there. That is why the situation nowadays with the administration in Syria, when it comes to politics, is a bit... We have ups and downs.

But in terms of humanitarian aid, our region regularly provides medicine and health facilities. We have always been open to the Syrian Kurds. There are 300 thousand Syrian refugees, most of them are Kurdish, in the Kurdistan region. But when it comes to politics, the methods they are applying in the Syrian part of Kurdistan, we don't really accept, we don't go with it.

And in Iran?

The Kurdish opposition in Iran is also divided. One part goes with the ones that are real opposition and they are in Erbil, of course. Politically they are not accepted in Iran, and so they are in Iraqi Kurdistan. We have very good relations with them. But another part are sister parties with PKK and they do other stuff.

There were a few Kurdish militants who joined ISIS, but mostly the Kurds became famous as the only force which stood up to ISIS on the ground. That generated a lot of sympathy for the Kurds...

When ISIS came in Iraq, in June 9th 2014, the second largest city of Iraq, Mosul was controlled by ISIS in a couple of hours. Of course we were not expecting ISIS to attack the Kurdistan region, because at the beginning what defined ISIS was a Sunni/Shia conflict, because the Sunnis in Iraq feel that they are not being included, that the Shiite majority government is not giving the Sunni population their rights.

The majority of the ISIS leaders were Sunni tribal leaders, that was clear. And it was seen as part of the Sunni/Shia conflict.

And specifically a Sunni/Shia Arab conflict...

In Iraq we have three main entities. Sunnis, Shias and Kurds. Kurds are Kurds: We have Shia Kurds, we have Sunni Kurds, we have Christian, Yezidi, all these differences of ideology and of religion, but they are all considered Kurds.

But when it comes to Arabs, Sunni or Shia is the difference, their sect is the difference. So we were considering it as a conflict between these two sectarian groups, the two main sectarian groups.

But two months later, when ISIS changed their war policy and began attacking Kurdistan, we were shocked. We were not ready in terms of military and all of a sudden we shared a border with ISIS which was more than 1.000 kilometers long. The only thing we had were brave Peshmerga. Their rifles were from the 70's, Russian Kalashnikovs, and their weaponry was really outdated, so we had difficult times, but the international allies against ISIS started to see that the only real fighters against ISIS on the ground were us and they started to support us in terms of military training, supplying weaponry, all these things. Hopefully we will continue to keep on defeating ISIS, and control our borders.

Previously we have had a problem with disputed areas with the Iraqi part, and now, after ISIS we don't have it any more, we have controlled the so-called disputed area between Kurdistan and Iraq and we believe that they are part of the Kurdistan region. Politically speaking, in Kurdistan region, we say there are no disputed areas, we have controlled everything.

Baghdad might disagree...

Baghdad does disagree, continuously, but so far that is the reality.

Before we go there, we tend to see, especially here in the West, that the Middle East has a serious problem with radical Islam. But it seems that Iraqi Kurdistan has seemed, so far, to avoid this problem. So is it correct to say that this is more of an Arab problem than a regional problem?

It is a regional problem. The Turks, for example, are not Arabs, but radicalism is a trend in Turkey. In the Kurdistan region the major political parties tend to be more secular than based on religious ideology, so the form of government in the Kurdistan region goes against the line of radicalism. And we have fought against it, we have fought against radicalism in the Kurdistan region and we continue to fight it. We are a Muslim majority society, and the mosques play a huge role in this issue of radicalism. We had people that joined ISIS from the Kurdistan region, and their main education base were mosques under the supervision of these radical Islamists.

We still have political parties in Parliament which are very radical, no different in terms of the basis of their ideology from ISIS and other political parties.

You had said that the main parties are secular, but the problem with radicalism is when it gains roots in the ground and amongst the people. So among the Kurdish people, all over Iraqi Kurdistan, is there much extremist influence?

Not much, but it depends on the area. We are influenced by the geography. The areas which border Arab fanatics, of course they are influenced. There are areas in the Kurdistan region where people listen to ISIS radio. For a couple of months the waves were received in those areas. Imagine that! It does influence. So it depends on that and also the movement is not a joke... It is going on in the region and it has its roots, but it is not that powerful in the Kurdistan region, thankfully.

When Mosul falls, then this problem of the disputed areas will probably rise again politically. Could it also become a military issue between Kurdistan and Baghdad?

I hope not, but it is very likely. Because it is not easy for Baghdad to abide by this constitution that they helped draft.

According to the constitution we should have a referendum in those areas no later than December 2007. That never happened, because the Iraqi part did not allow it. We would have loved to have it and we would love for the people of these areas to decide their own destiny.

Will you still promote a referendum?

We are still promoting a referendum, because we believe that the people of these regions should decide their destiny, they should decide where to go, what to do, how to be governed.

Is there a risk of persecution of Arab communities which live there?

There is a risk of that.

As a politician, is there anything the Government of Kurdistan is trying to do to protect them and allow them to remain there if they want to?

The main issue of the people in those areas is security. Not only for Arabs, also for Kurds, Christians, Turkmen, all these ethnicities, the main issue is security. But the majority of the population in these areas, including Arabs, and perhaps especially the Arabs, are happier with the security provided by the Kurdistan Regional Government than by the security provided by Bagdad.

You mentioned the minorities, how might this affect them? You say their main concern is security, do you think they will accept and support the Kurds against Baghdad?

Well, all those Iraqi communities, Turkmen, Christians, Assyrians, Arabs, Armenians, Kurds, everyone from any part of Iraq, if anything happens to them they seek refuge in Kurdistan. So I think that answers your question.

You were talking about the ethnic minorities, but I saw you did not mention the Yezidis.

Yezidis also...

But some Yezidis complain that they are being called Kurds when they feel they are a distinct community.

They have a religion, they are a religious group in Kurdistan. Their language is Kurdish, they live in this area, it is the only religion on Earth that practices in Kurdish, they pray to God in Kurdish, if they say they are not Kurdish, I don't know what else to say. It's their decision... If they are not Kurdish, fine, but they practice in Kurdish, they speak Kurdish, they're holy book is written in Kurdish. It is the only Kurdish religion on Earth. Their basis is religious, and it is obvious to everyone in the region. If they say they are Arabs, or that they are Yezidis, and this is different, then they should have some scientific basis...

In terms of Christians, I have spoken to many over the past years and more recently I have been asking them about the relationship with the Kurds. Most of them will say they are very grateful because the Kurds took them in and gave them refuge and protection, but there are also complaints and fears. Some of them say they do not forget that the Kurds helped the Turks massacre them in 1915, in Simile in 1933, and some, more recently, say they don't forget that the Peshmerga promised to protect their villages, but then fled and left them there when ISIS advanced... Is it possible to regain the trust of the Christians?

Well, starting with the Armenian genocide, and the genocide that happened in the areas, like Simele... At that time it was the Ottoman Empire which was committing these genocides against them. Those who were soldiers, were forced to serve the army in the Ottoman Empire, there was Mandatory Military Service, some people served for up to 20 years.

But there were also civilians who took part, they say...

They say... But the history writers don't confirm this. I don't know, it belongs to history, that is history and say we are a part of it? Ok. But talking about nowadays, that their villages were destroyed by ISIS... Its war! Ok, I promise that I will do my best to protect a village which is under the control of ISIS and we also control parts of the village or the town, then all of a sudden the war changes the whole situation... It is not about the promises you make. Then ISIS takes control and starts to blow up all the buildings... The basis of that argument is weak, I'd say.

If they don't trust... Nobody trusts the security in that region. Every night, when we sleep, we are very brave to sleep there. Because 20 km from the city where I live there used to be ISIS. Nowadays it is between 50 and 60 km, it is a bit cleaner, but nowhere in Iraq is secure. I am not trying to defend the Kurdistan Region's position, but they should honestly look at the past 20 years, go back and see the difference in the way they were treated by the Kurds and in the other parts.

You were saying your city is 20 km from ISIS front lines. Do you have any military training?

Not really, no.

Was your father also a guerrilla in the mountains?

My family, the majority of them were and are military, including my sisters.

The position of women within Kurdish society is very different from what we see in most Arabic societies around them...

Well, again, they are influenced as well. It is different when it comes to the openness of the Kurdish culture, it is quite open, compared to other cultures in the region. For example, it is very well known that the Kurdish women are also fighters, and they fight alongside with men. That is not something new for us, it has been like this for centuries. They are better fighters, sometimes, than men, and there are no differences there.

And there is some other stuff... It relates to the culture, what is different in our culture and in the culture of others in the region, because we are a different nation.

You mentioned the instability in the whole region, with Kurdistan trying to remain stable amongst the instability, is there one thing necessary to bring stability to the region? Is there one factor which is destabilizing the region?

This is a very important question... One factor? There are many factors for instability. But of course, not talking to each other, not coming together around a table, not accepting each other as we are, is the main factor for instability.

I am asking this because many times we see... And I have begun to think this is a regional issue, I won't say Arab, because I get it from Christians too... They will say this is all because of Israel, all because of America, all because of Russia... A tendency to blame others for local problems.

We are to blame. Nobody but us. Everybody is responsible for what happens to him or to her. So we are to be blamed and if we don't find a solution for how to get together, we should not blame anybody else.

“The rebels brought the war into people’s houses. That is their strategy!”

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my recent interview with His Beatitude Patriarch Gregory III of the Melkite Church. The news reports, in Portuguese are here and here.

Esta é uma transcrição integral, no inglês original, da minha recente entrevista a Sua Beatitude o Patriarca Gregório III da Igreja Melquita. As reportagens estão aqui e aqui.

You were telling me that the other day on your trip to Lebanon there were only four checkpoints, whereas before there would be 12. Is the situation in Syria improving?

The first big tragedy was in Homs. Now it is peaceful in Homs and the people have returned there. They are reconstructing their churches in Homs, in Yabroud, in Qusayr, in Nabek. This is positive.

Around Damascus there are still battles. My home town Darayya has now been liberated, but was totally destroyed, including two churches and all our people's houses.

Maaloula also has been liberated and the people, most of them, returned. We have about 125 or 130 families back and we are building for them not the whole house, but one room per family, which means that they can be at home even in a small place, without having to pay rent.

Damascus itself was always peaceful, but you had daily rocket attacks, sometimes hundreds of rockets per day, killing, destroying, it depends. But despite that, life goes on.

Just today [21st of October], we had rockets and our Cathedral was hit. Not much damage, just a little. This was the fifth time our Patriarchate in Damascus was hit by a bomb, but despite this we remain.

Now the big problem is in the North of Syria and in Aleppo, which means the border to Turkey and Iraq and to Jordan are closed now. This tells you where the belligerants are coming from, from Jordan, Turkey, Iraq, but because Iraq is weak now, and not under the control of the Government. This geographical description shows us how the war is. The war is against Syria, in Syria. The Holy Father said there is a third world war going on.

Now the worst problem is in Aleppo. We had a meeting of bishops of Aleppo, we wanted to have it in Aleppo, but because of the situation we were obliged to have it in Damascus. They told us that there used to be four million people in Aleppo and now there are one million. The others are displaced, not necessarily outside of Syria. There were 150 thousand Christians in Aleppo, but now there are maybe 30 thousand.

All the churches of the different communities are destroyed, more or less. The people are in need of food, light, water... But they are still there.

Around Damascus there are belligerants, but the army is advancing slowly.

Now our problem is really how to get people to stay at home. Emigration is the biggest danger for the Church in the Middle East, not only in Syria. Syria, Lebanon are all under this influence, even Jordan. In Iraq, from around 1 million, or perhaps 800 thousand, the Christian population is only around 350 thousand now. In all of Syria, 55 thousand Christians displaced, inside or outside Syria, 50% of doctors are out. This is hemmorhaging of the Syrian society, Christians and Muslims alike.

The future of Syria is very problematic. You have around three million children without schools, these are the clients for ISIS in the future. That is why we are very keen to work for the children in Syria, in the schools, and to rebuild schools. My own school was destroyed, two thousand children were left with nowhere to go. Everything was stolen.

This is a very big tragedy, but in spite of this we have so much hope. You can't believe how the people are crowded in the churches, especially for Lent. Every day our churches are full. We have youth movements; our congregations, women, men, young people, are filling our churches with social and pastoral activities. I don't understand how the people react this way. Inspite of the fear and the imigration, this is a complex situation of hope, of power, generosity, fidelity, trust in the Lord and in the future.

Darayya

Obviously the whole world is watching Aleppo and there have been many accusations against Russia and the regime because of the bombings. People are calling for a ceasefire...

First of all, the Church is for reconciliation. Already I wrote a letter in 2013 saying that the only way for the future of Syria and the church is reconciliation. So we are apostles for reconciliation, for peace, for dialogue, for reconciliaiton inside the society, not only for belligerants. This is our situation, our position.

We are also working with the children. We had an initiative to gather 1.2 million signatures of children for peace, an 8 meter long sheet with words of children for peace. We went with all of these documents to the European Union in Brussels and Geneva, to speak abou the future, we were the messengers of the children.

So this is the real situation and position of the Church, rather of the Churches! We have three Patriarchs in Damascus. Greek Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox and myself, and several bishops in Syria. All of them have a common vision regarding the situation, the government, the complot of this war, and so on.

For example, Darayya, which now has been liberated but is destroyed, before the destruction the people were happy, working, developed, and everything. A rebel group entered and made life impossible. They subdued the civilians; the civilians were under their control. Who has the responsibility to save these people? Who is responsible for the citizens? If the rebels are taking my house, who will kick them out?

The Government might destroy my house... This is what happened to a house of my relatives*. It was destroyed because a family came from outside and they rented a house near him. But it was an arsenal for weapons. The government shelled the house, and the house of my relatives was destroyed.

The same happened with churches. When the belligerants came to Homs, in the midst of the Old City of Homs, where the churches are, they turned the churches into their strongholds... What to do? So you can say that most of the churches were destroyed by the government. But why? Because they were no longer used as churches!

Monastic life in Aleppo

For example, the very famous monastery of St. Bachus and Sergius, in Maaloula, it was a central stronghold for the revolutionaries, the belligerants and for ISIS. What to do? The belligerants brought the whole war into the houses, in the old city, that is their strategy and that is the problem. Why, in Europe, are they blind to say that the government is targeting these structures? Yes, its true, but why? I can say this from my own experience, the same is happening in Aleppo now.

The civillians in the rebel held area of Aleppo, are they being used as human shields?

All of them! This is the whole strategy in the whole five years of war. Starting with Homs, Maaloula, my own town Darayya, the people were taken as shields to defend the rebels. That is why the civillians were killed. They were not allowed to go. Just like in Mossul now, not even the priests were allowed to go. They had to be there in order for the Government not to shell.

Now they can ask for ceasefires, but what to do next?

Would a ceasefire just drag this situation on? Would the best solution be for the Government to end the siege as quickly as possible, by taking the rest of the city?

A ceasefire is always an act of mercy. We are in the mercy of God. Everything in life is compromise. Even relations between husband and wife are about compromise. The same here with your enemies, you have to have compromises to protect the lives of the civillians. We have to think about that.

The policy of the church is to alleviate as much as posisble this very harsh time of the civillians.

Russia is seen by many Western countries as being part of the problem, criminals bombing civillians. When I speak to Christians from Syria they always have a very different idea of the Russians. What is your view of the Russian involvement?

If I am in danger, and you come to help me, can you help me without me? Without my consent? Without my advice? Without my collaboration?

Please, USA, come and fight! But with Syria and with Russia.

Let’s not do politics. Let’s speak in a simple way, like simple people. Come together Russia and America. Together. The European Union is no longer important, a shame, but the truth. If the USA and Russia came together with Syria in one month's time ISIS would be overcome. I am sure.

What is ISIS? It is a myth. It is an instrument of evil. Of a battle of interests. That is ISIS. It is nothing, not Islam, nothing at all!

Now Syria has become a supermarket for superpowers. Where are these interests? In Russia and in America. If they are ok and have common consent about their interests, where their respective profits lie, the war will end.

Everything is an instrument. Even the fighting between Shiites and Sunnis is historical, but now it is an instrument. Even the killing of Christians is an instrument. Nothing to do with the so called goal of the revolution. What can anybody in Syria bring that is different from what was already done? It was not too bad, not too good, but it was enough.

Who can build something new? The so called opposition are from the same school as the ones who are there. So they can bring nothing, nothing can be brought.

Reconciliation. Together, America, Russia and Syria can bring forth ceasefire and peace and also the renewal of Syria. We have to be renewed, we have to present a vision. You can't end the war without vision. Russia and América can end this, but they have to have a vision for Syria, and with Syria.

I am not for Assad or for the regime; I am for Syria, which is a key society in the Middle East. Not Lebanon, not Jordan, not Egypt, not Iraq, it is the most important place where Christians are a little group, but living in a cohesive society.

You have been criticized by leading figures in your own Church. Several bishops have called for your resignation. Is resignation an option?

I am for the cannon law, which says that the Patriarchal See is vacant upon the death of the Patriarch or by his own resignation. I like to tell my bishops "I love you. Let us love eachother so that we can confess, love, and serve our Church and make it a symbol of testimony for the Lord in this tragic situation for the whole Christian Middle East"

Can you imagine a situation where you would resign in the future? Or do you prefer to die in your post, as is traditional among Eastern Patriarchs?

That is up to God. I can't answer you, because I don't have that power. Let's just say that I am here for the service of the Church and the future is in the hands of God.

Patriarchs Laham, Shevchuk, Clemente and caridnal Sandri

You are a special guest at the meeting of European Eastern Catholic bishops, who are discussing the pastoral care of migrants in the West. Have you come here to learn from them, or to share your own experience?

I was invited by them, especially by the Ukrainian Church, because I was in Lviv in September, in the synod of the Ukrainian Church and they told me about this meeting and invited me, and I was happy to come.

I am very happy to have come because it very important learn and to give our own experience and especially our own vision of the very tragic situation of emigration.

Emigration, for us, is very important, very problematic. It is very problemetic for Christians in Europe and for Muslims in Europe, and in encountering a region which is no longer a Christian Europe, but an area of globalisation, an area of Laicité, and in some respects atheist. This is a very big danger, more dangerous and more acute than the whole war in Syria.

I tell you the result of the war, migration of Christians and of Muslims, from both sides, it is a bigger danger and more harmful for the world than the war in Syria. Therefore I proposed, today to bring this theme of the results and dangers of the emigration of Christians from the Middle East, both for the Middle East and for them in Europe, and for the Muslims from the Middle East and in Europe.

For me it is a very current and urgent to have a special assembly of the bishops conferences of Europe about this theme. Europe is not prepared to have such a tsunami of migrants, both Christians and Muslims. How to cope with Muslims and Christians coming with their own identity. Islam has a different approach that Christians in Europe. That is a very big danger for...

*His Beatitude here used the word “parents”, but considering his age, and the fact that the word Parent in Latin languages actually means relative rather “mother and father”, I have changed it to relative. 

This is the second time I interview His Beatitude. You can read the first interview, from November 2014, here.