The Bad News In The Iraqi Election
First the good news, which far exceeds the downside. Iraq has a democratically elected government, and this speaks volumes. Here are a few sample pages from the volumes. Iraq demonstrates it is possible for a predominantly Arab Muslim nation to escape tyrants and defeat terrorists. The Iraqi people are, to use the idiom, “pulling the gun away” –a phrase I first heard a Syrian friend of mine use and later a former Jordanian government minister. The ripples from Iraq are already changing the Middle East’s political landscape. Another volume: It is possible to escape “bad history” –embedded ethnic and religious conflicts. Escaping bad history is a step toward “modernity.” (We can and should debate what that entails, but one facet of a modern political system is the individual’s ability to express political and social opinions freely and without –how should I put it– excessive fear. A slap or harsh rejoinder is one thing, a bullet something else entirely.)
So what’s the bad news? I am disappointed in the poor showing of Iyad Allawi’s secular list(the Iraqi List). Allawi impressed me with his strategic savvy and tactical finesse. Allawi’s leadership in the critical months of July 2004 through January 2005 (think Najaf, Fallujah, and the elections) was extraordinary. He should have won a Nobel Peace Prize. Perhaps two decades from now, when the leftish who nominate candidates and elect prize winners are either dead or embarassed, Allawi will receive one.
Here’s an AP report on Allawi (via the Guardian).
The lede:
Ayad Allawi looks like the poster child for America’s vision for Iraq _ secular, pro-Western, tough on terrorism. To Iraqis, the former prime minister and other secular figures proved less attractive. That underscores a truism: In the new Iraq, politics and religion go hand in hand.
Allawi’s ticket, which included prominent Sunnis and Shiites, won only 25 of the 275 seats in the December election, according to results announced Friday.
That represented a 38 percent loss from the number of seats won by Allawi’s ticket in January 2005 _ although the former prime minister himself was elected to parliament.
As for following the ins and outs of forming a coalition government,
Iraq The Model has the best analysis. (And provides the most complete election results).
Here’s another AP report on the parliamentary results and the need to form a coalition government.
Allawi won’t disappear. He has a seat in parliament.
I think he’ll be put as the Interior Minister. Keep an eye on that one.
Comment by Robert Mayer — 1/21/2006 @ 10:04 am
Iran wins. Any attempt to deal with Iran will turn the Iraqi Shia against the coalition. We lose.
Comment by Hugh Beaumont — 1/21/2006 @ 11:41 am
“coalition” is the key word. That mean compromises and deals. also, keep in mind there will be future elections, where the Shia religous parties do worse.
Comment by Aaron — 1/21/2006 @ 1:02 pm
It is a quite natural that people will move towards religion in times of instability and crisis. 19 of the UIA’s 128 seats are due to a complicated “rounding” formula. While the US looked away, as the Shia in the South of Iraq were being slaughtered, Iran left the border open so they had somewhere to run. Being “Pro-survival” is not the same as being “Pro-Iranian”.
Comment by Soldier's Dad — 1/21/2006 @ 1:24 pm
It’s highly unlikely that the Iraqi party distribution of 2006 is stable. It’s much more likely that Iraq will go through a number of radical shifts as the people “find their feet” and come to political arrangements that they are comfortable with over the long haul. Take a look at E. Europe and the differences in all those countries between the first elections and their 2nd or 3rd ones. Ethnicity and religion are powerful motivators but they do not last as durable party motivators. ED NOTE: Great comment. I agree, with this additional thought. The “party distribution” that finds the balance point amid the demands for security, the right of dissent, the fact of ethnic and tribal identity, and the rewards of economic productivity will have a long and fruitful run in power.
Comment by TM Lutas — 1/21/2006 @ 4:29 pm
I won’t pretend to understand all the intricate subtleties of Iraqi politics, and have at times been impressed with Allawi. Nevertheless I believe he spent a good deal of time during the campaign talking about how things had gotten worse rather than better, and accused the present government of all manner of atrocious behavior, particularly regarding the treatment of prisoners. example: http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/27/iraq.allawi/index.html?section=cnn_topstories Perhaps this was selective quoting or coverage by the media, which will find the “it’s a failure” needle in any haystack. Perhaps it was understandable as an opposition politician running against the incumbents. But it was pretty clear that comparing the current government unfavorably with Hussain’s government didn’t resonate with the electorate. I hardly expected any Iraqi politician to run a platform of gratitude to America, but I can’t help but wonder if such comments did not dampen enthusiasm for his candidacy among those voters who might have quietly appreciated the progress made there — i.e. the core of what should have been his own constituency. That’s just an observation respectfully offered from well outside the expertise that is consistently found on your very well respected blog.
Comment by DaMav — 1/21/2006 @ 4:53 pm
Allawi is a shrewd guy, I bet he ends up building a significant coalition. So far the Iraqis are doing remarkably well in organizing. They’ll eventually get down to a handful of parties, because fifty little parties will have no power against the big ones. As long as they aren’t killing each other on a large scale, we have to be proud of what they’ve accomplished to date. Heck, they just got the official results of the election this week. Patience!
Comment by Ed Poinsett — 1/21/2006 @ 5:19 pm
I’d have to disagree here. Though his list got only 25 seats, that same tact and political saavy that Austin talks about has pretty much made him the de facto head of the proto-party Maram - the ad-hoc alliance between his list and the Sunni parties which, unified, form a bloc of 67 seats (25% of parliament). The Sunnis, we should remember, have been the source of the insurgency not because of any real subscription to islamism (more true in Shiite Iraq, though not as much as in their neighbors), but because they lost their priviliged position under Saddam and have been, until just recently, marginalized by both the Interim govt and CPA (some by their own hand, some not). Those 69 seats, aligned together under Allawi, form enough of a chunk to coalition with the Kurds and the smaller parties (typically more secular and thus less keen on the UIA) to reach the 138 seats needed to form a government. This will undoubtedly have a moderating effect on the UIA and means, in short, that talk of Allawi’s political demise are much exaggerated.
Comment by Anton Traversa — 1/21/2006 @ 7:50 pm
I think seeing the Iraqi elections in terms of, say, Italy might help, instead of from the two party system, as in the US or Britain, where election results are fairly clear cut and the parties are either in power or not. After all they have system where forming a government means putting together a coalition of small parties dominated by one religion, or by the Communist Party, or the Fascist party, all of which have twentieth century open history of opposing democracy - and the US. Stable Italian govenment is almost a contradiction in terms. And yet Italy has been democracy for sixty years, the country is productive and famous as producing beautiful things and being a great place for a holiday… Having messy elections and people who are loudly argumentative about politics and religion does not make a country a failure. We who live in countries where the parties are a choice between, as one Australian politician put it ‘between Tweedle dum and Tweedle even dumber’ are not used to it, that’s all.
Comment by Shawn Dorca — 1/22/2006 @ 1:19 am
Very, very off topic, but I can’t resist: Hugh Beaumont, didn’t you used to be Ward Cleaver?
Comment by Warren Windrem — 1/22/2006 @ 2:04 am
I too am disappointed by Allawi’s somewhat poor showing. But look at it this way. His list probably got roughly the same number of votes as in January, but the percentage was much smaller due to the giant increase in Sunni participation. Thats the same reason the Kurds lost a number of seats and the Shia Islamist coalition lost a number of seats. All in all, it means more people are participating. Thats a good thing.
Comment by DT — 1/22/2006 @ 3:25 am
I agree this is a great comment! “The “party distribution†that finds the balance point amid the demands for security, the right of dissent, the fact of ethnic and tribal identity, and the rewards of economic productivity will have a long and fruitful run in power”. The real problem is the fear that the Islamists will have ONE VOTE, ONE TIME….. just like Chavez has effectively done in the Non-Islamist Venzuela and the Mullahs have done in Iran. Eliminating candidates right to run is their style now. We will see what Iraq’s Shia crazies like Moqtada do. Ultimately, NO RELIGIOUS PARTY can be trusted. Islamists ALWAYS lie. It is required by the Koran.
Comment by leaddog2 — 1/22/2006 @ 12:05 pm
A new Iraqi government may take months to form HT Austin Bay Read Mohammed’s update at Iraq the Model. Here’s the upside and downside: All are convinced now that solutions lie within politics and negotiations but what concerns us now is that …
Trackback by Rocket's Brain Trust — 1/22/2006 @ 7:06 pm
Whatever your current view, I think everyone should read or re-read The Islamic Paradox, which is available for free at http://www.aei.org/docLib/20041115_book799text.pdf
Comment by Josh Dufresne — 1/23/2006 @ 4:01 pm