No country rising up in dependency: in defense of national identity Iraq

A nation does not rise unless the citizen rises, a citizen does not rise unless he believes that his homeland is his supreme reference, that the state to which he belongs is not just a geographical spot, but a comprehensive framework for his identity, rights, dignity, and future of his children...; nor does a citizen rise if he surrenders to ignorance, or plunges himself into corruption, or makes his loyalty to the outside superior to his loyalty to his homeland... States are built not on cement alone, not on armies alone, not on wealth alone, but on the man who first recognizes that defending his homeland is defending himself, and that the fall of the state is a fall for all.

So the most dangerous thing that nations face is not always an external invasion, but the collapse of society's internal immunity... when a citizen loses confidence in his homeland, or puts foreign allegiance to the national interest, or belittles the sovereignty of his state, society becomes more intrusive, and the state becomes an open arena where foreign wills and conflicting interests conflict.

History has proven that foreign powers were not able to impose their influence in any country unless they found within them those who legitimized or facilitated their way... and therefore political dependence, betrayal, corruption, and betrayal, are not just political errors, but are factors that undermine the state from its foundation, because they transfer the center of decision from within to outside, and make the national interest subordinate to the interests of others.

Nationalism is not a slogan raised on occasions, nor a poem thrown at celebrations, but a daily behaviour, starting with respect for the law, and ending with defending the sovereignty of the state, its wealth, its boundaries, and its institutions... The national citizen is the one who differs from his government if he makes a mistake, but does not differ from his homeland, and criticizes authority, but does not compromise his country's sovereignty, and opposes policies, but does not make Iraq just a piece of paper in the conflicts of others.

This is where the distinction must be made between opposition to power and anti-state. The authorities change, but the homeland remains. Governments come and go. Iraq is history, geography, people and civilization. So turning political dispute into understatement of the state or questioning its legitimacy or calling for its weakening does not serve reform, but opens doors to further division and foreign interference.

Some political and media discourse is not limited to criticizing government performance, but goes beyond that to underestimating the Iraq value of the state, portraying its borders and sovereignty as secondary, or justifying the threat of external forces by ideological, religious or national means... and this tendency, however different its slogans, has one result in common: a weakening of the concept of state and national identity.