So the election results are trickling in slowly from the Iraqi parliamentary elections, and the coalition led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is expressing confidence that they will come away with the largest share of the votes — a confidence that may or may not be related to the gradually accumulating accusations of fraud in the ballot-counting process.
Although all of the blocs that made up the Iraqi national legislature have frayed somewhat since the last round of elections at the end of 2005, virtually all of the major players are expected to return when the dust settles this time… most likely including al-Maliki as the prime minister.
As happened four years ago, you can expect the major Shiite religious parties to join forces with the dominant Kurdish groups to form a ruling coalition, shutting out all but a few token Sunnis as well as secular Shiite politicians like the former U.S.-installed interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi. Although there was a much-ballyhooed split between Maliki and the other religious factions last summer, several savvy observers noted right away that a reunion was inevitable.
I wrote at the time that the strategy behind the frenemies-style breakup seemed to be to diffuse the public unhappiness with the Shiite-dominated government’s lack of results in delivering basic services:
… Maliki would pick up votes from those who didn’t want to elect a sectarian slate [again], while the Hakim-Sadr-et al. group could pose as running against the Maliki regime… even though (surprise!) everyone would wind up in effect reelecting Team Shiite, with Maliki on top.
For better or worse, judging from the early voting returns and the political jockeying that has already begun, this analysis from last August seems to have been on target.
The difference this time is something that may not bear fruit until the next parliamentary elections, whenever those might be. By apparently unifying behind Allawi’s slate, the fragmented losers from the 2005 elections — Sunnis of all stripes, as well as secular Shiites — will in effect make him the clear, singular leader of the political opposition.
Given the rampant corruption and ineptitude of the current (and likely to be re-installed) Iraqi government, that could be a favorable spot to hold. If the next few years aren’t much of an improvement over the last four, and voters choose not to be fooled again by a faux split among the religious Shiite parties, Allawi would be uniquely positioned to ride the wave of political resentment. (What would happen then is something even I can’t begin to guess.)



11 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Of course a Jeffersonian Democracy will break out!
Dammit, why the gloom?
Maliki just needs to eliminate capital gains taxes, then Jeffersonian democracy will break out.
Breaking – Mohammed Said al-Sahhaf, otherwise known as “Baghdad Bob” returns from seclusion in Paris, appointed to run Iraqi Ministry of Public Health.
OK, /s
Most of the full time Iraqi observers do call it a net loss for Maliki, tho…! Juan, Reidar, Gregg, etc… All have opined that Maliki’s Shi’a centric bloc is taking a significant hit by Allawi’s electoral gains… Remember that Iraq is 65% Shiite…! ;-)
it’s not like there isn’t election tampering in our own country…
Proof American democracy (TM) works!! It’s purely coincedence that the winner was exactly who the US wanted! Wonder who is casting the deciding votes!
US GI: but what am I signing sir
General: just put a check mark beside this name
US GI: Ok sir.
*heh* How ironic that you should mention that…
I haven’t seen the commentary you’re referring to, but in any event I wasn’t trying to give the impression that the results were a smashing victory for Maliki.
I would say, though, that if SOL/INA and the Kurds once again form the government with Maliki continuing as prime minister, that has to be considered “mission accomplished” for Maliki & the Shiite powers that be, regardless of what percentage changes occur on the margins (“close enough for government work,” you might say).
The key point, as I note in the post, is that by splitting up, Maliki & the INA appear to have successfully diffused the backlash generated by their poor performance as a governing coalition. In my opinion, had they run as a combined slate again, their joint numbers would have been less than what they will have gotten separately.
Elections where there is a foreign military invader present, are not real, not honest, and not valid. Good luck with this one Obama. The last election was such a smashing success.
Swopa, I wasn’t criticizing you I was merely pointing out…
The Iraqis have somewhat figured it out…! ;-)
David Dayen is upstairs!
Exposé Shows Rubio Spent Big in Rise to Top