Gulan: what do think of the formation of the Popular Mobilisation Force (PMF) in Iraq?



Pollock: They have good points and bad points. The good points are that they are fighting against ISIS and they are also doing that in coordination with the Iraqi Army and sometimes with international forces or Kurdish forces. The bad points are that they are also coordinating very closely with Iran and Iran’s military advisers within Iranian forces in Diyala, for example. And as it related to that, they are also sectarian and they are only Shia forces. So even though now they are fighting against ISIS, they could also alienate local population whether Kurdish or Sunni Arabs. There may be a danger in some cases in actual fighting and even massacres or killings of local people by these militias. At this point, there isn’t likely a good alternative to get cut from these forces in many parts of the country because Iraqi army is so weak and the militias are part of what needed, for example, to push ISIS out of Tikrit and probably other cities and areas in the country. I do believe that if the militias become active in Kirkuk or in Mosel, that is not a good idea and would be very provocative. So it is going to take a lot of effort to find alternatives in those areas in the country.



Gulan: to what extent is it important for the international coalition not to leave this situation for Iran?



Pollock: I think that what is happening is that different forces are fighting with different parts of the country. So in Salahadeen or Diyala provinces and also probably in parts of Anbar or in the future in Rumadi and Faluja, the militias are necessary parts of the fight against ISIS. I think the local population, even the Sunni Arabs will be willing to accept that as better option than living under Daesh or ISIS control. As long as the militias behave properly and do their efforts about avoiding civilian casualties and avoiding what we call ethnic cleansing, that in other parts of the country which are far away and almost entirely the native population are Sunni Arabs and Kurdish, like in Nainawa Province or Kirkuk, that where I think the militias should stay away because probably they are going to make people very afraid and angry and I think they may not be needed. I think by the time there will be a big battle for Mosul, we can hope that the regular Iraqi army would be prepared and won’t need the militias, and I think the peshmerga would be prepared also to help on the east side of the river, in more Kurdish areas, and the same does probably for Kirkuk and other provinces in the north. So that is also probably true for the western part of the country in Anbar near the Syrian border; they don’t need the militias and they would make all the things worse. So it depends on what part of the country. It is not the same situation in different parts of the country as I see it.



Gulan: there has been a kind of tension between popular mobilization forces and Peshmerga, so what do you think this would be after Mosul liberation?



Pollock: I think this is a very serious issue that you have raised because we have to think about what we call “the day after”, after Mosul liberated from Daesh. Who will be in control? Who will run the city? And unfortunately I don’t think there is an agreement about this and that means there would be a big problem and what we really don’t want to see is a return of a kind of civil war that was in Iraq in 2006 and 2007. So we need to have some kind of political understanding about what will happen in a government in Mosel after Daesh. That means an understanding between the government in Baghdad and also forces including Kurds and Sunni Arabs and anyone else in the areas. It is similar in Kirkuk even in a small scale, but it is more complicated because already some Shia militias have been there and there have Turkmens and the oil field. So it is going to require everybody to have an understanding about what happen in the day after. We don’t have this right now but people should be working on that issue just as much they are working on training military forces.



Gulan: what do you think of United States’ position about the popular mobilization forces and the role of Iran and Hezbollah in the region? It seems that The United States and NATO are partners with them to fight Daesh and on the other hand traditional allies like Saudi Arbia, Turkey, and Israel are not happy about that.



Pollock: Yes that is absolutely true. This is another big problem in the area. There are many Iraqis and Iranians—more Iraqis-- fighting in Syria, supporting the Assad regime whether it is Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq or Liwa Abufazil Al Abas. Iraqi Shia militias are entering Syria and fighting against Daesh, and sometimes they are fighting the moderate Sunni opposition and they are doing that with Iran and Hezbolla. That is a big problem for Arab Gulf countries that support the Sunni opposition in Syria and I think it is a problem for the United States because we oppose the Assad regime and we are trying to find an alternative, a moderate and non-jihadist alternative. When you have all these foreign Shia fighters in Syria, this makes it almost impossible. So I think what I personally recommend is that the Iraqis should take out in Syria and deal with their own problems at home. I think now they are making the things worse for everybody. Although there is a common enemy that all have, which is Daesh, it is not good for the Iraq to get involved in Syria and supporting the Assad regime.



Gulan: Apart from Iraq and Syria, the Shia militias exist in both Yemen and in Bahrian. Do you think that this creates a ground for a wider regional war?



Pollock: I don’t think there is a wide regional war, but I do think that it is a very serious and dangerous problem. I think in each country you are going to find a lot of resistance to Iranian interference and you see that now in Yemen and to some degree in Bahrain where the government need Saudi help in both cases. I think that you will see that also in Syria and in Lebanon. What is happening is not a regional war but a kind of a series or a chain of local proxies, a small scale battle and it is unfortunately a sign of Iran’s greater power in each and this is something that I know many people in the region including Arab countries, Israel, and even Turkey worried about and they are all friends of United states so they should be helping them to resist Iranian intervention.



Gulan: the problem of budget has not been resolved yet between the KRG and the central government. So do you think that this problem is going to be solved soon?



Pollock: Honestly I don’t understand why the budget is still a problem. I have thought there is an agreement about this in December. I know that the agreement was temporarily just for a few months and have to do a new agreement but in my view this is a bad case on the part of the government in Baghdad. There is hope because it is a different government in Baghdad as Abadi is a prime minister not Maliki and there are new people in charge of oil ministry and the finance ministry and that is encouraging but Baghdad still not keeping their promises which is very disturbing. I think that KRG frankly has no choice yet because they do have a very serious common enemy (Daesh). So I would just recommend that the Baghdad government keep its promises to the KRG, and the KRG continue to be patient and to work hard but quietly in order to implement the agreement with Baghdad.



Gulan: what is your last word?



Pollock: America is very grateful and respectful of what KRG is doing in fighting Daesh and they see that the Kurds are a very important partner, not the only one, but a very important for us and the world in trying to hold a line against the terrible extremism. So you have my best wishes. I was in Erbil a few months ago and I hope to come back to it and find it stable and successful.