Are the insurgents and their terrorist allies in the Sunni Triangle doing Iraq a favor without knowing it?
The question is not fanciful. The violence unleashed by the insurgency has concentrated most minds on a single issue: Security. It has brought together communities and political parties that would otherwise be fighting one another over faith, ideology, and economic interest.
In the current election campaign Communists, monarchists, and Islamists often find themselves on the same side when it comes to defeating the insurgents and ridding Iraq of terrorism.
Almost all participants in the election cite the restoration of security as the No. 1 issue for the future Parliament. Paradoxically, however, fighting the insurgency may prove more difficult under the new democratic government because of the many checks and balances that will be introduced. Thus the new Parliament is likely to have heated debates about how to quell the insurgents and their terrorist allies. For the time being, however, the terrorist campaign has united Iraqis in a quest for democracy as the only means of keeping the nation together while preventing the return of despotism in any form.
The future National Assembly, to be elected tomorrow, however, will quickly find itself faced in a number of other issues — the real, long-term issue of Iraqi politics that have been occulted by the terrorist campaign.
These issues include:
• Mosque and State: The role of Islam in a democratic Iraq is at the center of debate. Some radical Shiite and Sunni groups want Islam not only to be declared the official religion of the state but also to be the sole source of legislation. This is opposed by others across the political spectrum. The terrorist campaign, however, has prevented fundamentalist Sunni groups from forging an alliance with their Shiite counterparts in a common quest for an Islamic government. Meanwhile, the biter anti-Shiite tone of the insurgency in the four affected provinces has prevented Shiite fundamentalists from advertising their true colors in this election. Once terrorism is defeated and security improved, the issue is certain to move up the agenda of Iraqi politics.
• Federalism: The Kurds take this to mean autonomy just short of full independence. The Arabs, both Shiites and Sunnis, however, are not prepared to go that far and will do all they can to limit autonomy to local issues. In this context the future status of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk, claimed by both Kurds and Arabs, is likely to become a hot issue. Iraq was created as a state in 1921 with a highly centralized system of government. The culture of devolution is new to Iraq and the new Parliament might have great difficulty achieving a consensus on building a genuinely federal structure based on the concept of two nations in one country.
• Market Economy or Welfare State: The Americans have tried to remold Iraq after the Milton Friedman model of liberal economics. Paul Bremer, the American “Pasha” of Baghdad until last June, still prides himself on the set of market reforms that he imposed by fiat. But many Iraqis prefer a social market model. Some openly want a socialist-style welfare state. It is not at all certain that the new Parliament will produce a majority to back the Bremer reforms. Much evidence points to the contrary with virtually all political parties contesting the election promising state subsidies and welfare measures that have no place in a laissez-faire capitalist system.
• Forgiveness or Revenge: Many Iraqis are angry at the fact that the US-led coalition has left the vast majority of former Baathist officials free and unpunished. Some want massive purges and the trial and punishment of tens of thousands of former Saddam associates. Others preach forgiveness. Many informal revenge squads are already in existence, determined to hunt the Baathists and mete out punishment in the most dramatic manner possible. If they have not gone into action yet it is largely because the US-led coalition has told them to remain calm. One immediate effect of an early withdrawal of the US-led forces could be a nationwide massacre of the Baathists, including those who are part of the insurgency. The Americans are campaigning for a truth-and-reconciliation formula to prevent a future bloodbath. But it is not at all certain that the new Parliament will produce a majority to vote for forgiveness.
• Who Gets What? The distribution of Iraq’s oil revenues and the sharing of its water resources are crucial issues. The Kurds want a system of sharing based on demographic strength of each community. The Arabs, both Shiites and Sunnis, want the central government to have a free hand within national budgets and plans. This issue is linked to that of the economic model that the new Iraqi Parliament might wish to back.
• What To Do With Foreign Forces: Some parties and personalities want a quick end to American and allied military presence. Others believe the US-led coalition should remain engaged for another three to five years to make sure that Iraqi democracy is stabilized and that Iraq has an army to protect it against predatory neighbors. All parties, however, are opposed to granting the US, or anyone else, any permanent bases. As things stand it seems likely that the new Parliament and the government that it will produce will ask the US-led force to remain at least until the end of 2007.
• Positive Discrimination: Under American pressure all electoral lists consist of 30 percent women candidates. At least a quarter of the seats in the new assembly are likely to go to women. Most Islamist parties and some tribes oppose this. They also don’t like the quotas imposed in favor of women in government departments. Even more serious is their objection to giving women equal rights in matters of marriage and divorce and custody of children. Secularist parties, however, believe the measures must go further in favor of women. One of the early tasks of the new Parliament would be to review existing laws concerning issues of private life such as marriage and divorce and the custody of children. Many fear that the new Parliament may pass laws in that field that are more reactionary than those now in force. Women’s organizations and secularist parties, however, are determined to fight any such backtracking.
• Foreign Policy: Some parties want Iraq to withdraw from the Arab League and even OPEC and to seek a special relationship with the US-led NAFTA. Others want Iraq to seek the leadership of the Arabs with a message of democratization. While some personalities want Iraq to recognize Israel, others strongly oppose such a move. Foreign policy is always a hot topic in Arab politics, and will be even more so in Iraq in this period of transition. Tehran’s mullas, operating through their clients and sympathizers inside Iraq will do all they can to goad new Iraq toward a “Third-Worldist” and anti-American posture.
The US and its allies, on the other and, will work hard to persuade new Iraq that it is in its best interest to jettison the prejudices and misconceptions that have passed for Arab foreign policy over the past five decades.
With tomorrow’s election Iraq’s real political problems, pushed by onto the backburner by the insurgency, will begin to move center-stage. Building a new pluralist Iraq remains a difficult task, but one that is certainly worth working and fighting for.
