Abdullah Nubari : Kuwaiti Opposition Head Asks What Happened to Democracy

A top soft carpets and brocaded pillows, a dozen or so men recline quietly, talking in small groups and sipping sweet tea. This is the hallowed diwaniyah , a centuries-old Kuwaiti institution in which men gather after midday and evening prayers to chat about the affairs of the day.

Virtually every prominent Kuwaiti family has one; so do the crown prince, leading Islamic groups, and political opposition factions: comfortable places where like-minded people come to air the issues they agree--and disagree--on.

This large, airy room where opposition leader Abdullah Nubari holds court in the evenings was not always so tranquil. Last spring, it was the scene of several angry, pro-democracy demonstrations by Kuwaitis demanding the restoration of the Parliament, dissolved by the emir in 1986. After one rancorous protest, Nubari and several of his associates were arrested and held for several days.

Nubari and the other mentor of this diwaniyah , Ahmed Khatib, are among the most prominent leftists in the widely divergent Kuwaiti political spectrum, in which secular radicals often find themselves side-by-side with Islamic fundamentalists pressing for democratic reform. They were among those who launched the Arab nationalist movement many years ago with radical Palestinian leader George Habash, but in recent years Kuwait’s nationalist faction has split and focused its energies inward, on widening political participation in the tiny, closely held emirate of Kuwait.

With Khatib in exile during the occupation, leadership fell to Nubari, a former Parliament member and Oxford University graduate who has become one of the most vocal critics of the returning emir’s government since Kuwait’s liberation.

In the soft evening light, with sporadic gunfire piercing the twilight stillness, Nubari props himself on one elbow and talks quietly, in rhythmic measures, about the future of a country whose recent past has been dictated by violence.

Question: We are now weeks into the liberation of Kuwait. How do you assess the situation? Is it as you expected?

Answer: Not at all. I mean, people never thought it would be so bad . . . . People were hearing that there are so many plans going on, there are so many contracts, there are so many programs for preparing how to cope with the situation of the liberation. But to have it for all these weeks without electricity, water, without basic needs, garbage piling in the streets and food still scarce--people never thought such a thing would happen.

Q: What do you think has gone wrong? Whose fault is it, and what hasn’t been done that should have been done?

A: Well, I think, first, that the government is out of touch with people’s demands and needs. We think also that the government is preoccupied with regaining its control of the country. It seems they are fearing that people who stayed in (Kuwait) got a sort of confidence in themselves and they lost confidence in government--the way it left the country on the day of the invasion. It seems that they’re fearing people here . . . .

Then the way they implemented martial law--we think there is too much high-profile military presence within the residential neighborhoods . . . .

Q: Is there the possibility that dissatisfaction within the country has become so strong that the regime is threatened?

A: Well, the regime--if it wants to apply the constitution, work within the boundary of the constitution, no, there is no threat. But if they want more than the constitution allows them, then of course there will be trouble. Because people would like to have a change in government, in accordance with the constitution.

That is, they want to restore the constitutional process, which stipulates that we should have a legislative power in the form of a parliament elected by the people, in a free election, and then a representative government formed from that parliament . . . . But this has not been done . . . .

Q: The crown prince and the emir have pledged to restore the constitution and have elections. Do you believe their promises ?

A: . . . . It is not enough to say that, well, democracy’s coming . . . . We had too many pledges before, too many promises--and they were unfulfilled. What we need is to hear a date for the elections. What we need to hear is how they bridge the constitutional gap we have in the absence of a legislative body. This is what we need. We need concrete steps . . . .

Q: Do you think the West and the allied coalition have a responsibility to pressure the government of Kuwait into increasing steps toward democracy?

A: We think they have a moral responsibility. As far as the Kuwaiti people are concerned, we don’t want interference, we don’t want imposition, but we want moral support. The Western powers for so many years have been supporting the call for application of human rights. Well, we’d like them to support the human-rights application in Kuwait. The other thing, we think that to be ashamed that after the sacrifices the Western powers have taken, in the form of human life or economic costs, all these risks, we don’t think this has been done to save Kuwait from a dictatorship to hand it to a despotic ruler or to have the power concentrated in one hand . . . .

Q: You mentioned the government had been in exile and was not necessarily aware of the experience of those who remained. Tens of thousands of Kuwaitis around the world have yet to return. Did things happen here in these last seven months that changed you as a people, that will inspire differences among you when they come back?

A: . . . . We don’t think there’s much difference, or a case for people who stayed and people who left. But there is a case between the people who stayed and who left, on the one side, and the government . . . . We were invaded by a dictator. This has strengthened the conviction of the people in a shared decision-making process. They were living with Saddam 24 hours (a day) for seven months and they see the culprit as one man . . . . People have faced brutality and atrocious treatment by the Iraqis, and they paid the price, and they lost people, and the women were brutalized and raped--so we saw the worst. I think this experience has hardened the people’s mettle, and made them readier to face up to any hardship . . . .

Q: You referred to the brutality Kuwaitis faced during the occupation. Since the liberation, there have been allegations that some Kuwaitis have turned the tables and exercised brutality against some suspected of collaborating with the Iraqis. We’re seeing a number of cases of Palestinians stopped at checkpoints, arrested, complaining of being beaten or tortured, in some cases even executed. Where is it coming from?

A: I don’t know where that’s coming from, but I think the authorities are responsible, since they are in charge. We hear about some militias, some private militias . . . but we don’t think ordinary Kuwaitis are behind this . . . . I don’t think this is acceptable to the Kuwaiti people in general at all. There are hard feelings toward some Palestinians who collaborated with the Iraqis, or who carried arms . . . . But still, objectively, these are minority groups. The rest of the Palestinians were helping the Kuwaitis, through services in hospitals and utilities and some government institutions, so you cannot say all the Palestinians. And I think whatever bitterness or hard feelings the Kuwaitis have, they would also like those who deserve punishment to be punished according to the law, and by the official authorities, not to be caught in the street and shot or executed by somebody. I don’t think this is acceptable, because this would endanger the innocent people.

Q: Some members of the opposition have charged that opposition figures have been targeted for violence. One has been shot and is paralyzed now. Is there any credibility to these allegations?

A: Let me say first that these militias act not on behalf of the government, but I think at least they are known to the government; the government is able to know who does this. As for the threat to the Kuwaiti opposition members, we think there’s a real threat. We know there are the hawks among the ruling family members who don’t approve of democratization and who speak at least of using violence and force to stop the democratic process. It could be that they sort of think of using force against the opposition members. That was a cause for concern among the opposition, and worry.

The shooting of one of our colleagues, Mr. Hamad al Jou’an, a prominent member of the opposition, also has sort of emphasized this concern, and we made our views known to the government, to the representatives of the American and British governments and to the international press. We think there is a real danger, and still is--unless we hear from the prominent members of the al-Sabah family a statement and action of disarming these people and putting a stop to these activities.

Q: I’ve heard the word “Lebanon” used here. There are checkpoints around town, and you hear talk of private militias and people, such as yourself, saying there will be trouble if the government doesn’t respond to demands--is the situation deteriorating?

A: Well, we hope not, but we can’t discard that possibility. It won’t be like Lebanon, because in Lebanon it was between factions of the people. It won’t be between factions of the people here. We think all the groups, all the religious factions, are united in preserving the constitution as a way of maintaining stability. So there is no problem between the segments of the Kuwaiti population. It’s between the people, on one side, and the government, on the other. If the government attempts to mobilize certain sectors from this society against another, that’s something else. But we don’t think any group, any Kuwaiti faction that would initiate any action against another faction. We don’t have a Maronite-Muslim situation here.

Q: I have heard that many resistance members are reluctant to give up their weapons. Do you think that’s ominous?

A: Well, I would say that it’s ominous only in case of the political situation getting more and more complicated. Really, one cannot foresee what could happen. Kuwaiti society, from a historical perspective, has always been peaceful. But you cannot always say that what will happen in the future will be exactly as what happened before. Especially if the government is toying with the idea of using force or suppression. I don’t think the people will stand suppression anymore, or the confiscation of their freedoms and rights, as provided for in the constitution . . . . I don’t think that they would be submissive and docile and just forget about all of those things, no.

Q: Hussein enjoyed relative popularity among some factions in the Arab world--the Yemenis, the Palestinians, the Jordanians, the Sudanese, the North Africans. What message did Saddam have that won such broad appeal, and how do you, as Kuwaitis, now respond to that?

A: It’s sad to see all the Arab intellectuals and political groups allow themselves to be deceived by Saddam Hussein, knowing his history and knowing that his is the most vicious fascist regime in history. Just by raising the banner of fighting the U.S., they overlook the facts of life--that he brought these calamitous events on himself, on Kuwait, on the rest of the Arab world. We thought they should have the foresight to see that he wasn’t serious about helping the Palestinian to get his rights; he was only using that slogan. Because for 20 years, he has done nothing for the Palestinians, he has done nothing for social justice in the Arab world, he has done nothing for sound development in Iraq. Iraq is poorer now than it was 20 years ago . . . .

So to find that these groups, mostly intellectuals and leaders, allowed themselves to be deceived by a dictator is really saddening. I would say it is affecting the Kuwaiti people’s outlook toward these groups, toward the idea of Arab cooperation, toward the idea of supporting Arab issues . . . .

Q: So where will things go from here?

A: Well, insofar as the government attitude, I wouldn’t be optimistic. But so far as the people’s stand, I have all the optimism in the world. I think the Kuwaiti people are ready to fight for regaining their democracy and restoring the application of the constitution . . . .

But as far as domestic affairs of the Gulf countries--democratization and the relation between the Gulf countries--I’m not optimistic. Because, unfortunately, most of the Gulf governments think only about maintaining power in a few hands . . . . As far as democratization is concerned in Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf countries, they are worried if Kuwait regains its democratic process--because it could have some influence in those countries . . . .

Democracy in the Arab countries is a complementing process. We will not have democracy in one country, especially in small countries like Kuwait, unless we have democracy all over the place. That’s why we look very, very anxiously to have democracy in Iraq, because in that case, that will give democracy a great push in the whole area.