Baghdad for Kirkuk (Iraqi Elections)

I think most of you have seen the disturbing results of the elections after the commission completed counting 90% of the votes. I think the announcement was due to pressures on the commission which also chose to show the results of the Sunni provinces apparently to calm the Accord Front down a bit as the Front achieved good results in those provinces.

Today we heard that a delegation of Hachim al-Hasani (chairman of the National Assembly), Mowafaq al-Rubai’i (national security advisor) and Barham Salih (planning minister, a Kurd) went to the Accord Front to talk to them and convince them to abandon their threatening attitude and to invite them to be part of the new government.

The situation is till tense but the new thing which is not unexpected is that the Kurdish parties finally got what they’d been dreaming of and won 51% of the seats in Kirkuk after they added 200,000 new voters to the registration database just a few days before the election day. In my opinion we’ve just witnessed a Baghdad-for-Kirkuk deal being made and the Kurds were smart when they delayed the results of Kirkuk for another day. Because of the timing, Kirkuk didn’t get much attention here since the dispute over Baghdad is getting all the attention and dwarfing the relatively smaller issue of Kirkuk.

Today I recalled what Barzani told al-Sharq al-Awsat paper two months ago; he said “we will have no choice but to separate from Iraq if a civil war erupted in the middle and south of the country” at that time I thought it was strange from Barzani to say such things while Iraq was about to make more positive steps represented by the participation of the Sunni which was supposed to contribute to Iraq’s stability. So why did Barzani warn from a civil war when last time’s boycotters were changing their minds to join the political process?

I’m afraid the Baghdad-for-Kirkuk deal is done now and there’s nothing I can think of to reverse the new reality which was forced via a democratic practice. Right now we’re in facing a big crisis that leaves us before two possibilities; either the Sunni agree to be part of the government and we get a parliament with 200 Islamist members (Sunni and She’at) in the face of 75 secular members, 50 of them are Kurds who won’t care much about this parliament or the rest of the country since they have their own parliament and government in Kurdistan (which is going to include Kirkuk in the near future of course).

Those 200 Islamists will just have to diminish the 25 liberal members and that’s not going to be difficult at all in four years, I mean one year was enough for the Islamists to burn offices, assassinate and intimidate the liberals and seculars.

The second possibility isn’t brighter than the first, probably the rival parties will enter another conflict in which words will not be the only weapon, we will also hear the democracy of mortars and RPGs speak loudly.

And of course the "elected" government will soon ask the “occupiers” nicely-and maybe violently-to leave Iraq as their mission is over and the government is now capable of controlling the people without needing intelligence, air or armor support from the “occupiers” the new government will be able to exterminate and punish all sorts of outlaws.

We did not expect the secular parties to win the election and we said at many previous occasions that Islamists are still stronger; we even expected that the new PM will be Aadil Abdulmahdi from the SCIRI:

we can see that the United Iraqi Alliance still has luck, and to some extent votes, on its side. The Alliance will again be the largest bloc in the parliament, with between 70 and 90 seats. This will grant them the right to have the future Prime Minister selected from amongst their members.

I think the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution (SCIRI), one of the two main Shiite political parties, will not give the PM post to the Dawa Party or the Sadrists. I expect the new Prime Minister to be a SCIRI member. The hot candidate here is Aadil Abdulmahdi, the current deputy PM.

And we said that the secular parties’ role will be limited to balancing the influence of the Islamists during the next four years:

Although the liberal and secular powers aren’t yet ready to take the lead for a number of reasons related to 35 years of oppression and destruction but still, the progress they made in a very short time is impressive and I think their main duty now is to establish balance with the religious parties during the coming four years and I believe we already have a partial balance...

What happened is that secular elements whether Sunni or She’at were marginalized and expelled (al-Mutlac from the Accord Front and Chalabi, Ali al-Dabbagh and Ibrahim Bahril Iloom from the UIA). Marginalizing those men was the beginning of the coup that began from within the parties themselves. Actually the UIA themselves weren’t even dreaming about 50% of the seats:

Nadeem al-Jabiri the head of the Fadheela Party (one of the 4 major components of the alliance) said in the interview that their goal is to achieve at least 1/3 of the seats of the Parliament as that would grant them the ability to block any alliance between other blocs. The people in the Alliance realize very well that their chances to lead a government are getting smaller but they’re still in a state of denial, as one can conclude from al-Jabiri’s words “We have put in our plans that the Alliance shall win at least 1/3 of the seats so that no government can be formed without the Alliance…”.

All they wanted and all they knew they were able to get was 33% of the seats which can give them the veto right in the parliament but the Baghdad-for-Kirkuk deal with the Kurds allowed both of them to get the at least the 51% majority, each in his region of interest.

Iraqpundit
12/21/05
http://iraqpundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/counting-out-iraq.html

Counting Out Iraq?

Early reports from Iraq that the Shiite clergy's "555" list has done extremely well in the recent election have alarmed many secular Iraqis and others who wish the country well, and have delighted those want to see Iraq fail because they hate George Bush. Similarly, suggestions that voting and/or vote counting may have been dishonest are extremely worrying.

But those who are ready to perform the funeral rites on Iraqi democracy should wait until we have much more information before declaring the country a lost cause. The results that have us all concerned are not yet complete. Reports indicate that the ballots of early voters, such as soldiers and others, have not been counted. The ballots of overseas voters haven't been tallied yet. No province has even given a full tally of the votes. Indeed, voting officials have been issuing corrections involving blocks of as many as 100,000 votes. That's why it would be wise to wait until we have the full picture. Iraqis especially should try to control their notorious pessimistic streak

That's not to say that I think the vote was a clean one. Election official Farid Ayar recently said that of the many complaints of vote tampering, some 20 complaints are serious. He added that these cases could affect the outcome of the election.

The reports of fraud have not been very specific, with the exception of a questionable report of a truck intercepted at Wasit. According to news accounts, the truck was entering Iraq from Iran loaded with the partly filled out ballots. The driver supposedly told Iraqi authorities that there were three other such trucks besides his. There were no reports about the remaining trucks. Did any of this happen? At least one Iraqi authority has denied it entirely. If the story is true, it might help explain the reported success of the clerics' list; if the story's a rumor, it provides an insight into the distrust of some Iraqis toward elements of the clerics' list.

The success of the 555 list raises many questions. For one thing, the list has purportedly gotten a larger percentage of the total vote this time than it did in January, despite the fact that so many more people voted this time, especially Sunnis and secular Iraqis. Of course Moqtada Sadr's gang also voted this time, which might explain some increase in the total vote for the 555 list -- on more than one level. That is, if Sadr's followers voted honestly, that would raise the raw numbers for 555. On the other hand, some of Moqtada's thugs are not above stuffing the ballot boxes, which also might explain the higher numbers for 555.

The electoral commission said 10,893,413 of 15,556,8702 registered voters cast ballots, a turnout of 69.97 percent. The Jan. 30 elections saw a turnout of 58 percent, while 63 percent participated in the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum.

The complaints about the election have been that the 555 list and its supporters have behaved badly in the sense that they illegally used photos of Sistani in advertising their list. Sistani said he wasn't supporting any specific list. Using his picture certainly brought in more votes for the 555 list. There also were complaints of party posters being torn down at night, and reports of the dead voting in the south.

All this worries me greatly. But there is no sense in deciding the worst until we have the final tally, which might take another month.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.