Tweet
So: results of the provincial elections won’t be in for I guess about a week. Today’s reports are filled with quotes from hopeful Iraqis. Unlike the two previous rounds of voting, there appears to be greater reasons for optimism in the sense that entrenched sectarian imbalances may tip, or even be upended entirely. I’d recommend reading Musings On Iraq for information on the provincials and their underlying dynamics, as I’ve been relying on it to get me up to speed.
Beyond the elections themselves loom the question of how the provincial institutions will adapt to new electoral realities. I have no evidence for the following proposition and it’s pure supposition, but here goes: electoral pivot points in weak states can create new and competiting institutions rather than the transition of control over existing institutions. Could that happen here? Some Iraqis in Diyala, interviewed by Tony Shadid, feared it could:
After voting Saturday, his finger stained with purple ink, he said those forces were still holding more than 1,000 of his men, detained in an offensive by Maliki’s government last year that he said unfairly targeted his forces and Sunni regions. Even with a victory, Abu Talib said he doubted Badr would surrender control of the security forces.
"Definitely not," he said. "The obstacle that faces Iraq now is Badr."
Perhaps that quote is merely evidence that distrust doesn’t fade as soon as a ballot is cast. But it’s something to watch for. Iraq now has a model for creating militias to supplement the on-the-books security forces: the Sons of Iraq (or, as they’re called in Diyala, the Popular Committees). Why not expand the model if you feel you’re unfairly denied power — whether by the rightfully elected parties or the formerly dominant ones?
7 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
thanks Spencer!
if you feel you’re unfairly denied power + militia = Negotiating leverage or Civil War?
I have this notion that a lot of the same purple fingers (usually, index) will be inserted into the trigger guards of AK-47’s as soon as Obama starts to make serious drawdowns.
I also just read that the turnout was 55%, despite putting most of the country into lockdown for the election.
When we see nearly all of our troops gone, and when the $2.5 billion a week that bush’s petro-crusade is costing us is down to a pittance, then OBAMA can put up a “misson accomplished” sign.
The problem is, that I think when most of our troops are gone, the Green Zone is probably going to turn into the world’s most expensive mortar training range, and I have doubts that the Iraqi “security” will be willing or able to suppress that, by themselves.
We’ll know more by June, when the U.S. troops are supposed to pull back to the Fortress America’s in the desert. I think the resentment for 6 years of bloody, humiliating, occupation is going to be expressed in some way, and I don’t think it will be user-friendly to the Fortune 500.
There is also the Tikrit problem which has yet to be resolved. I don’t believe they participated in the election.
What this highlights is that the reason for the surge, a political settlemnet, never happened. Now a couple years late we finally have these provincial elections. They could well change the calculus of power but the question is will they lead toward a political settlement or away from it? The Sunnis participated this time but Maliki remains as opposed as ever to sharing power with them, or really anyone else.
What does a (moderately-regulated) militia run you these days?
In a sense, it doesn’t matter. Or perhaps to say it better, it cannot be ALLOWED to matter.
To whatever extent the American troop presence has kept a lid on “Civil War 2: Iraqi Boogaloo”, at some point you were always going to have to draw down and sort of allow things to work themselves out. Just as this case has been made for at least 4 years for an enduring occupation, so could it have been made for an early withdrawal. The “pressure increasing under the lid” metaphor is admittedly an imperfect one, but it can be made with the same confidence as any other post-occupation scenario prediction.
Seems to me the best the local American Commanders can do is negotiate a “we’re leaving already, hold fire ’til we’re out of site” agreement. Because there’s still a lot of imbalances to redress, from Diyala to Kirkuk to Basra, these things have an outcome that can be delayed, but probably not prevented…
mikey