When "Realpolitik" Collides with "National Memory"

In a move that raised sharp questions among the Iraqi public, an official delegation headed by Prime Minister Ali Al-Zaidi traveled to Washington. Notably present within the delegation was the head of the Health and Medical Education Authority at the Holy Shrine of Imam Hussein, Dr. Haider Al-Aabedi. This trip was not merely protocol; it concluded with the signing of a series of contracts and partnerships with major American companies. This raises deep questions about a shift in the approach of the Shrine's institutions, which have long existed in the popular consciousness as a fortress of values and abstinence from international politics.

A Timing That Ignores the Wound:

This visit gains double the embarrassment due to its "shocking timing." It took place just a few days after the funeral procession of the great religious authority and Supreme Leader, Sayyid Ali Khamenei, who was assassinated by a direct decision from U.S. President Donald Trump—who not only executed the order but boasted about explicitly acknowledging responsibility for this crime.

At a time when the solemn scene of the funeral remains vivid in the conscience of a large segment of Shias, the departure of a delegation containing leadership from the Holy Shrine of Imam Hussein to Washington conveys a painful break with the feelings of the popular base, which views this timing as a provocation to the symbolism of the lost leadership.

This visit comes amid an open war in which nearly 100 Iraqis have been killed, and at a time when Iraqi memory has not yet healed from the wounds of decades of American policies:

In the 1991 "Desert Storm" war, approximately 944,000 rounds of depleted uranium ammunition were used, leading up to the 2003 invasion, which utilized more than 1,200 tons of the same munitions.

Cancer: The Unforgiven Crime:

How could these contracts not strike terror into the hearts of Iraqis, given that the use of those missiles and munitions saturated with depleted uranium left bleeding scars on Iraqi bodies?

Today, we face approximately 140,000 cases of cancer, with 7,000 to 8,000 new cases registered annually.

In Basra alone, studies recorded a 100% increase in leukemia cases among children, and a 242% increase in all childhood tumors, alongside terrifying rises in congenital deformities.

Contracting with American companies while our land remains contaminated and our hospitals are packed with victims of "radioactive pollution" caused by the American war machine is a blatant disregard for the pain of a people whose children's bodies continue to pay the price for those wars.

Global Boycott vs. Technical Normalization:

At a time when people around the world—Muslims and others—have engaged in broad and comprehensive boycott movements against American and Israeli products and companies in solidarity with thousands of children exterminated in Gaza and Lebanon under U.S.-backed bombardment, and in rejection of the destruction of hospitals and the killing of doctors, these agreements fly in the face of that consensus.

While free people around the world insist that the weapon of boycott is the bare minimum expression of a moral stance, the religious establishment in Iraq chooses the path of "technical normalization" with the very entity that funds the killing machine in Gaza and Lebanon.

The Fall of Principle Before "Interest":

The urgent question here is not about the utility of medical services, but about "principle": How can an institution affiliated with the Holy Shrine of Imam Hussein—which is managed under the guidance of the religious authority that many view as a symbol of dignity—go and sign agreements with a state primarily responsible for Iraq's destruction?

This behavior is clearly interpreted as a complete alignment with "Realpolitik" at the expense of national and religious memory.

Institutional calculations of "interest" now appear to outweigh "principle," even in institutions that have long prided themselves as guardians of values.

Conclusion:

Searching for Balance

This divergence between declared principles and practical actions poses a real challenge to the religious establishment, which today finds itself at a crossroads. Between the need to develop medical services and the necessity of preserving collective memory and emotional connection to just causes, there is an urgent need to review these directions.

The legitimate questions raised by the Iraqi public regarding how these steps align with national and moral constants demand explicit clarifications to ensure continued trust between the establishment and its popular base, which has long viewed these shrines as a safety valve for values and principles in an era dominated by the language of self-interest.