The Legacy of Malik Khoshaba Yousip & Yousip Malik Khoshaba
By Fred Aprim
Source: Zinda 2003
Lately, certain attempts have been made to rewrite the legacy of malik* Khoshaba Yousip and his son Yousip (Joseph) malik Khoshaba Yousip.
Before we proceed, it is worth mentioning that the term "malik" is an Assyrian hereditary title that is given to heads of tribes. Although Khoshaba was known as malik Khoshaba and his son as malik Yousip, many familiar with the Assyrian history stress that both father and son acquired the title "malik" later in life and not because their family came from a tribal head.
The Article
The rewriting of the legacy of the father and, or, the son started a while back, however it remained as scattered verbal attempts. The written attempts began, as it seems, with an article about Yousip Khoshaba in Syriac, which appeared on page 32 of Nineveh Magazine, third Qtr., vol. 23, No. 3, 2000, originated by a so-called Assyrian Preparatory Committee in the Diaspora. I do not believe that publishing that article in Nineveh magazine reflected the views of that well-respected magazine about the person in question, but the opinion of its Syriac section editor, who in my opinion did not have all the facts straight.
The article included much untruthful and deceptive information. First, the article claimed that Yousip Khoshaba was elected by heads of church and tribes as “archana d' Atouraye” and then as the official head of the Assyrians after the death of his father malik Khoshaba in 1952 (some records indicate 1954). The question is who were these claimed heads of church and maliks who elected Yousip as so. The truth is that it was the Iraqi government, which was behind such appointments. Secondly, the article claimed that in 1964, Assyrians elected Yousip as “archana” for them (i.e. their head or representative)! Again, who were the Assyrians who elected Yousip as such? Thirdly, the article claimed that Yousip was elected around 1999 as president of a mysterious ‘Assyrian Supreme Committee' by the so-called Assyrian Preparatory Committee in Diaspora to demand national rights for Assyrians in Iraq . They claimed that they selected Yousip since he was a son of one of the great Assyrian heads (referring to malik Khoshaba). One might wonder, what is the background of this preparatory committee and who gave it the authority to elect Assyrian representatives and who was behind it? Some have linked William Shawil with this preparatory committee, however, that has not been verified by this author. Many argue that the Iraqi government was behind this process, which wanted to undermine the progress of the Assyrian national movement in Iraq ?
Yousip malik Khoshaba was born in 1914. In 1918, he joined the Mar Toma ( St. Thomas ) Jacobite School in Mosul . In 1928, he joined the Iraqi Military College from which he graduated in 1934/1935 as an officer in the Iraqi Calvary Division. He advanced in the ranks of the army until 1960 when he retired as Colonel. Yousip Khoshaba died in Baghdad in June 2000.
Assyrians who lived in Iraq during the period 1960 to 2000 know well the unpatriotic role and divisionism that Yousip Khoshaba played. He was a person who worked faithfully for implementing the policies of the Iraqi government. He was behind the persecution of many Assyrians in Iraq during the height of the turbulence, which shock and ultimately divided the Church of the East. When the Church of the East adapted the Gregorian calendar, Yousip was a major player in the very unfortunate events that led to the split in the Church in 1968. He was a pro-Iraqi government in every sense of the word throughout his life. It is unbelievable how today few are trying to glorify him or his father for that matter.
The Documented Accounts
Nobody can deny the heroic role malik Khoshaba Yousip played during World War I and the immediate following years. However, and as they say, people change and so did malik Khoshaba when he began to take part in the Assyrians' communications with the Iraqi government regarding the Assyrians settlement in late 1920s. In June 1932, all Assyrian maliks, including malik Khoshaba, many clergymen, and notables met in Sar Amadiya and agreed to send the Late Patriarch Mar Eshai Shimun to Geneva to represent the Assyrians in the League of Nations (replaced later with the United Nations). It was malik Khoshaba among few others who supplied the Iraqi government, immediately after that meeting, with a letter, which was used by the Iraqi representative in the League to undermine the representation and authority of the patriarch. It was in that letter where malik Khoshaba claimed that Assyrians were happy in Iraq with the treatment of the Iraqi government and that the patriarch was not their representative. That letter and the stand of malik Khoshaba was one of the main reasons for the failure of the Assyrian mission in the League. Malik Khoshaba died in 1952 and his son Yousip Khoshaba took over and followed in his father's footsteps.
Below are seven references (A – G) about the father and the son:
A. Malik Khnoshaba was born as a member of the Church of the East. It seems that he had joined the Presbyterian Church just before the Great War. After the Great War, he had gotten in serious trouble with the Iraqi government when he murdered his own wife and child and escaped to Turkey . However, he was pardoned later and returned to Iraq . Giwargis Bet Benyamin, an Assyrian author, writes that when malik Khoshaba realized that the Presbyterian Missionaries would not be able to destroy the Church of the East, he converted to Catholicism while in Mosul . The destruction of the Church of the East by Catholicism was progressing, and that was the reason why Khoshaba joined it; he wanted to be part of the process. In 1932, the Iraqi government supported Khoshaba and his group and succeeded through the latter's infamous letter to destroy the Assyrian national cause in Iraq . During the twenty years, from 1933 to 1952, the Iraqi governments recognized malik Khoshaba as head of the Assyrians in Iraq , yet he accomplished nothing except creating more divisions among the Assyrians.
Source: Giwargis Bet Benyamin d' Asheeta. “Reshanoota d' Atourayeh d' doora d' Isri” (Assyrians' Leadership in the 20th Century). In Syriac. Chicago : 1987, pp. 43-54
B. The Assyrian heads and notables gathered in Sar Amadiya in mid 1932. They agreed unanimously to send the Mar Eshai Shimun (the Patriarch) to Geneva to present the Assyrian case to the League of Nations . This was vital before the termination of the British Mandate over Iraq was announced and the admittance of Iraq in the League became a reality. The Assyrians were concerned that if the Assyrian issue was not resolved before the admittance of Iraq into the League, they would face great danger under a non-supervised Arab government. Malik Khoshaba was one of the attendees in that meeting. After the meeting, he had contacted the Iraqi government and generated a letter in which he and few others had denied the representation of the Patriarch.
Yusuf Malek, a member of the Chaldean Catholic Church, writes that in return for malik Khoshaba's dirty work:
“Khoshaba was promised to be made "Sheik ul-Mashayikh" of the Assyrians, if he were to consent to the Dashtazi settlement scheme; his son, Yusuf, a student in the military school, was to be promoted to the rank of an officer; his second son Daud was to be made a police officer; other relatives were to have access to government posts in preference to the other "obstinate" Assyrians; and his son-in-law, Lazard, was to be made Mudir Nahiyah of Dohuk.”
Yusuf Malek continues to state that for these privileges, malik Khoshaba, and his group, was asked by the government to:
Renounce the Mar Shimun.
Deny their complaints made to the League of Nations against the Iraqi government.
Agree to the Dashtazi settlement a one-eyed project.
Sign documents proposed from time to time by government officials stating that the government was benevolent and was affording the Assyrians the best treatment.”
Source: Yusuf Malek. "The British Betrayal of the Assyrians." New Jersey : The Kimball Press, 1935, p. 221
C. After the death of malik Khoshaba in 1952, the Iraqi government brought his son Yousip malik Khoshaba and made him the head of the Assyrians in Iraq . The son did yet greater damages throughout his life till his death in June 2000.
Bet Benyamin adds that what Yousip did to the Church of the East in Iraq in the period from 1960 to 2000 is known well to Assyrians involved in the Church of the East and national affairs. When the Church of the East decided to adopt the Gregorian Calendar in the early 1960 in order to be in concert with the majority of the Christian world, Yousip fluxed his muscles. He gathered a gang around himself and stood against the church leaders and the switch of the church. One wonders why! Why would Yousip care whether the Church of the East uses the Eastern or the Gregorian Calendar? It just boggles any man's mind since Yousip was not a member of the Church of the East; he was a Presbyterian! When the Assyrians thought of building a church in Mosul and began raising money, Yousip wrote to a clergyman: “You go ahead collect the money but you will not decide where it will be built!” The Assyrians had picked a very suitable place close to where many of the Assyrians had resided, but Yousip because of his influence with the government rejected the location. He wanted to build it in the middle of a Moslem neighborhood! Bet Benyamin wonders, why do people meddle in issues not relating to them? Why did Yousip continue to act in such manner?
Bet Benyamin continues to state that Yousip malik Khoshaba was a member of the Iraqi Armed Forces with great influence and connections. He used this power to terrorize every Church of the East clergyman who did not agree with his opinion. It reached a point where he took many of the Assyrian clergymen to State Courts where they were insulted and called degrading names by his own people or allies, a humiliation to the Church of his ancestors. Because of his position in the Iraqi Army, Yousip had made many government officials be under the pretence that every Assyrian who was not with him, was therefore against the authority of the Iraqi government. He made the government believe that those Assyrians who did not consider him their ‘master' were collaborating with foreign powers against the sovereignty of Iraq . Yousip went so far that he deposed of some priests who did not agree with him and brought his own puppets in their place. All churches belonging to the Church of the East in Iraq were closed in late 1960 at the orders of this Yousip and many clergymen who wanted to challenge the orders were harassed inside courtrooms. The Church of the East had never seen so much humiliation more than in the era of Yousip malik Khoshaba. He had said: “I will do just as Samson the great had done; I will destroy Assyrians and their church and let me die with them all in the process!” What could we expect from such a man? What could we expect from a selfish, egocentric, Iraqi government driven individual?
Source: Giwargis Bet Benyamin d' Asheeta. “Reshanoota d' Atourayeh d' doora d' Isri” (Assyrians' Leadership in the 20th Century). In Syriac. Chicago : 1987, pp. 125-134
D. Col. (Retired) Yousip Khoshaba played an important role in the split of the Church of the East in the 1960s. His father malik Khoshaba always opposed the patriarchal family. It is stated that when Yousip Khoshaba caused the spilt in the church in 1968 (i.e. establishing the Old Calendar Church ), and creating the new patriarchy under Toma Darmo, he was in reality taking revenge from the Mar Shimun's family. Worth mentioning that Yousip was not member of the Church of the East, he was a Presbyterian.
Source: Dr. Mar Aprem (George Mooken). "The Assyrians in Iraq : A Travelogue." Trichur , India : M. T. B. C. Technical Training Center , 1990, p. 42.
I need to stress here that we cannot apply modern rules on old practices that were the Bible of people at the time. The patriarch was for centuries the religious and secular leader of the Assyrian "millet." This "temporal" power was practiced among the Assyrian tribes of Hakkari undisputedly, whether Turkish government sometimes liked it or not. The government of Iraq and its king, originally from the Arabian Desert , did not understand what the word "Temporal" meant. It was translated as "sulta zamaniya" (literally Timed Power), however, it hardly meant that. As any leader, the patriarch had to protect his authority, which the Iraqi government wanted to undermine. The British understood exactly what this word meant and since they were in control in Iraq , they could have done something. The British could have explained the history behind the word "Temporal" to the king and the Iraqi government, just as the patriarch tried hard to do, before allowing the detention of the patriarch, his deportation, and the massacre of the Assyrians, but they did not bother.
E. Staff ord writes that the Assyrian leaders nominated the patriarch as their leader in June 1932 in Sar Amadiya, but the Iraqi government tried to abolish this authority and the Temporal power. The patriarch tried more than once to explain what this word meant. He stated that the power was not assumed by him but descended to him from centuries past, which was recognized during the Sassanid Kings, Islamic Caliphs, Mongol Khans, and Ottoman Sultans. No proof of any misuse of that power have ever been traced in history. (pp. 100-105)
Staff ord adds that malik Khoshaba was not a real malik (head of tribe), he was a man of stormy past, a man of mood, and his whole life was dominated by his hatred of the Mar Shimun. After returning to Iraq , he murdered his wife and daughter. Malik Khoshaba and Bishop Yawallaha have long opposed, for personal reasons, to the patriarch. Therefore, it was not difficult to win them over to the government side. (p. 122) The Iraqi government had in the absence of the Mar Shimun appointed malik Khoshaba as President of the Assyrian Advisory Committee, a committee established to find lands to settle landless Assyrians. While the patriarch felt naturally betrayed for having his deadliest enemy appointed to such position, the Iraqi government argued that Khoshaba was the only Assyrian leader who accepted working with the government. Furthermore, the Iraqi government tried to interfere and appoint and nominate Assyrian maliks and raises, was a further interference in the patriarchs duties. (p. 123)
When given the option and as most competent and impartial observers consider that 90% of Assyrians would have decided to leave Iraq (even if not to the same place) and only few hundreds would have remained in Iraq backing malik Khoshaba. Later Staff ord tried to justify the Iraqi government and British actions, he tried hard to add certain doubts in the readers mind. He states next that the strength of the two parties, i.e. the patriarch and malik Khoshaba, cannot be accurately stated. Still, he state, quote: "Possibly the anti-Mar Shimun party represent 25 to 33 per cent of the whole, but it is difficult to say, as none can tell for certain to what extent the sectional leaders, for example, malik Khammo of the Baz and malik Nimrud of the Jilu represent the rank and file." Unquote. (p. 213)
Source: R. S. Staff ord. "The Tragedy of the Assyrians." London : George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1933.
F. Louka Zodo describes the opposition group that betrayed the Assyrian cause by rejecting the leadership of the Mar Shimun in Geneva as a group that sold their alliance to Sir Francis Humphrys and the Iraqi government, British High Commissioner in Baghdad, although these leaders have no conscious to start with.
Source: Louka Zodo. "5000 Years History of the Assyrian Civilization and Racial Aims." In Syriac. California : 1981, p. 239.
Of course, Louka Zodo is referring to the group of malik Khoshaba in the 1930s, and exactly in 1932, when he undermined the authority of the patriarch in the League of Nations with his infamous latter that was used by the Iraqi government.
G. "Malik" Yaqu d' "Malik" Ismael writes in his book:
In May 1932, the Late Mar Eshai Shimun invited all Assyrian villages' heads and tribes' maliks to attend an Assyrian Council meeting in Amadiya. Malik Yaqu malik Ismael attended as a representative of Upper Tyari since malik Ismael was very old and weak to endure the long trip. During the trip, malik Yaqu writes that he was thinking what to do and how to handle the situation with malik Khoshaba. He concluded to address these four facts:
1. Although Upper and Lower Tyari are two tribes, they are one in reality.
2. Malik Khoshaba has been part of almost all meetings.
3. After that horrible event of Khoshaba killing his own wife and his little girl, he escaped to Turkey (J'maneh village). Upon entering Iraq again, the Iraqi authorities began searching. His father-in-law in Mosul , the qasha of Baz, has submitted a complaint to the officials against him for the killings of his daughter and granddaughter. Rayis (head) Sheeno Audisho from Dadosh village, heard about the complaint and the intentions of the government. He immediately began spreading the news in the neighboring villages that they must not allow the apprehension of malik Khoshaba.
4. Malik Yaqu and his brother Daniel having heard about the economical condition of malik Khoshaba upon his return from Turkey decided to gather a fund to help him. 2000 Ruppe were collected and sent to malik Khoshaba. A letter of appreciation addressed to Daniel was received confirming the reception of the fund.
Upon the arrival of malik Yaqu to Amadiya he went immediately to visit malik Khoshaba to reach an understanding. The following was concluded; that the Assyrians have no future in Iraq unless their autonomy is secured, otherwise if Turkey does not allow us to return to our homes, then we must look for alternative places. This understanding was the same malik Yaqu and Rab Imma Khnano (representing Tkhoma) had reached together earlier while driving together from Mosul to Amadiya. At that night, a meeting attended by all heads between themselves took place and this understanding was presented and agreed upon by all. Next morning, the meeting with the Assyrian Patriarch Mar Shimun took place. In attendance were Mar Yousip Khnanesho, Metropolitan of Shamisdin; Mar Sargis, bishop of Jilu; Mar Yaw-alaha, bishop of Lower Barwar . The Patriarch said that he prefers negotiating with the Iraqi authorities rather facing the troubles of migrations and many have settled in and opportunities for prosperity in Iraq are plentiful. After more discussions, everybody agreed on the Patriarch's proposal and was given the authority to lead the people in this direction.
Here it was decided upon to have a second meeting of the Assyrian Council attended by one representative from each tribe and as follows under the leadership of the Patriarch:
Mar Yousip Khnanesho, Metropolitan of Shamisdin
Mar Sargis, bishop of Jilu
Zaia d' Malik Shamisdin
Malik Khoshaba of Lower Tyari
Malik Yaqu of Upper Tyari
Malik Khnano of Tkhoma
Zadoq Shim'aonaya of Upper Barwar
The following demands were listed and planned to be presented to the authorities:
Assyrians should not be recognized as tribal people, rather as ethnic group living in Iraq .
Hakkari must be reunited with Iraq and returned to the Assyrians. Compensations must be paid to rebuild churches destroyed.
If point 2 above is not possible, then another home for all the Assyrians, those in Iraq and outside, must be found for them.
As indicated in point 1, this new home to be centered in Dohuk, under an Arab governor assisted by a British officer. A committee to redistribute land to Assyrians, on condition Kurds properties not to be disturbed, so both Assyrians and Kurds can live together in peace together.
The Assyrian Patriarch to be recognized in Iraq as a temporal and religious leader of the Assyrians as recognized by the Ottoman government.
The Iraqi central government to include a seat for an Assyrian representative selected by the Assyrian people.
A school in this new Assyrian region is to be established where it teaches in Syriac and Arabic.
Clergymen are to be assisted monetarily by the government.
A central hospital to be established in Dohuk, with branches in other villages.
Assyrians must remain armed similar to other groups in the region.
A second Council meeting was decided to take place in June 1932. As the first meeting was adjourned, news arrived to the Assyrians that malik Khoshaba has begun his contacts with the Iraqi authorities against the Assyrian Council. Khoshaba began to create divisions among Assyrians against the patriarch and succeeded to gain some supporters.
In June 1932, malik Yaqu while in ‘Swara Tookeh' on his way to attend the second meeting in ‘Amadiya,' was contacted by a messenger from Khoshaba asking him to join forces together against the plans of the Council. Malik Yaqu declined since they have all discussed the matter and swore in the first meeting to stay united. At the break of the new development three Assyrian notables from Lower Tyari: Audisho Lawando from bnay Lagepa; Shim'aon Barkheesho from bnay Matad d Jaliya d Leezan; and Khiyo Audisho from Asheeta, sent a letter to Khoshaba Yousip stating that they refuse to accept him as a representative of Lower Tyari.
In this meeting, the patriarch read the response of Sir Francis Humphrys to the Assyrians' demands stating: “Your demands have been received: but regretfully the issue of uniting your home of Hakkari with Iraq, the rebuilding of destroyed churches, and the establishing of schools, are out of our control. These demands must be presented to the League of Nations , and we will be supportive in such matter.”
According to these latest devlopments, it was decided that the patriarch would represent the Assyrians and the council to present these demands to the League of Nations . Here malik Khoshaba Yousip requested that the three Lower Tyari notables who wrote him the letter mentioned above be called in and accept him as the representative of Lower Tyari, or he is going to resign. Many tried to convince Khoshaba that the letter should be put aside and work to continue, but he insisted. Here malik Yaqu stood and addressed Khoshaba saying: “This is not an important issue. It seems that you are looking for excuses to put obstacles in the Council's path. We cannot please everybody. By staying so stubborn about the three men and their letter, you are proving that this was some sort of a planned scheme to undermine the decisions of the Assyrian Council and an excuse so you pull away and create division.”
Malik Khoshaba thought for a second and stated: “Indeed, your conclusions are logical, let me then join all of you!” Therefore the matter was dropped. The Council hence adopted a decision to send the patriarch along with Shamasha Emmanuel Shimun as a clerk to Geneva . On October 1932, His Holiness departed from Mosul to address the League of Nations and Mar Sargis of Jilu was appointed to occupy the patriarchal chair temporarily in his absence.
Upon the patriarch's departure, malik Khoshaba began his intensive and quick efforts backed by the Iraqi authorities to undermine the patriarch's mission in Geneva . A letter was written stating that the Mar Shimun has no authority to speak on behalf of the Assyrians in Geneva since the Iraqi authorities are taking care of the Assyrian resettlement issue and all other necessities. This letter somehow was approved by some of those who participated in the Amadiya meetings. Accordingly, the presence and all the demands of the patriarch in Geneva were rejected.
In early 1933, Britain reduced the Assyrian Army. Second Battalion in Diyana-Rawandoz was retired, replaced by the Iraqi Army. Other Assyrians were placed as Britain 's Airplanes keepers in Hinaidi and Baghdad . In May 1933, the patriarch returned to Mosul empty handed from his mission to the League of Nations . The British began a campaign to show that the patriarch had failed to represent the Assyrians in the League and in June 10, 1933, it appeared that two sides has emerged within the Assyrian community. Khalil ‘Azmi, the governor of Mosul , asked both sides to attend a meeting in his office. Lt. General R. S. Staff ord was present too. Below are the names of both camps.
The Patriarchal Coalition:
Metropolitan Yousip Khnaneesho
Malik Yaqu Malik Ismael
Malik Loko Shlimon of Tkhoma
Rev Giwargis of Tkhoma
Malik Andrious of Jilu
Rayis Hurmiz Younan of Mazra'ya
Shamasha Kanno of Jilu
Malik David of Tkhoma
Zadoq Enwiya of Asheeta of Lower Tyari
Saypo Cheena of Lower Tyari
Rayis Bokko of Asheeta of Lower Tyari
Shamasha Yousip Eliya of Walto of Upper Tyari
Rayis Audisho Khawsh of Romta
Rayis Yaop Soro of Champa of Upper Tyari
Rayis Youkhanna of Halmon
Rayis Warda Oshana of Darawa of Upper Tyari
Shlimon Zoomaya of Jondichta Tikhom
Chooma Makhmoora of Baz
Hurmiz Talia of Baz
Tailu David of Baz
The Opposition headed by Malik Khoshaba:
Mar Sargis, bishop of Jilu
Zaia d' malik Shamisdin of Lower Tyari
Malik Khoshaba Yousip of Lower Tyari
Malik Khamo of Baz
Giggu Giwu of Dadoosh of Upper Tyari
Audisho Dadeesho of Walto of Upper Tyari
Khiyyo Audisho of Asheeta of Lower Tyari
Daniel Paris of Jilu
Gabriel Shimun of Baz
Shimun Barkhesho of Jilu
Audisho Lawando of Lower Tyari
In this meeting, the Mosul governor stated that it has been decided to settle the Assyrians in the towns of Na'la, Ziha, and other undesirable regions. He threatened anybody who would try to stand against the Iraqi authorities. Malik Khoshaba Yousip stood and praised the authorities, thanked them for being merciful and full of virtue. He declared that Assyrians would accept any suggestions and solution by the Iraqi authorities. Many arguments were discussed based on one principle, which is that Assyrians do not want to have any problems with the Iraqi government, but they did not ask for those badly infested regions. The governor sat there and watched the two sides argue other matters like the authority of the Mar Shimun. From here on it was decided that separate meetings between the authorities and the two camps would be conducted. The opposition side began to get a very special treatment from the government. Their families transferred in special transportation means into desirable areas while the Mar Shimun camp were treated unfavorably. Finally, on July 10, Shamasha Kanno of Jilu, speaking on behalf of the Mar Shimun camp, stood and requested that they be allowed to chose a different country to go to.
Khalil ‘Azmi said first you need to get permission from the authorities of the country you wish to go to, then the Iraqi government will supply all needed transportation to take you there peacefully. Here Lt. General Staff ord leaned over and had couple of words with the governor who turned and said that by the way I need to get the approval of Baghdad about the transportation issue.
The Mar Shimun group left the meeting but soon after they stepped outside, Mar Yousip, malik Yaqu, malik Andriyous and malik Loko were called back by Lt. General Staff ord and Major Thomson to the office again. They were asked to travel to Baghdad to ask the patriarch to sign a declaration surrendering his temporal powers. Mar Yousip said that he is a religious person and he would rather leave the matter to the others to carry on. It was decided that malik Yaqu and malik Loko to travel to Baghdad the next day. Fearing for their lives and realizing that their travel to Baghdad is nothing but a trap to capture them, the latter two did not head south to Baghdad as ordered by the governor and the British but headed north of Mosul . An urgent meeting commenced in Boosriya attended by many Assyrian leaders and it was decided to head for Syria .
Source: Malik Yaqu d' malik Ismael. “Assyrians and the two World Wars.” In Syriac. Tehran: The Press of the Se?ata Saprayta d' ?Alayme Atouraye, 1964.
Conclusion:
Based on the seven accounts above, what I have heard from my own father who was personally involved in the Assyrian affairs in Iraq and was harassed and imprisoned because of such involvement, and based on additional information from other Assyrians, it is fair to conclude the following. There is much that needs to be said and uncovered about malik Khoshaba and his son Yousip malik Khoshaba. The father and son have played a very questionable role in Assyrian history, the father from WWI to 1952, and the son from 1952 to 2000. Malik Khoshaba was a great army commander during the Great War; no one can take that away from him. However, he changed in Iraq with the smell of wealth and power and the sense that he finally can accomplish what he had sought for long. For his personal satisfaction, malik Khoshaba, some argue, perhaps changed the course of Assyrian history. No one knows what the Iraqi government and the British would have done if the Assyrians remained united behind their patriarch in 1932 who was insisting on the recommendations of the League of Nations ' Special Commission for a homogenous Enclave for the Assyrians in Mosul Province . Yousip Khoshaba, meanwhile, brought the Church of the East back to the dark ages; he was instrumental in splitting the church, humiliating, terrorizing, and imprisoning many laity and religious figures who did not agree with him. He used his Iraqi military background and the support of the Iraqi government not to help Assyrians as a whole, but to get whatever he, and those very few around him, desired. He was the man the Iraqi government turned to whenever it needed to accomplish something; He was the man for hire indeed, as described by many Assyrians.
Looking Towards the Future
The various Iraqi chauvinistic governments have dealt unfairly with the Assyrians. They applied the divide and rule policy to pin one side on another in order to undermine the Assyrians' legitimate rights as indigenous people of Iraq . With the liberation of Iraq , end of oppressive regimes, and the promises of democracy, freedom, and liberty, Assyrians must look for the future and undo the mistakes of the past.
The following steps must be initiated immediately:
First step is to undo the division of 1968 and the reunification of the Ancient Church of the East (Old Calendar) and the Assyrian Church of the East. As soon as that process is completed, dialogue must be initiated between Mar Emmanuel III Delly, Patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church, and Mar Dinkha IV, Patriarch of the Assyrian Church of the East, to undo the division of 1830. These two steps should restore the church to its original status through its glorious name "Church of the East."
With the mounting of challenges in the Middle East in general and Iraq in particular, Assyrians' chances for survival is only through their unity. Since Assyrians are Christians and the church plays a major role in their lives, the church leaders must seek the fulfillment of this urgent goal.
Fred Aprim
California, USA
California, USA
California
