Posted on 02/12/2006 3:55:06 AM PST by RWR8189
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Shiite lawmakers Sunday chose Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari to head Iraq's new government, Shiite officials said.
Al-Jaafari won 64 votes, one more than Vice President Adil Abdul-Mahdi, officials said. There were two abstentions.
More than 100 lawmakers from the Shiite coalition, the United Iraqi Alliance, gathered to vote.
The choice of the umbrella Shiite alliance is assured of becoming prime minister because Shiites won the most parliament seats in the Dec. 15 national elections.
Shiite lawyers cast their votes at the heavily guarded home of Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, the head of Abdul-Mahdi's party. Al-Jaafari's supporters gathered in the compound cheered when word of the outcome emerged from the closed door meeting room.
Al-Jaafari, a physician, is a member of the Dawa Party and spent years in exile in Iran and Britain before returning to his homeland after the U.S.-led coalition ousted Saddam Hussein in 2003.
His government, which took office in April 2005, had been widely criticized for failing to improve the country's crumbling infrastructure or deal effectively with the Sunni-led insurgency.
They may well get him anyway because if Jaafari doesn't get his cabinet approved, he must step down and another member of the UIA appointed.
I have my own perspective on things here. And the media does not influence them.
I've seen the media's version (yes, I have CNN, MSNBC and some of that other garbage here) and I've seen the reality.
There is a vast difference, believe me.
Who said anything about Iraqi democracy being a failure? They've got what they voted for. That's what democracy is, so where's the failure?
3 State Solution [CFR] Leslie Gelb... may have pegged it years ago
I've been advocating a three-state solution to Iraq since before the war. It's the only solution that would work, but for some reason the White House doesn't get it.
What I have heard in the media is similar to what the Iraqis are saying, that he is moderate.
So?
Also, the reason why Sadr supported him was the other guy was the Sunni candidate.
Duh.
To assume that he will be a radical Islamist because of Sadr's support is really irrational.
That would be a complete disaster, that is why the White House does not support splitting up Iraq into three little failed states.
Meanwhile.....Vatican imperative marches on : )
Personally, I don't see a failure.
I see people jumping to conclusions before this thing has had time to work.
good luck to him... he's gonna need it. It appears to me that Islamists political forces will not allow a true democracy to succeed. The cartoon mess is just a rallying cry. Worse will follow. I feel this way. If democracy in the middle east were to catch hold... Bush will be carved into Mt. Rushmore. If it doesn't... oh well... it was the right thing and we tried.
I abhor that sawed off little, fat bastard. I have since the beginning. I knew it was a big mistake when the hunt to kill him was called off. Now, I'm afraid, he might be to big to outright shoot. Are there any other alternatives to a well place bullet?
Nam Vet
The reason the White House doesn't support them is because a Kurd state would antagonize Turkey and a Shiite state might fall under Iran's sway.
What they're likely gonna end up with is a big failed state, with a de facto Kurd state that antagonizes Turkey anyway and a theocratic central government under Iran's sway.
Good to know.
That might happen, but only via violence. One of the three states is light in oil, and thus for that one of the three, there is a winter of discontent. But the upside, is that the choices are so poor for the Sunnis, that they might finally wake up and smell the roses of the least bad choice.
But is Jaafari a good leader, a good manager, the guy you want to manage the tensions, and the crises? One wonders.
Rome was not built in a day. This is a brand new democracy.
Things have improved over the last year. (The media won't tell you much about that.)
I say give it a chance before criticizing. It's their country, after all.
The irony though is that the Sunni nation would be the most likely to embrace freedom.
If I might wax philosophic for a moment, for all the brain power political scientists waste on the topic I think it simply comes down to how a people answers one basic question: Who has the right to rule me?
Not to be confused with the question: Who has the power to rule me? (That's just always the guy who controls the biggest gun.)
No one randomly points and answers 'that guy over there'; the answer ultimately leads back to one of three options: God, the Nation, or the Law.
The average Iraqi Shiite would answer God, or rather the representative of God, and so long as that's the case freedom is a hopeless cause for them.
The average Iraqi Kurd would answer the Nation, which is typical of peoples in the midst of or who have recently emerged from a liberation struggle. And the prospect of freedom is dicey for them in the long haul (the typical outcome is a strongman tyrant).
The average Iraqi Sunni would answer the Law, in one of several forms. In a twisted way, we see this even in the Saddam trial, where they are always railing on and on about the rule of law.
And in order for a people to be free, the answer must be the Law above and beyond and despite the other options.
And that is also why a unitary Iraq is doomed to failure, when it comes to freedom, or lack thereof. Because unless the people of a nation as a whole give the same answer to that question - Who has the right to rule me? - they can never function in tandem as a free people.
Interesting post, and yes it is difficult. But the choices for the Sunni's are poor. It is not as if they have a good choice. Having a sliver of real estate north and west of Bagdad without oil, is not particularly attractive. I find Iraq hard to predict as to its future.
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.