Iraqi Elections: Problems Solved or More Created? - Part 2

THE MUSLIM WEEKLY 2005
Continued from last week....

Some indication from Southern Iraq of how difficult it will be for Iraqis to hold sway over the security situation is when a few months ago, Iraqi security forces were given the opportunity of presiding over Al-Muthanna province. It didn’t take long for Multinational forces to realise that it just wasn’t feasible. Furthermore, leading up to the elections, the Iraqi Police didn’t seem able to grapple the necessary tasks involved in security, with British forces having to fulfill much of what was required.

On the ground, with party manifestos unavailable and ‘doorstepping’ unthinkable, many voters were unable to identify their local candidates even a day before the election. Most people I spoke to had a vague idea that they wanted an Islamic /democratic government.

In a conversation I had with Sheikh Ahmed Saleh (spokesperson for Ayatollah Sistani), he was keen to refrain from talking politics and on a question about whether he would trust Ahmed Chalabi replied, “Politics is about advantage, not trust”. Indeed, a recent statement by another spokesperson of the Ayatollah suggested that they had no intention of turning Iraq into an Iranian-style theocracy. Quite what they would do with their impending influence remained unclear. Interestingly, many Shias conceded that there were many points of view with reference to how a post-election Iraq would pan out.

Some of these views became apparent when we met Sheikh Khalid and Mohd. Sai’doon from the Iraqi Islamic Party (A Sunni party which boycotted the election). They were visibly upset that other countries (i.e The West) were dictating the political process, bemused that the military occupation should so forcefully devise a system for them. They also felt marginalized as they described how Sunnis were being refused jobs in the new Iraqi Police force while militias and even former Baathists were given prominent roles.

Meanwhile, it has recently become clear that although many Sunnis refrained from voting, the influential Association of Muslim Scholars in Baghdad have laid down a set of conditions primarily relating to America’s withdrawal in order to take part in the consultative process.

As for American eyes now focusing on Iran, perhaps it isn’t so much the nuclear issue, which is making the Neo-cons seemingly nervous. A religiously underlined Shia United Iraqi Alliance dominating Iraqi politics for the foreseeable future with like-minded allies in Iran as neighbours, maybe perceived by the US to be strategically virulent. Didn’t they see that coming? Not to suggest that they are politically adept.

What is almost certain is that the US will never leave Iraq unless it is certain it will not have to forego it’s regional objectives.

While the politics of the region throws up so many permutations, (far too many to discuss here) one would be wise to maintain vigilance as ongoing developments will I predict be a reference point for future relations between the Muslim world and the West.

Despite Iraqis clearly facing a steep learning curve as far as running their own affairs are concerned, outside intervention, consistently disputed and imprudent according to historical form faces an even steeper curve in it’s bid to redeem itself.

Which leaves me to borrow a quote from a fellow journalist embedded in Iraq, “The British and Americans think that they understand Iraq and its people, sadly they don’t.”