WORLD  
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 3

Iraq Throws Obama a Curve Ball, Key 2010 Elections in Peril

Obama has muddied the waters in his response to the current election crisis.
November 19, 2009  |  
 
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest World headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

Reminiscent of the political problems in Afghanistan that have plagued the Obama White House, on Monday Iraqi Vice-President Tareq al-Hashemi vetoed a set of amendments to Iraq’s election law approved by the Iraqi parliament. The veto may lead to a delay of the Iraqi elections, currently scheduled for January 21, 2010, and could trigger a debate over U.S. plans to withdraw from Iraq. 

The elections law amendment, commonly referred to as the “new elections law” was under consideration for almost a year before its final passage on November 8th. Passage of the law was delayed 11 times, as lawmakers could not reach agreement over the allocation of parliamentary seats. 

The original election law, used in the 2005 elections, was viewed by many Iraqis as unfair and opaque. The old law employed a “closed list” system, in which Iraqis were only allowed to vote for coalitions rather than individual candidates. The coalitions were not required to declare the names of their candidates. This led to millions of Iraqis voting for sectarian and ethnic-based coalitions with no political platforms or candidate names. Under the old law, all of Iraq was a single electoral district, failing to ensure that candidates were representing their constituencies. 

The newly passed law seeks to provide greater transparency and accountability of candidates and their political parties by blending the old “closed list” with elements of an “open list”. Under the new law Iraqis are given the option to either vote for a particular candidate in a coalition or vote for the entire coalition. The new law also puts into place electoral districts organized by provinces.  

With a system that apparently deepens democracy, giving citizens greater oversight of their lawmakers, why would al-Hashemi veto the measure? The status of how seats will be allocated in politically charged city of Kirkuk and for Iraqi refugees is officially being used as the rationale for vetoing the measure, but the truth lies a bit deeper.  

There are approximately 20 major political parties represented in parliament, but only five are in the executive branch. Despite the fact that combined these five parties control a minority of seats in parliament they managed, with the help of the Bush administration, to the run the country exclusively without participation of the other 15 parties that control the majority of seats in the parliament (the only nationally elected body). 

Four of these five ruling parties control the Presidential Council (ISCI, KPD/PUK, Islamic Party), and the fifth is Prime Minister Al-Maliki’s party (Al-Dawa). The four ruling parties in the presidential council oppose the “open list” law, because they have benefited from the “closed list” system. The closed list system has given them a free ride at the expense of other parties.  

But these four parties started to lose their grip on power in the January 2009 provincial elections when the elections law was changed, forming electoral districts by province. The ruling parties lost control of all of the provincial councils to nationalist parties and others not previously represented in the provincial councils. Take ISCI for example, it used to control around a dozen provincial councils, now they control zero. 


Raed Jarrar is Senior Fellow on the Middle East, Peace Action. He blogs at Raed in the Middle. Erik Leaver is policy outreach director for the Foreign Policy In Focus project at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest World headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: iraq, elections law


Comments are closed-

What about the ammendment?
Posted by: fieldswithoutfences on Nov 19, 2009 3:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great Article Raed, but I think you forgot to mention that a contributing factor to Hashemi's veto is due to the the ammendment in the bill that would exclude Iraqis living outside of Iraq (who as you know are mostly Sunni like him) to vote.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Is this bizarro world?
Posted by: mkdelta69 on Nov 20, 2009 12:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who still believes that the trans national corporate ruling class want's stability in Iraq? In Iran? In Afghanistan? In South America? If you do then you have identified certifiable lunatics.

The ruling elite have no desire of stability in the Middle East. With stability, the US could not force compliance with the extraction of wealth needed to support our corporate mafia. With stability, governments demand fair prices for their resources. They can't pay off people like Saddam Hussein or the Shah Of Iran to ruthlessly suppress the people for their cut of the wealth.

Our huge bases in Iraq and Afghanistan say long term occupation. You know the people in Afghanistan and Iraq will not accept this. So it is either defeat the trans national corporations and let Afghanistan and Iraq settle their problems. Or perpetual occupation and war.

Our NSA uses the Economic Hit Man to try to make an offer to the target country they can't refuse. Support the dictator in power as long as he pays us protection money. If that doesn't work then we send in the CIA Jackyls. They murder and subvert good government to prop up or install a dictator that will do our bidding. If the CIA Jackyl doesn't work then we send in the military.

The only way we can extract our protection tax that supports an Empire that doesn't produce anything anymore is ruthless economic and military terrorism. And to do this you can only afford to support a small ruling elite. The rest are cut out of the economic system.

Look at the United States. Wall Street is trying to steal all the resources and control the economic system so most outside the ruling elite will live their lives in perpetual fear of loosing everything. If we can't fight the trans national corporations in the United States, then what chance does Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan have?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The fastest way to expose reality
Posted by: EJLima on Dec 12, 2009 3:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Google search Lueren Monet and post links to documents and pictures if you can. YES YOU CAN!! .... DO It NOW!! ...PROSECUTE... THIS IS HOW....

feel free to add more

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

What about the ammendment?
Posted by: fieldswithoutfences on Nov 19, 2009 3:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great Article Raed, but I think you forgot to mention that a contributing factor to Hashemi's veto is due to the the ammendment in the bill that would exclude Iraqis living outside of Iraq (who as you know are mostly Sunni like him) to vote.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Is this bizarro world?
Posted by: mkdelta69 on Nov 20, 2009 12:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who still believes that the trans national corporate ruling class want's stability in Iraq? In Iran? In Afghanistan? In South America? If you do then you have identified certifiable lunatics.

The ruling elite have no desire of stability in the Middle East. With stability, the US could not force compliance with the extraction of wealth needed to support our corporate mafia. With stability, governments demand fair prices for their resources. They can't pay off people like Saddam Hussein or the Shah Of Iran to ruthlessly suppress the people for their cut of the wealth.

Our huge bases in Iraq and Afghanistan say long term occupation. You know the people in Afghanistan and Iraq will not accept this. So it is either defeat the trans national corporations and let Afghanistan and Iraq settle their problems. Or perpetual occupation and war.

Our NSA uses the Economic Hit Man to try to make an offer to the target country they can't refuse. Support the dictator in power as long as he pays us protection money. If that doesn't work then we send in the CIA Jackyls. They murder and subvert good government to prop up or install a dictator that will do our bidding. If the CIA Jackyl doesn't work then we send in the military.

The only way we can extract our protection tax that supports an Empire that doesn't produce anything anymore is ruthless economic and military terrorism. And to do this you can only afford to support a small ruling elite. The rest are cut out of the economic system.

Look at the United States. Wall Street is trying to steal all the resources and control the economic system so most outside the ruling elite will live their lives in perpetual fear of loosing everything. If we can't fight the trans national corporations in the United States, then what chance does Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan have?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The fastest way to expose reality
Posted by: EJLima on Dec 12, 2009 3:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Google search Lueren Monet and post links to documents and pictures if you can. YES YOU CAN!! .... DO It NOW!! ...PROSECUTE... THIS IS HOW....

feel free to add more

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS