Tag: Iraq
Jon Stewart’s freedom packages
If you didn’t see it on TV, and you are not among the 156,073 people who have viewed it on line since Monday night, this is well worth all 6 minutes and 49 seconds.
The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
America’s Freedom Packages | ||||
|
Doom and gloom
A world that was looking hopeful two weeks ago has taken a sharp turn southwards:
- The earthquake in Japan has not only caused upwards of 10,000 deaths and untold destruction, it has also put in doubt nuclear programs worldwide, not to mention what the prospect of further radiation leaks will do to stock markets today and the economic recovery in the future.
- Counter revolution is on the march in Libya, Bahrain and Yemen–in all three countries repression is winning the day, with the help of hesitation in Europe and the U.S. and Saudi and UAE security forces in Manama.
- Egypt votes in a constitutional referendum Saturday to either approve amendments prepared behind closed doors that would leave its regime largely intact, or disapprove, sending the country into uncertainty once again.
- Violence in Sudan is rising, with local south/south conflicts and tension in Abyei overshadowed for the moment by the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Movement claim that the north is planning a coup intended to prevent independence in July.
- Iran is succeeding in repressing its Green Movement opposition and in neutering anyone else who might dare to challenge President Ahmedinejad.
- Kurdish and Arab leaders in Iraq are competing to see who can claim Kirkuk is their Jerusalem most convincingly, while their respective military forces face off in the contested town.
It is telling that today’s testimony in Congress by General Petraeus on the situation in Afghanistan, which is expected to be relatively upbeat, is the only good news, though experienced wags will see it as just the latest in a long string of turning points in a war that has never turned.
Is Maliki becoming a dictator?
While I was publishing an op/ed in the Washington Post optimistic about prospects for democracy in Iraq, my former colleagues (Sean Kane and Jason Gluck) at the United States Institute of Peace were giving interviews to the New York Times for a piece that views Maliki as broadening his powers in ways that threaten Iraqi democracy. Who is right?
My view is that we all are.
There is no question but that Maliki aspires to enhanced powers, and recent constitutional court decisions have given him some. We’ll have to wait and see what he does with the administrative oversight he has gained over the central bank and the electoral commission, about which I have already expressed concern. I’ll be surprised if Maliki can get away with monkeying with the central bank. The electoral commission though is another matter, and especially important. I have little doubt that Maliki, if allowed, will exploit his position in ways that enable him to enhance his power and to stay in office for as long as he likes, which could well mean beyond the 2014 retirement date he has announced. That is what I would expect of any good politician, and certainly Maliki has proven that he is one.
But I also have little doubt that there are other forces at work in Iraqi society, where there is relative freedom for them to work. Most directly relevant is the parliament, which needs to learn how to check the executive’s ambitions. The previous parliament was quite accomplished at this–it had learned how to stop financing the prime minister’s pet projects, some of considerable merit, and thereby exert influence on him. This new parliament will have to learn similar tricks. The parliament would do well to use the power of the purse to force Maliki to appoint Interior and Defense Ministers, portfolios that he is still holding himself.
The collapse of the ill-fated proposal for a National Council for Strategic Priorities, led by Maliki’s archrival Ayad Allawi, enhances the prospects for parliament taking a firmer stand. As Reidar Visser has suggested, it is time for Allawi to focus his attention on checking prime ministerial power, even if his coalition members remain in the government (that’s my view, not Reidar’s).
The constitutional court has unfortunately been a disappointment. Its decision that only the executive can initiate legislation is particularly concerning, but I don’t really see how it can seriously inhibit parliamentary oversight and legislative activism. Presumably any proposed legislation can be amended. Maliki lost many votes in the previous parliament, despite his nominal parliamentary majority. Why shouldn’t he lose them in this one as well?
The demonstrators are another important check on Maliki, whose security forces have handled them badly and committed many gross human rights violations–the parliament would do well to focus some attention on accountability for those. But when Ayatollah Sistani is asking the government to provide better services, it is clear that Maliki cannot ignore the protests, which may well grow.
It is important to remember that all of this is occurring while Iraq is still threatened by both an Al Qaeda-linked insurgency and Iranian-back Shia militias. Maliki isn’t wrong to worry about the demonstrations being exploited by anti-constitutional forces. His responsibility is to protect the country from enemies, foreign and domestic. The protesters, the parliament and the constitutional court should be ensuring that he does it strictly within the limits of the “state of law,” which happens to be the name of his electoral coalition.
Behind Iraq’s protests, a call for better democracy
Read my op/ed in tomorrow’s Washington Post.
I wrote this originally during my trip to Baghdad in January. It was even more “optimistic” then than the current version, which will strike many as still too rosy-eyed. What I did not see in January was the enormous gap that has opened up between Iraq’s politicians and its people. The politicians were happy with the “national partnership” government, but the people were not seeing anything change in their too real lives.
Maliki seems to have understood this, after the demonstrations. We’ll see how effective he is at getting some results.
I do think there are upsides for the United States if a more or less democratic Iraq can come out of this mess a high-volume oil (and maybe gas) producer that exports to the north and west as well as through the Gulf. That’s not neo neo conservatism. It’s just realism. No need anyway for Iraq to be a model any longer–the Arab countries seem to be in a race to produce democracies left and right. Let’s hope they succeed at least as well as Iraq.
So much to keep track of!
So I thought a quick update on the revolutions of 2011 might be in order:
- Libya: Gaddafi holding on in Tripoli, where his forces indulge in random killings, but most of the rest of the country seems to be in rebel hands. Tribes and a hodge-podge of local authorities seem to be the mainstay of law and order, insofar as it exists. The army is split. Lots of high level defections. The Americans have finally imposed unilateral sanctions freezing assets and banning travel. The UN Security Council is still debating its draft, which may have to lose the referral to the International Criminal Court in order to get past India, China and Russia (none are states parties to the ICC).
- Yemen: Protests have grown dramatically with adherence by some important tribes, President Saleh took the Gaddafi vow to fight to the last drop of blood, and the opposition seems intent on continuing despite Saleh’s vows to leave office in 2013 and not install his son.
- Egypt: Big demonstration yesterday to keep pressure on the military, force out the prime minister, who is Mubarak’s buddy, and end the state of emergency, which the military has promised to do once order is restored.
- Bahrain: Another big demo, but the monarchy clearly committed for the moment to avoiding violence. An important Bahraini Shiite leader returned to the country from exile and was allowed to speak.
- Tunisia: Protesters Friday pressed for faster change. Pro-Ben Ali youth rioted Saturday. Violence in both instances. The good guys should really wear white hats and maintain non-violent discipline, as that will help to distinguish them from the bad guys.
- Iraq: At least eight killed around the country in the first big demonstrations, mainly by undisciplined security forces. The Speaker of Parliament says he supports the demonstrators’ right to protest, Prime Minister Maliki tried to fend off both protests and criticism, and Ayatollah Sistani weighed in on the side of the improved public services and an end to corruption. Sistani is the one really worth listening to, but he hasn’t got a lot of influence in Kurdistan, where violent demonstrations continue.
- Jordan: A big, peaceful demonstration Friday, but big is much smaller (4000) than in other places. The call is still far more for reform than for regime change.
- Iran: The regime still has things “under control,” mistreating its own people even as it praises the rebellions in Arab countries. The video at that link, by the way, demonstrates a lack of discipline on both sides of the confrontation, but the text is useful for understanding why demonstrations in Iran have been less than fully successful.
Overall: lots of ups and downs this week, but it is clear that few real dictators will survive much longer. The question of what will replace them is still an open one, but it is looking more and more as if re-imposing autocracies will be nigh on impossible. The people simply won’t stand for it. More power to them!
Maliki ueber alles?
While we’ve all been preoccupied with Tunisia then Egypt, an Iraqi Supreme Court decision has called into question the independence of the central bank, the electoral commission, the human rights commission and the integrity commission. Reidar Visser has commented on the electoral commission aspect, but arguably the central bank is even more important. The big issue is accumulation of power in the hands of the Prime Minister.
Here are the most obviously relevant articles of the Iraqi constitution:
Article 102:
The High Commission for Human Rights, the Independent Electoral Commission, and the Commission on Public Integrity are considered independent commissions subject to monitoring by the Council of Representatives, and their functions shall be regulated by law.
Article 103:
First: The Central Bank of Iraq, the Board of Supreme Audit, the Communication and Media Commission, and the Endowment Commissions are financially and administratively independent institutions, and the work of each of these institutions shall be regulated by law.
Second: The Central Bank of Iraq is responsible before the Council of Representatives. The Board of Supreme Audit and the Communication and Media Commission shall be attached to the Council of Representatives.
What the court apparently decided is that agencies with an “executive” function have to be subordinated to the executive branch, not the Council of Representatives, in order to respect the separation of powers. This is obviously pretty deep legal water in which I don’t know how to swim, so I am reluctant to dive in.
But it also raises important questions about the survivability of democracy in Iraq, where accumulation of power has a long and unhappy history. Independent agencies are a frequent feature of the landscape in democratic societies, and independent central banks are regarded as absolutely vital to macroeconomic stability, which Iraq has enjoyed for the most part since the fall of Saddam Hussein. If executive branch supervision refers exclusively to financial probity and other administrative questions, that is one thing (though perhaps not entirely without problems). If executive branch decision is going to mean that these institutions are no longer in any serious sense independent, that is another.
We shouldn’t leap to conclusions, but I certainly hope the U.S. embassy in Baghdad is inquiring and letting the Prime Minister know that those who fought and paid for Iraq’s relative freedom would not be interested in seeing it undermined by an overly aggressive effort to centralize power.