Friday, 6 February 2009
Iraq descended into a civil war further after the first election in January 2005 causing thousands of dead. On the 31st of January, Iraqi people once again went to the polling stations to elect 440 representatives for the provincial councils from over 14, 000 candidates.
Indeed, conducting ‘free elections’ in Iraq itself has still carried great security risks despite the fact that sectarian and nationalistic divisions appears to have died down recently. So far after the elections no major security problem caused by civil war and terrorism has been observed, but the risk is still there haunting the Iraqi people. So, can one interpret that largely violence-free elections have finally given way to the emergence of a more secure and stable Iraq? In other words, will these elections likely help stabilise Iraq in security terms, or still carry the risks for destabilising it in months and years ahead?
Holding ‘Free’ Elections in Iraq: General Security Environment
Iraq has never seen any stable environment since its birth. It is a country having suffered from long years of dictatorships, international sanctions and destructions of wars and finally ended up with occupation. Evidences of all these are starkly visible from cities to villages by just looking at the unrepaired schools, buildings and pavements having left out for decades. It is very simple from outside that neither past dictators nor the new occupiers have lived up to the promises of a better life they have made to the Iraqi people. Baghdad, the capital of many empires and centre of ancient civilisations, is now fully covered by huge concrete walls, zeppelins and military checkpoints for the aim of providing security in the city and an election without violence.
If holding a nationwide election in Iraq is the case, surely no one can dispute the level of abovementioned security precautions taken by the Iraqi government and the US army there. All well known how Iraq witnessed an intensified civil war after the elections in January 2005. The Iraqi government put entire security forces of military and police together amounting 500,000, on streets throughout the country, which allowed a relatively non-violent elections unlike those of the previous ones. Additionally, since the middle of 2007 sectarian and nationalistic violence and terrorist attacks led by Al-Qaida got down significantly due to the extra military measures taken by the US and the Iraqi government. The agreement between the US and tribal leaders in some Sunni regions (e.g. Al-Anbar) for instance has largely rooted out the Al-Qaida militants there. Perhaps, changing perceptions of Iraqis who have tired of terror in the country are the most important reason why there were almost no violence and terrorist attacks during the recent elections. Another reason of why the Iraqis have not chosen violence is maybe because they have wanted the end of US occupation as soon as possible considering the fact that the more they fight one another the longer the foreign occupation continues.
Some Positive Outcomes of the Elections
Despite the fact that Iraq appears to be far away from a stable country, there are positive signals that can be derived from the January elections.
Firstly, in contrast to the elections in 2005, now Sunnis also voted. Participation of the Sunnis this time has entailed that all segments of Iraqi people had accepted post-Saddam reality in Iraq and expressed their voices in the re-shaping of the destiny of the country just like those of the other ethnic and sectarian groups. This also means that unlike previous elections 4 years ago current elections have gained the legitimacy before the eyes of the Iraqi people as a whole.
Secondly, though still unclear what will happen yet when more election results are released, there was, as mentioned earlier, almost no serious violence during the January elections apart from several mortar firing near a polling station in home town of Saddam Hussein, Tikrit, and a shooting incident in a Shiite district in Baghdad caused by a row over a camera being used in a polling station. Civil violence and terrorist attracts died down greatly even before the provincial elections, and thus a hotly contested political experience without bloodshed should be read as a tremendous success and a threshold for security and stability for the upcoming elections in this year and economic and social recovery of Iraq.
Thirdly, there seems to be a great degree of optimism among political leaders in Iraq and abroad. A non-violent and accepted election results can definitely help the new US President to withdraw the American forces in Iraq as he had promised during his election complain. Although the US and Iraqi governments have agreed on the troop withdrawal by the end of 2011, Obama administration would not fulfil his promise if Iraq went back into chaos just like before 2007.
Some Negative Outcomes of the Elections
Overall turnout in the elections was expected up to 70 %, but it only remained at the level of 51 % of 14 million voters, which was 55 % in 2005. This lower turnout cannot be explained just by the reason that a number of people were either not put on voter rolls or listed in wrong polling stations. Perhaps, peoples’ perception of the lack of security, as well as heavy security measures, and of mistrust to politicians and corruption did not encourage people in great numbers to fill the polling stations.
Moreover, the longer the announcement of election results is delayed, the more suspicious the results become. Although voting procedures seem to have been to a great extent followed by voters and election officials in polling stations, there were not enough domestic political and non-governmental as well as international observers during and after the elections were completed and counted.
Also, despite some positive conclusions that can be drawn so far from the provincial elections, these do not still suggest that security and stability in Iraq are going to be succeeded in the near future. After just the preliminary election results have been announced, there was a suicide bombing in the North-Eastern Iraqi town of Khanaqin in ethnically mixed (Arabs and Kurds) Diyala province killing 12 and injuring 15 people. Again, as the elections results began coming out, for instance, secular Sunnis parties in Anbar region, who did not participate in the election in 2005, complained about serious fraud and now threaten to take up arms if there was not a recount. Sunni tribal leaders in this region, who entered the elections with their Awakening Movement, already stressed that they would not accept the results if the religious Iraqi Islamic Party, a Sunni party participated the elections in 2005 and controlled 29 seats in the provincial council.
Thus Iraq is still crossing a very fragile line in terms of political parties accepting election results, and as more results are released by the Election Commission, coming days will be a significant test for the security and stability in the country.
Provincial Elections for Constructing an Iraqi National Idea?
Nearly 400 political parties have participated to the elections. After security, most important question regarding the election results, was and still is about which party, secular or religious or ethnic would win most provincial seats. It was in fact this question that its answer will determine Iraq’s direction to chaos or national reconciliation paving the way for the reconstruction of a new Iraqi national idea encompassing majority of people.
In the previous elections in 2005 ethnic and sectarian differences dominated the election results. While Kurds in the North voted for the Kurdish Parties, Shiites in the South preferred their own sectarian political parties. As far as voters’ preferences are concerned, the issue is not about which political party they will choose in the election, but about which political ideology they will follow in their ethnic and sectarian domains. In this case, in both Sunni and Shiite Arab provinces more secular or religious political ideas appear to be the main contending forces in the elections in Iraq.
In 2005, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), the coalition partner in the current government and based its ideology on the promotion of the Shiite identify, won most votes in Southern Iraq. Different from 2005 elections, preliminary results show that the ISCI has lost most seats to Maliki’s State of Law alliance, the biggest partner in the coalition government with more secular in nature and multi-ethnic in composition compared to those of the ISCI. In line with these characteristics, the State of Law bloc has advocated Iraqi nationalism and promised more security in the country. According to the preliminary election results, it was reported, for instance that, the State of Law bloc has won 38 % in Baghdad, 37 % in Basra, followed by the ISCI. Importantly it was also said that State of Law bloc has won in Najaf, another stronghold of the ISCI.
Maliki’s State of Law bloc has represented a multiethnic character, and propagated not religious credentials but secular and nationalistic (Iraqi nationalism) ones. So, at the end, if the State of law bloc comes out of the elections as the biggest winner in coming weeks, this would be interpreted as the approval of Maliki’s emphasis on more security, order and unity around a single Iraqi national identity in the country.
In the final analysis, Iraq has entered into a new critical stage in 2009 beginning with the provincial elections held at the end of January. Currently, despite all words of normalcy spelt out by the US and other occupying states and non-violent election process in January Iraq has still been experiencing a great deal of anarchy. It is chaotic in the sense that there seems to be no other authority rather than men wearing military uniform with guns in charge of everything in the country. How long this will last like that seems to be dependent on how the Iraqi people with all its sectarian and ethnic diversities will unite successfully around their common values, identities and understandings in months and years to come. It is true that Iraq has now faced less violence, but still been far away from building its own national idea of being Iraqi to unite all segments of society. So long as Iraq fails to build that idea acceptable for all, it will always stay one step closer to go back into civil war, chaos and terror again and again. And yet, if Iraq succeeded to develop a manageable democracy and boosted this with fair share of its natural resources (oil), it may then really come out as a star in the Middle East and help the children of Iraq to get out of their despairing social, economic and political miseries.
Elections in Tajikistan Promise Too Little 
