Disorder leaves democracy hanging in the balance
WITH a sovereign government now in place, Iraq begins an 18-month march toward democratic rule but there is a lot to do: organise and hold three national elections, draft a new constitution and hold the insurgents at bay.
If things go according to plan, Iraq will emerge as a democratic state in a region of authoritarian rulers and the US and other foreign troops can go home. But the road is littered with potential minefields.
The elections set the stage for a clergy-dominated theocratic state. A sharp escalation in terrorist attacks could threaten the timetable or lead to a military-backed authoritarian ruler, voted into power by Iraqis more interested in an end to the bombs, bullets and kidnappers than in Western-style democracy.
Sceptics question whether a conservative, tribal-based Muslim society divided both ethnically and religiously will produce anything that resembles the democratic dreams of those in Washington who promoted the war.
Once the new government assumes full sovereignty, the next step is to convene a national conference of about 1,000 prominent Iraqis in July to choose an Interim National Council to advise and oversee the work of the interim government.
The idea is to expand participation in the political process to give a role to people and movements not represented in the interim government. The council will advise and monitor the interim government.
One of its functions is to help allay fears of the country's influential Shiite clergy that the new government, dominated by Westernised figures with close links to the Americans, would take decisions on the future of the country that the clerics think rightfully belong to a future, elected leadership.
Those steps are aimed at paving the way for national elections by the end of January to choose a transitional government.
Choosing a new leadership only seven months after the old one takes over might seem unnecessarily burdensome, considering the precarious security situation and the need to draw up new electoral laws and voter rolls from scratch.
However, the arrangement is a compromise between the demands of the Shi'ite clergy, especially Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani, for elections as soon as possible and US insistence that a ballot could not be arranged by the June 30 transfer of sovereignty.
With Shiites comprising an estimated 60% of the population, the clerics assume their followers would win any fair national election.
Al-Sistani's followers said an election could have been held by the end of June if the Americans had not stalled. The Americans argued that Iraq was too unstable for a safe and fair ballot and that extremists may have even won seats in the new government.
That is a big gamble. There is no guarantee that security will be any better in January than it has been in recent months.
Lieutenant General Thomas Metz, commander of the Multinational Corps Iraq, said some US commanders believe insurgents may lay low for months and launch major attacks "closer to election time".
UN elections chief Carina Perelli said the first major test will come by September, when voter registration is scheduled to begin. The spectre of car bombers targeting people waiting to register or vote is alarming. "The whole issue of fear is going to be a theme in this election," Ms Perelli said.
Fear could prompt many Iraqis to turn to candidates they believe can restore law and order at any price. In a country without a democratic tradition and a long history of strong central leadership, instability could help candidates with strong connections to the military and police, such as Interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.
Delaying the election would be risky. Al-Sistani's aides had long feared an appointed interim government might exploit the security crisis to cancel the January elections and hold on to power. Delays could trigger a crisis within the Shi'ite majority.
After the January elections, the newly elected government will convene a national convention to draft a new constitution, which is to be ratified by the voters in October 2005.
Many painful decisions, such as the status of the Kurdish autonomous region in the north, the role of women and the position of the Islamic faith in secular law have all been deferred until the constitutional convention.
If the Kurds, who form about 15% of the population, believe their aspirations for self-rule are being ignored, it could fan the flames of secession, a move that neighbouring countries such as Turkey, Syrian and Iran all with their own minority Kurdish populations could not tolerate.
Under the interim constitution approved in March, the permanent charter would be scrapped if a majority of voters in three of Iraq's 18 provinces reject it. That gives the Kurds an effective veto since they control three provinces.
But such a move would probably trigger a grave national crisis since many Shi'ites oppose the Kurdish veto. If Iraqis overcome those hurdles, they face the final step yet another election in December 2005 for a constitutionally-based government.
With that fourth and final step, the political process enshrined in the UN Security Council resolution enacted in May comes to an end and with it the mandate of the US-led multinational military force.
Only then, if everything goes according to plan, will Iraq recover full sovereignty and gain the first democratically-elected government in its history.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
