London Observer: Shia landslide set to put religion at heart of power

[Jack Rabbit]

From the London Observer (Sunday supplement of the Guardian Unlimited)
Dated Sunday February 6

Shia "poll landslide" set to put religion at heart of Iraqi power
Victory will end oppression of the poor south. Peter Beaumont, in Basra, on the election aftermath
By Peter Beaumont, foreign affairs editor, in Basra

There is a word used often by politicians in Iraq's deep south. It is tahmeech, meaning isolation.
It is used to say that for decades not a single government minister in Baghdad has come from Iraq's second city, Basra. It signifies a generation of discrimination against Shias by Saddam's Sunni-dominated regime.

Now, if the initial results of last Sunday's Iraqi elections prove to represent the final picture, the centre of political gravity has shifted inexorably south - away from the violence of the cities of the north, away from Baghdad and that city's technocratic class - towards the poverty-stricken, dust-blown Shia heartland.

With 35 per cent of all polling stations in Iraq reporting results, the coalition of Shia parties was maintaining a lead of two-thirds of 3.3 million votes counted so far, with the electoral list of religious parties dominating.

Read more.

[The Doctor.]

1. What religious background is Iyad Allawi?

HMMMMM......

[tx_dem41]

2. He is Shiite...but bascially secular.

But, he assuredly isn't going to be the next PM.

[ECH1969]

3. Then you have been buying the medias bullshit

The media doesn't know WTF is going on, they just know vote totals. This link actually talks about the power plays going on behind the scenes.
---------------------------------------------------------
Allawi does not expect to win a majority, or even a plurality of the vote. To stay in power, he appears to be attempting to trade on fears of clerical and Iranian influence in the UIA and even hoping to cherry-pick allies from within the improbably broad Shiite coalition. The goal would be to use the provisions of the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL) governing the process to parlay a minority share of the vote into a leading role in government. That's because the TAL, drawn up by U.S. administrator Paul Bremer, essentially requires the support of two thirds of the National Assembly for a new government. The process begins with the Assembly choosing, by two thirds majority, a president and two vice presidents, a troika that must unanimously agree on a prime minister. So, the thinking goes, even without a plurality or a majority, as long as Allawi can assemble a coalition that exceeds one third of the Assembly members, he can filibuster himself a place as a "compromise" candidate for prime minister.

Allawi's best bet would be to draw the Kurds into his own bloc. But the Kurds, secular and seperatist, they are hardly natural allies for the moderate Islamist-nationalist UIA list assembled under the auspices of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani. Still, they may see the Sistani list as a more viable government, if they can strike a deal that gives the Shiites the power they seek in Baghdad in exchange for de facto Kurdish independence in the northern provinces — largely at the expense of Sunni Arabs and ethnic Turkmen in Kirkuk and other contested areas. Ultimately, however, the Kurds are likely to choose the horse that appears most likely to secure their interest in entrenching, and even expanding, their de facto independence.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1024482,00.html

[tx_dem41]

4. No...I don't read the corporate-owned media...especially Time!

(Odd you would feed me with American corporate media (a Time article), and berate me for believing what the media says...very strange).

I read an assortment of sources including ME experts, Iraqi and Iranian blogs, a smattering of Arab press, and have read vastly on the subject of the ME (Both history and current events). The thought of the Kurds and the Allawi slate joining together is laughable. I stand by my statement.

[ECH1969]

6. It all depends on who gives them the best deal

The Kurds will go for anyone that promises to give them the most autonomy.

The UIA is fighting amoungst themselves right now. If Allawi can either give the Kurds the best deal or keep the UIA fighting amoungst itself for which of their three PM candidates they will put up then he wins. That is not saying he has a great shot of pulling it off, but I do think he has a decient shot. The truth of the matter is that neither Allawi nor Hakim knows how this thing is going to play out.

[The Doctor.]

7. No, but we do...

Which is to say that the US does.

Whoever winds up in power will do so through our proscribed fiat.

We can't have Iraq trading oil for Euros, now can we?


{typo}

[ECH1969]

8. The US has a list of names of candidates it would support

Allawi's number one, a guy that worked on Saddam's nuke program in the 80s and who is a member of the UIA is number two, I don't even want to know who number three is.

[Jack Rabbit]

9. The TIme piece is interesting. I don't agree with it.

Nobody who thinks Mr. Bush and his neoncoservative aides invaded Iraq to bring democracy to that country has anything on Pollyanna when it comes to being naive. The only thing from which they were interested in liberating the Iraqi people was their mineral rights.

In the beginning, Bush and his aides didn't want these elections, preferring instead a process in which they would make the rules and determine who could play, the popular opinion of "liberated" Iraqis be damned. It was a process less democratic than found in Iran, where a elite group of stuffy old mullahs decides who is a good enough Muslim to run for office. It was Sistani who demanded the elections because he knew his people could win them. The neocons only agreed because Sistani was ready to send his followers out into the streets if they didn't.

The Time article speaks of Allawi maneuvering behind the scenes to stay in power by pealing off support from other factions, even some within the United Alliance. This is risible in view of the present reported election returns. Allawi, whose Iraqi List slate has failed to garner 20% of the vote, is no position to dictate to the leaders of the United Iraqi Alliance, who have about two-thirds of the vote, who is going to be in the transitional government or what its policies will be. It is like a 98-pound weakling telling a defensive lineman he's going beat the crap out him. Allawi and his interim government never had any credibility with the Iraqi people, and these returns underscore that.

There is no getting around what these results mean: it is a popular repudiation of US occupation. Allawi was perceived as the neocons' water boy in Baghdad and Sistani's slate as opposed to the presence of US troops.

There is no doubt that new transitional government under the United Iraqi Alliance will have to share power under the rules drawn up by the former American proconsul, Mr. Bremer. However, they will have enough power in the new government to determine with whom they want to share it. Moreover, they won't have to share a lot of it. If they want to exclude Allawi and his quislings, they can. If they want to tell your favorite Frat Boy and mine to set a timetable for withdrawing his troops from their country, they can do that, too. They can even make noises about selling oil in Euros, if that pleases them.

The neoconservatives can only helplessly watch as their boy Allawi goes down in flames. If the Shiites feel that Bush and his aides are attempting to rob them of the power they have won, then they, too, will take up arms against the occupation. It would just be too stupid for the neocons to try to dictate Iraq's domestic affairs to a transitional government that won by being perceived as opposed to the occupation. Unfortunately, as The Magistrate pointed out in a discussion about Iraq policy a few weeks ago, the too-stupid-to-try test fails when predicting the behavior of Bush and his neoconservative aides.

[The Magistrate]

10. Indeed, My Friend

And it was a damned useful test, too, that is much missed. In this particular instance, it seems best to substitute, as a general tool of analysis, the proposition that if it seems too stupid for anyone to actually do, it will be featured in the newspaper headlines within a month at most as the latest effort of these reptiles.

The proposition that Allawi will be able to cobble together a majority coalition is certainly nonsense on its face, though it must be recalled that, as the puppet of the occupation, he will have formidable tools of bribery and coercion at his disposal in such an effort. The various "parties" participating in this election are not really coherent institutions, and the persons who will be seated by their lists are not comrades from the precinct days, but individuals in very loose amalgamtion, and certainly a number will be on the look-out for how they can best serve themselves, and their personal cliques. Kurdish political life is particularly riven with personal rivalries and feuds, and in the theater of sectarian rivalry, Sunni Kurds are no natural allies of Shi'ite Arabs. Some Kurdish elements doubtless will see alliance with Alawi, Ba'athist and "strong center" type at heart though he be, as the best way to manipulate the U.S. into granting them the autonomies they desire above all. This "National Assembly" will be an exercise in insincerity and double-cross to shine through the ages as an epitomy of the darker arts.

"Sincerity is the key; if you can fake that, you've got it made."

[MeDeMax]

5. the turnout count is suspect...

according to other reports:

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1570542>