"Abou Moussab Al-Zarkawi is dead. His name is being used by the occupants as a pretext for staying in Iraq." (English & French)

Sheikh Jawad Al-Khalessi is the imam of the mosque Al-Kazemiya in Baghdad and dean of the adjoining religious school. He is passing through Paris after an interreligious meeting in Sant'Egidio in Lyon.

Abou Moussab Al-Zarkawi has declared "total war" on Shiites and perpetrated the bloodiest massacre in Baghdad, Wednesday, Sept 14, since the beginning of the war. What is your opinion of this declaration?

I don't think that Abou Moussab Al-Zarkawi exists as such. He is an invention of the occupants intended to divide the people, since he was killed in the north of Iraq when he was with the group Ansar Al-Islam, in Kurdistan. His family, in Jordan, even held a ceremony after his death. Abou Moussab Al-Zarkawi is thus a toy used by the Americans, an excuse to keep up the occupation. He is a pretext for not leaving Iraq.

But why would they declare "total war" on the Shiites?

In order to get them closer to the occupational forces. In this way, the Shiites will find refuge with the Americans rather than join the resistance. For the Shiites in the south are participating in the resistance, as the recent attacks committed bear witness to, particularly in Basra.

However, it has just been announced that Najaf passed under the control of Iraqi forces and that other cities in the south would follow.

That is not true. It's only what the media are announcing. In reality, Iraqi forces do not control the situation and occupational forces are staying on the periphery in order to intervene as soon as problems arise.

The adopted project for a Constitution will be submitted to a referendum on October 15. What is your opinion on this?

"The constitution is a text that's been adopted in all haste to fit in with the American agenda. It does not reflect the hopes of the Iraqi people who are more preoccupied by their day-to-day survival and with their security. The project has been concocted in the "Green Zone" under the leadership of the US ambassador. As a British specialist on Iraq has said: "The Constitution, it's as if they were busy arranging the deckchairs on the decks of the Titanic as it was already going down." The fact is that Iraq is sinking.

Will the referendum be a success, the way the elections of January 30 were ?

Personally, I will call for a boycott, but if my fellow citizens decide to vote "no", we will not be against it. Anyway, George Bush has already prepared his statement confirming that this consultation has been a success and that it amounts to progress on the road to democracy. But what is that going to change for Iraq?

What is the position of the grand ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani on this referendum ?

He hasn't taken a position yet. Those who are in favor of this procedure will try to use him to incite the population to vote. He might say "yes" or he might not say anything. For January 30, he supported the election, but this did not have the effect that had been counted on for the Iraqi people and the promises were not kept. Since then, the situation has only worsened. Those who were elected seem more concerned with their own place in society and their own wellbeing than by the wellbeing of the people. Corruption is generalized. Even the reconstruction budget has not even begun to be carried out.

Ibrahim Al-Jaafari is a bad prime minister just the same as he is a bad physician. It's not like your P�tain who was a good general before becoming a bad politician.

So, in your opinion, what are the solutions for saving Iraq?

First thing: A calendar for the pullback of the troops. Second: Putting national competences under the supervision of the UN in the service of the country and not under the politicians. Third: A national dialogue with the organization of elections under international supervision. If the occupation continues, the situation is only going to get worse and the Iraqis are more and more going to join the resistance.

Siv O'Neall was born and raised in Sweden, graduating from Lund University. She has lived extensively in Paris, France and New Rochelle, N.Y. Siv retired after many years of teaching French in Westchester, N.Y. and English in the Grandes Ecoles (Institutes of Technology) in France. In addition to her original writing, Siv has also provided Axis of Logic with translation services. She presently lives in Lyon, France. Siv can be reached at sivoneall@nerim.net

Original

"Abou Moussab Al-Zarkaoui est mort. Son nom est utilis� par les occupants pour rester en Irak"

LE MONDE | 16.09.05

Cheikh Jawad Al-Khalessi est imam chiite de la mosqu�e Al-Kazemiya, B Bagdad, et doyen de l'�cole religieuse attenante. Il est de passage B Paris aprPs la rencontre interreligieuse de Sant'Egidio, B Lyon.

Abou Moussab Al-Zarkaoui a d�clar� la "guerre totale" aux chiites et perp�tr� le massacre le plus sanglant B Bagdad, mercredi 14 septembre, depuis le d�but de la guerre en Irak. Que pensez-vous de cette d�claration ?

Je ne pense pas qu'Abou Moussab Al-Zarkaoui existe en tant que tel. C'est seulement une invention des occupants pour diviser le peuple car il a �t� tu� dans le nord de l'Irak au d�but de la guerre alors qu'il se trouvait avec le groupe d'Ansar Al-Islam, dans le Kurdistan. Sa famille, en Jordanie, a mLme proc�d� B une c�r�monie aprPs sa mort. Abou Moussab Al-Zarkaoui est donc un jouet utilis� par les Am�ricains, une excuse pour poursuivre l'occupation. C'est un pr�texte pour ne pas quitter l'Irak.

Mais pourquoi d�clarer la "guerre totale" aux chiites ?

Afin de les rapprocher des forces d'occupation. De cette maniPre, les chiites vont trouver refuge auprPs des Am�ricains plut�t que de rejoindre la r�sistance. Car les chiites participent B la r�sistance au sud, comme en t�moignent les r�cents attentats commis, notamment, B Bassora.

Pourtant, il vient d'Ltre annonc� que Nadjaf �tait pass�e sous le contr�le des forces irakiennes et que d'autres villes du Sud allaient suivre ?

Ce n'est pas vrai. C'est juste un effet d'annonce pour les m�dias. En r�alit�, les forces irakiennes ne contr�lent pas la situation et les troupes d'occupation restent B la p�riph�rie pour intervenir dPs qu'il y a des problPmes.

Le projet de Constitution adopt� sera soumis B un r�f�rendum le 15 octobre. Qu'en pensez-vous ?

C'est un texte adopt� B la h�te pour r�pondre B l'agenda des Am�ricains. Il ne reflPte pas les espoirs du peuple irakien, qui est plus pr�occup� par sa survie au jour le jour et sa s�curit�. Le projet a �t� concoct� dans la "zone verte", B Bagdad, sous la houlette de l'ambassadeur am�ricain. Comme l'a dit un sp�cialiste britannique de l'Irak : "La Constitution, c'est comme si on s'occupait de ranger les transats sur le pont du Titanic en train de couler" . Or l'Irak est en train de sombrer.

Le r�f�rendum sera-t-il un succPs, comme l'ont �t� les �lections du 30 janvier ?

Personnellement, j'appelle au boycottage, mais si mes concitoyens d�cident d'aller voter "non", nous ne nous y opposerons pas. De toute fa�on, -George- Bush a d�ja pr�par� sa d�claration affirmant que cette consultation a �t� un succPs et un progrPs sur le chemin de la d�mocratie. Mais qu'est-ce que cela va changer pour l'Irak ?

Quelle est la position du grand ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani sur ce r�f�rendum ?

Il n'a pas encore pris position. Ceux qui sont en faveur du processus vont tenter de l'utiliser pour inciter la population B voter. Il peut dire "oui" ou ne pas parler. Pour le 30 janvier, il avait soutenu les �lections, mais le peuple irakien n'en pas tir� les effets escompt�s et les promesses n'ont pas �t� tenues. Depuis, la situation n'a fait qu'empirer. Ceux qui ont �t� �lus sont plus pr�occup�s par leur place et par leur bien-Ltre que par celui du peuple. La corruption est g�n�ralis�e. MLme le budget de la reconstruction n'a pu commencer B Ltre r�alis�.

Ibrahim Al-Jaafari est un mauvais premier ministre comme il est un mauvais docteur. Ce n'est pas comme votre P�tain, qui a �t� un bon g�n�ral avant d'Ltre un mauvais politicien...

Alors, B votre avis, quelles sont les solutions pour sauver l'Irak ?

PremiPre chose : un calendrier de retrait des troupes. DeuxiPmement : mettre les comp�tences nationales sous la supervision de l'ONU au service du pays, et non plus des politiciens. TroisiPmement : un dialogue national avec l'organisation d'�lections sous supervision internationale. Si l'occupation continue, la situation ne va qu'empirer et les irakiens rejoindront de plus en plus la r�sistance.

Propos recueillis par Michel B�le-Richard

Article paru dans l'�dition du 17.09.05

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/
0,1-0@2-3218,36-689730@51-627391,0.html