Elections in Iraq

Another crucial phase for Iraq’s future has passed. How does one sum up the March 7^th parliamentary elections? Not with a one-liner.

Starting with voter turn-out estimates, said to lay around 62%. To some that figure is a disappointment, especially in comparison with Iraq’s previous election. Nevertheless, the share of people eligible to vote that actually showed up is  larger than during Britain’s last election, however. “So what”, you might reply. Well, Britain wasn’t plagued by bombs set off by mobile phones and other, sadly more effective, acts of terrorism.

Seen from that perspective, one can easily understand how right US president Obama was in stating that he had “great respect for the millions of Iraqis who refused to be deterred by acts of violence, and who exercised their right to vote.” Because that is after all what happened: Even for ‘modernized’ democratic states, 62% is not a bad number.

The inevitably question is: What will happen next? Official results will probably not be available for a month and a government coalition isn’t anywhere in sight even if results make their public debut sooner than that. And, unlike in previous years, politics are now at the center stage by being Iraq’s biggest obstacle for a better future. If reasons for invading are cast aside, it is to Mr. Bush’s credit that security has improved greatly. His final attempt to secure life in the Arab state has been reasonably successful. Training too has worked out well, as more than a million people are now wearing uniforms in Iraq. Paying public sector workers already accounts for about a fifth of the total budget (and it is also the reason why unemployment rate isn’t causing heart attacks).

Despite that there is no denying the many deaths each month: It is not quite yet a ’safe haven’.  Last week’s elections – i.e. the government coalition eventually to to result from it – will only be proven useful if sectarianism can be overcome,  and that cannot be taken for granted, as it will mean that Sunni Muslims, who held power during Saddam’s reign, need to accept they will not have most of the power, and on the other hand that Shia Muslims need to realize that they cannot and should not abuse their majority.

Where in America’s senate 60 is the magic number, Iraq’s legislative chamber requires 163 for a majority in the legislative upper house. It is very, very unclear who will be part of it. The Iraqi National Alliance, a fierce Shia group (though leaning less on Iran than its rival the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq), is said to have done well, but Arab pride is growing too as shown by the rise (in admittedly notoriously unreliable Iraqi polls) of the Iraqi National Movement, led by Mr. Allawi.  He relied on a more secular –hence in this case less sectarian – way of campaigning, quite different from the Iranian tradition and theocracy, which is anyway much more Persian than Arab.

A split coalition is, I think, the safest bet. Kurdish involvement is expected by many, and that would be a good thing if one desires a representative government. And while they might not be the largest ethnic group, their numbers are great enough to ensure possibilities of filling in a vital role in the formation of a coalition. Another good candidate to participate therein is Shia party Dawa – led by the current Prime Minster Maliki – both thanks to his (expected) good performance in the elections, as well as the options he holds in steering the current policies of his country that might influence future agreements (and disagreements).

In the meantime an issue re-enters the scene, one that was thought to be dead: The withdrawal of American troops. The deadline approaches.  If the Iraqi government makes a request to the White House that some troops need to remain on their soil for a longer period, than Obama should give in, which means breaking an electoral promise.

The reason is simple. After spending hundreds of billions of dollars in a war nobody likes, we finally arrived at a stage where not all seems to have been done for nothing. Saddam is gone, Iraq is free and more secure, and has a lot of economic potential. But, in order to make sure those prospects and achievements are protected, security is essential. Being free on paper while still running the risk of being blown up whenever you stick your nose out of the front door is not a true form of being free. It is like having the freedom to think about criticizing the Kremlin, while KGB-idiots are looking for any expressions that might betray those thoughts, only to turn those into the full penalty of law.

All we can do now is wait for the results to lead to a long, bumpy road. That road is essential in more than just the respect of the latest elections; it is also a test of the durability of Iraq’s democracy. Let us hope for the best.