Iraq’s never-ending election negotiations

While Australia negotiates its way to an election result, spare a thought for Iraq. On 7 March this year, Iraqis held their second parliamentary elections since the invasion in 2003.

No party won a clear majority, and to this day – nearly six months on – the various parties are still haggling over who will be the next government.

Meanwhile, America ended its combat operations there last week, leaving responsibility for Iraq’s security to the army and police. 50,000 troops remain but only in a training role.

And with July being the most violent month since 2008, it puts even more pressure on Iraq’s politicians to find a solution.

The vote

Iraq’s election had four major players, all of whom were coalitions (groups of parties with the same policies).

The State of Law coalition, led by the current Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, and the Iraq National Alliance (INA), are both moderate Shia-dominated religious coalitions.

The Iraqiyah coalition is a non-religious group of Shia and Sunni parties led by former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.

And the Kurdistan Alliance is a collection of parties from the northern semi-independent region of Kurdistan.

Iraq has proportional representation, meaning the percentage of votes is equal to the percentage of seats won.

In the March 7 election, none of the coalitions were close to achieving a majority in the country’s 325-seat parliament, known as the Council of Representatives.

Iraqiyah won the most seats with 91. The State of Law coalition was second with 89. The Iraq National Alliance was third with 70, and the Kurdistan Alliance was fourth with 43. Six other minor coalitions took the remaining 32 seats.

An election shambles

Here’s where it gets messy.

According to Iraq’s election law, it’s unclear who has the first shot at trying to form a majority government.

With the most seats, Iraqiyah claims they have the first right, and this is ordinarily the case. However, Maliki has found a High Court ruling saying that whoever can form the broadest coalition of support should go first.

On 11 June, Maliki’s State of Law coalition and the third placed INA officially joined forces to form a wider bloc of 159 seats, leaving them only 4 seats short of a majority.

And the Kurdistan Alliance has since shown an interest in joining their bloc, which would take them to 202 seats – easily beyond the 163 needed for a majority.

Furthermore, the president – a Kurd – said he would allow this government.

But there are two problems that are holding everything up.

The first is most of the politicians seem to agree that the Sunni Arabs, who make up a quarter of the population, should be represented somehow.

By not being in government, they may get picked on and resentful. And with most of the insurgent groups being Sunni, this could see an increase in violence, particularly as the American troops pull out.

As a result, many believe Iraqiyah must be part of the new government.

Though not strictly a Sunni group (Allawi himself is Shia) the Iraqiyah coalition is seen to most closely represent the Sunnis because a lot of its votes came from them.

This has given rise to the idea of a grand coalition – all four coalitions coming together to form a government.

In theory, this is the best option as it would enable everyone to be represented. However, in practice it would be extremely difficult.

In addition to the inevitable personality clashes, it would mean bringing together more than a dozen individual parties, many of whom share different positions on a range of policies.

The second problem is the issue of prime minister.

Muqtada Sadr, the head of the larger faction within Maliki’s ally the INA, is firmly against Maliki being prime minister.

And the two Shia coalitions, mindful of the Sunni-dominated rule under Saddam, are unlikely to let Allawi be prime minister.

Indeed, given their strong affiliations, many believe neither Maliki nor Allawi are capable of leading a grand coalition, if it ever eventuated.

However, no one seems to have a better candidate. Ibrahim Jaafari of the INA was seen as the best alternative but both the Kurdistan Alliance and Iraqiyah don’t like him.

So because of these two issues, and allegations that Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria are all trying to influence the outcome, the squabbling continues.

Just last week, Allawi announced he had halted talks with Maliki after he called them a “Sunni bloc” in a television interview the day before.

They maintain they are a “nationalist project” and said they wouldn’t resume negotiations until Maliki apologised (which he did on Sunday).

Observers now fear that if the deadlock continues for much longer, Iraq risks an increase in street violence and possibly even a coup (takeover) by a frustrated army.

If that happens, then the extremely costly effort of bringing democracy to Iraq will be for nothing.

By The Casual Truth

Photo – Iyad Allawi (left) and Nouri Maliki