Iraqi Elections (by Allison Martell)

January 30th looms. It is the day when some of the Iraqi people will elect the next stage of their transitional government. Some might like to say that it will mark a huge step towards democracy in Iraq, the beginning of a new era of freedom. But almost no one dares imagine that the election will go off without a hitch, and even if it did, Iraq’s future would still hang in a pessimistic fog. This article examines some conditions within and around the upcoming election, and their possible implications.

Even if what is developing in Iraq could be called a democracy, it is an imposed democracy. There is a fundamental difference between citizens pushing for democratic reform in their own country and an occupying army manufacturing democratic institutions, some pretence of civil and political rights, and elections out of thin air. The former is about self determination; the latter, about nothing of the sort. It isn’t up to the U.S. government to decide that something approximating their system of government is the right system for every society on earth.

Even if we assume that some sort of democracy is the right goal, it’s not clear that elections are the right way to achieve it right now. There was a time when many considered the war on Iraq finished, but with the instability and mounting casualties on all sides, that can hardly be said now. Is it possible to hold an election during a war? No one in Iraq has the capacity to prevent intimidation and coercion of voters in this election. Iraq isn’t even considered safe enough for international monitors. They will be stationed in Jordan, and it’s hard to imagine what use they will be there. Lakhdar Brahimi of the United Nations, who is advising on these elections, thinks that they are impossible right now and should be postponed.

On January 30th the Iraqis who do vote will be selecting a 275 member interim national assembly, which will be responsible for selecting a government and drafting a new constitution. The structure of the national assembly will not necessarily be the structure of the future government, but its structure is still important, as it will make some important and lasting decisions.

The national assembly will be chosen through pure proportional representation, with no regional representatives at all. This means that seats in the assembly will be assigned to each party based on how many votes it gets, and no states or provinces will exist.

Systems that employ proportional representation more accurately reflect the range of views in a country, but can also be difficult to manage. In some situations, proportional representation can create fragmented systems where nothing is agreed on and nothing gets done. Since the new Iraqi national assembly will be responsible for writing a new constitution, deadlock would be a disaster.

25% of the national assembly will be made up of women. This requirement, while ultimately beneficial, may come out of an alarming habit of the American government to implausibly blur together the Taliban and Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. There is a perception that women in the Arab world are oppressed by default. In fact, a 1993 report by UNICEF on Iraq said that “men and women must receive equal pay for equal work. A wife's income is recognised as independent from her husband's. In 1974, education was made free at all levels, and in 1979 it was made compulsory for girls and boys until the age of 12.” Under Hussein, women could be professionals, and hold positions of power. This is not to say that conditions were perfect – really, conditions for women are not perfect anywhere in the world – but if anything has harmed the status of women in Iraq, it is the American occupation.

At the time of this writing, the Guardian is reporting that the main, fairly moderate Sunni party has withdrawn from the election. One of their main concerns is that Sunni Muslims, a minority that was historically favoured by Saddam Hussein, live in neighbourhoods disproportionately affected by the occupation. It is reasonable to imagine that many of them will not feel safe enough to vote. Whether this concern is legitimate or not, the loss of major Sunni representation in the election is a serious blow to the process. Why should Sunni Muslims accept a constitution that was drawn up without their participation? Even if the imposed democratic government holds, with its expected Shia majority, drafting the constitution this way could set Iraq up for decades of civil war.

Abrupt transitions to democracy are known to be less successful than gradual ones. Democracy from the barrel of a gun is much more problematic. If the election goes ahead, it will be because the American government needs to save face, redirect blame and get out as soon as possible. Once a nominally elected government is nominally in charge, the U.S. government will be able to redirect criticism of their handling of Iraq to the Iraqi government and then the Iraqi people. And when they eventually leave, they will not have to take responsibility (in the form of guilt or money) for the mess they leave behind.

This piece was intended less as a coherent argument than a collection of some of the more significant features of the upcoming election and resulting national assembly, but if it makes any point it is that many factors – including widespread violence, instability, confused impressions of Iraq and mishandling of ethnic cleavages – are converging to make this election much less about the interests of the Iraqi people than the interests of the American government.

Sources

Bennis, Phyllis. “Iraqi Elections.” ZNet. 20 December 2004. 28 December 2004. <http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=6899>.

Burke, Jason and Tariq Panja. “Iraq poll hangs on overseas vote.” Guardian Unlimited. 26 December 2004. 28 December 2004. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1379828,00.html>.

Diamond, Larry. “Three Paradoxes of Democracy.” The Global Resurgence of Democracy. Eds. Larry Diamond and Marc Plattner. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1996.

Howard, Michael. “Main Sunni party pulls out of Iraqi election.” Guardian Unlimited. 28 December 2004. 28 December 2004. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1380191,00.html>.

Lijphart, Arend. “Constitutional Choices for New Democracies.” The Global Resurgence of Democracy. Eds. Larry Diamond and Marc Plattner. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1996.

Zangana, Haifa. “Quiet, or I’ll call democracy.” Guardian Unlimited. 22 December 2004. 28 December 2004. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1378411,00.html>.

[ issue contents ] [ fmm home ] [ send feedback ]