Features > January 31, 2005 > Web Only

Celebrations of Iraqi Democracy Mask Uncertain Future

By Burhan Wazir

On Sunday, millions of Iraqis, in spite of a lack of overall security, left their homes to vote in a historic election derided by politicians and observers alike. On the same day and in reply, insurgents led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi—many of them loyal to the Iraqi wing of al Qaeda—killed 35 people in a bloody assault on both the polls and a tentative Iraqi freedom.

As some of the voters danced with joy, obviously overcome with emotion, others preferred to hide their faces in fear. Yet initial results were encouraging: Voters cast ballots in higher-than-expected numbers in Iraq’s first multi-party election in half a century. Samir Hassan, 32, who lost his leg in a car bomb blast last year, said as he lined up to vote in Baghdad: “I would have crawled here if I had to. I don’t want terrorists to kill other Iraqis like they tried to kill me.” But many polling stations were still empty in parts of Iraq’s Sunni Arab heartland, the area worst hit by anti-coalition attacks and where the violence has been bloodiest.

As widely expected, voters formed long queues in predominantly Shi’ite areas and in the Kurdish north. Many sang, chanted and clapped; others said they had walked for miles. “This is a wedding for all Iraqis. I congratulate all Iraqis on their newfound freedom,” said Jaida Hamza, dressed in a black Islamic robe, in the Shi’ite shrine city of Najaf. Iraq’s 60 percent-majority Shi’ites, marginalized for decades under Saddam, had been expected to dominate the polls. Kurds, who make up nearly a fifth of Iraqis but have traditionally remained the country’s most persecuted group, want a result that enables them to enshrine their autonomous rule in the north, a step that now appears to be tantalizingly close.

Officials of the current interim Iraqi administration were ever willing to put an optimistic spin on events despite the violence. Casting his vote in Baghdad’s heavily fortified and nearly impenetrable Green Zone, interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi urged his countrymen to face down the insurgents. “This is a historic moment for Iraq,” he said. “A day when Iraqis can hold their heads high because they are challenging the terrorists and starting to write their future with their own hands.” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was no less ebullient: “What we’re seeing here is the emergence of an Iraqi voice for freedom.”

Yet throughout the day, against the background of voting, militants launched a steady stream of attacks to try to jeopardize the polls. They struck mainly in Baghdad, rocking the capital with nine suicide blasts in quick succession. The Iraqi wing of al Qaeda continued to claim responsibility for the violence: In recent days, the group has declared war on the election, vowing to kill any “infidel” who voted.

The violence wasn’t unique to Iraq alone—expatriate groups living abroad have also, in recent weeks, seen a rekindling of tensions not seen since they initially left Iraq to escape Baath party rule. In Britain, where 30,961 of the nearly 250,000 Iraqi expatriates have registered to vote, the manager of Oldham Athletic football club was attacked on Sunday after he was caught up in a skirmish outside a polling station for the Iraq election. Manager Brian Talbot was driving past the polling station in Manchester on his way to Oldham’s FA Cup match against Bolton as fighting broke out between rival groups of Iraqis. After Talbot’s car accidentally struck one of the men, a mob of more than 20 then surrounded his vehicle, smashing its windows and assaulting the manager.

Back in Iraq, election monitors indicated that the final turnout was a little more than 60 percent of all registered voters. However, election commission spokesman Farid Ayar acknowledged, “the numbers are only guessing.” Any lower figure would prove an embarrassment for Iraq’s interim government, which has grappled with the concept of democratic legitimacy ever since the postwar deterioration in security. The government had initially set a target of at least 50 percent of Iraq’s 13 million registered voters as the barometer of success, but recently admitted that that was an optimistic outlook and that, in fact, many Iraqis would be too fearful to make the journey to their voting booths.

Officials expect to announce preliminary results in six to seven days and final results in about 10 days. The legitimacy of any new Iraqi government is still open to question, given that large numbers of international monitors mostly stayed away for fear of being kidnapped. Iraq’s first election in more than half a century, then, remains impossible to assess in terms of fairness or accuracy.

Confirmation of a low Sunni turnout would also undoubtedly damage the credibility of the election. Several parties from Iraq’s 20 percent Sunni minority boycotted elections, arguing that the insurgency in their areas, wedded to the presence of more than 150,000 U.S.-led troops, made a fair vote impossible.

For American troops currently occupying the country, a fair and swift resolution to the election is vital. There are well-grounded fears that instead of quelling the spiraling anti-U.S. revolt, the vote could further foment sectarian attacks by further alienating Sunnis, delaying any withdrawal of American-led forces from the country.

In the end, the election looks set to prove more evidence of the niggling and uncomfortable reality of Iraqi demographics—namely the informal creation of a three-state country where regions enjoy near-perfect autonomy but with some centralized ties to a government in Baghdad. This isn’t quite the brand of democracy the White House predicted when it went to war in 2003. But as the British learned long ago, Iraq is hardly a predictable country.

• subscribe to print magazine

  First Name Last Name Home Address City State Zip Code Email

  2-year, 24-issues, $44.95 1-year, 12-issue, $24.95

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  Let the Iraqis go

  As with the election issues should be heard even if they don’t pass. My Issue web site includes:
  07-14-04 The Hand-Over that Wasn’t
  http://www.fpif.org/papers/0407iraqtransf.html. The Congress should give full control to the elected officials, removing the 5 year influence of the USA on heir government & economy. The Iroquois 5 Nation Constitution is a good reference. We should present a time table for withdrawal of our troops, which + can take months, but let the Iraqis tell us what areas their people can handle. As they are trained, Iraqis can replace our people in an ongoing but continual reduction.
  
  This will show an end to any impression of occupation and reduce the effect of the propaganda of the opposition. It will also encourage help from the UN.

  Posted by Mark Schindler on Jan 31, 2005 at 6:28 PM

  This election shows - clearly - what is going on. A bunch of thugs - many led by a terrorist - are attempting to hold hostage an entire country. They are now speaking their intentions clearly (democracy is our enemy, it is apostasy). The Iraqis are speaking their intentions clearly too - the voter turnout was extraordinary as were the stories of the voters.

  I think the real fear of the left is that Iraq will succeed. Just as the fall of the Soviet Union came about from Reagans policies, the fall of a terrorist ruled country has now come.  Those of us who love freedom, who believe the strong should not terrorize the weak, we should be very happy right now.

  Can anyone here even imagine talking a Downs Syndrome child into becoming a suicide terrorist? Just par for the course on the “other” side. . .

  Posted by justShows on Feb 1, 2005 at 11:04 AM

  Hi justShows,

  a few things; first I seriously doubt anybody actively wishes Iraq to “fail”...that’s just nonsense. Secondly, The collapse of the USSR was because of Reagan’s policies?  If you mean outspending them by tying up huge amounts of American capital in arms development, then yeah, I guess you’re right.

  and lastly, any point you actually had is immediately negated by saying “those of us who love freedom” I mean c’mon!! There is not a single person in the world (save maybe an S&M;submissive) that “hates freedom”.  Freedom is a tricky concept, what one person considers freedom another does not. Is freedom free healthcare or is it the freedom to choose between competing healthcare providers? Is it the freedom to choose between coke and pepsi?  I’m sure that the Iranian’s that put the Ayatollah in power considered themselves free afterwards...(i personally don’t, but that’s sort of the point I’m trying to make).

  If you want to make a valid point then please do so, please don’t trot out the hackneyed clichés of the Bush Regime…

  another thing I was thinking about: Iraq’s population is around 25 million...roughly 7-8 million voted...when it’s put that way it doesn’t seem so resounding a victory for those that love freedom and liberty...not to detract from the fact that all things considered it was a pretty momentous occasion, but the overwhelming spin the media gave it reminds me of the infamous statue-toppling fiasco...i would love to see some balanced news in the mainstream media is all…

  Posted by lefty canuck on Feb 1, 2005 at 3:35 PM

  Hi lefty canuck -

  “Secondly, The collapse of the USSR was because of Reagan’s policies?  If you mean outspending them by tying up huge amounts of American capital in arms development, then yeah, I guess you’re right.”

  I agree. But i see this as hugely better than a hot war. Or even the continued cold war.

  “and lastly, any point you actually had is immediately negated by saying “those of us who love freedom” I mean c’mon!!”

  I was thinking of the wanna be dictators, like al Sadr. While most of us may wish for freedom, i am afraid that many do not - rather they wish to be kings.

  “There is not a single person in the world (save maybe an S&M;submissive) that “hates freedom”. “

  I wish i could agree, but as i say above it appears that many would rather rid there countries of freedon - IF they can then become kings. From what i can tell, that is the motivation of many of the insurgents in Iraq (but not all, of course).

  “Freedom is a tricky concept, what one person considers freedom another does not. Is freedom free healthcare or is it the freedom to choose between competing healthcare providers?”

  Point taken. However i think the issue is may be less nuanced. Freedom is being allowed to do what you wish without government interference. Thus prostitutes in the US are not really free, but bankers are, whether they be Jewish, Christian, atheist or Muslim. While no couutry is entirely free, one can imagine scales that rate them (with pre-war Iraq being very near the bottom of the scale, as was preWar Afghanistan ).

  “I’m sure that the Iranian’s that put the Ayatollah in power considered themselves free afterwards”

  Interesting assumtion. I suppose it depends on what you mean by them “putting Ayatollah in power”. It seemed more like the Ayatollah seized power from what i can tell.

  “If you want to make a valid point then please do so, please don’t trot out the hackneyed clichés of the Bush Regime…”

  Sorry. But i just talk that way. Nothing to do with Bush.

  “roughly 7-8 million voted...when it’s put that way it doesn’t seem so resounding a victory for those that love freedom and liberty”

  I disagree. As a fraction of those eligble to vote the number almost certainly exceeds the US elections (~60% for the US). (One thing to consider is that the population is **heavily** slanted toward the young, but i don’t have the demographics in front of me now.)

  “...not to detract from the fact that all things considered it was a pretty momentous occasion, but the overwhelming spin the media gave it reminds me of the infamous statue-toppling fiasco...i would love to see some balanced news in the mainstream media is all… “

  I think the statue-toppling event WAS momentuous and this is even more so. But only time will tell.

  Thanks for you thoughtful response.

  Posted by justShows on Feb 1, 2005 at 3:53 PM

  Both of you put forward interesting points, but i think you both are confusing the desired outcome with the real picture.

  I would like both of you to consider a couple of points.

  1.  The toppling of Saddam’s statue was an staged event.  Not only was it surprised to see the American Forces take down the statue, a lot of iraqi flags appeared out of nowhere as if people were carrying them around in their pockets.

  2.  It is expected for the Shi’ites to vote in the recent elections as they are a majority in Iraq and so are expected to vote to gain a majority within the Iraqi government.

  3.  It is well known, that the Kurds have longed for a Kurdistan.  This raised the tensions between neighbouring countries such as Turkey, Greece and Iran.  If you look at all polling stations attended and celebrated at by Kurds, you will notice that they flew the flag of Kurdistan and not Iraq.  In fact, the majority (if not all) of the iraqi flags where flown by iraqi arabs.  The Kurds are using the Iraqi elections as a gradualistic approach in establishing Kurdistan and having a generally autonomous northern state within Iraq clearly shows how Iraqi they really want to be.

  4.  The sunni muslims in any part of the world would never accept a democracy by choice.  This is due to the fact that their main reference is to the Quran which doesn’t allow man-made laws.  The US have shown intentions to ‘democratize’ the middle east which does not include any plans of actually removing any of the current rulers but staging an election to justify their standing.

  5.  The majority of sunni muslims in the middle east are eager to replace their rulers and want to return to a Caliphate type of system.

  6.  Muslims living in the west, who also have good links in the middle east, consider themselves as economic migrants.  The integration of muslims into main-stream society has been of much discussion recently throughout the whole of Europe.  Despite the ‘carrot and the stick’ approach presented by the governments, Muslims are still not considering societal norms as acceptable.  This stems from their belief which forbids alcohol, gambling, relationships outside wedlock, homosexuality, etc.  Should the situation in any part of world become more better, they would migrate in flocks.

  7.  Muslims in the middle east would never accept the concept of ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty’ because it will clash with their religion which is a very active part of their lifestyle.

  8.  Approximately 250,000 Iraqi ex-patriats live in the UK.  Only 30,000 have registered to vote.  In iraq, forms of ID had be be reduced from two to one to allow more people to vote.  Other changes in proceedure also took place to ensure a successful election result.

  9.  The fact that many Iraqi ex-patriats were allowed to vote outside Iraq shows the desperation of the US-led coalition.  I understand that there are Iraqi’s who have fled the country due to the war and should be given the right to vote; however, I also have personal contact with a lot of Kurds and Iraqi’s who have no intention of returning back to Iraq.

  On a more personal note, when the west talks about ‘freedom’ they should use the word ‘compromise’ instead.  The choices in the west are presented by the elected goverments which in most cases becomes a compromise for its citezens.  The true nature of ‘freedom’ poses no restriction whatsoever thus allowing the individuals the right to do whatever, whenever, however - a concept that would never come into reality.

  Just to set the record straight, I am against the invasion of Iraq for many reasons and am over-joyed to see Saddam removed.  I hope the people of the middle east remove the rest of the puppet regimes in place.

  I hope you find my comments useful and enlightening.

  Thank you for your time.

  Posted by Election Eye Witness on Feb 1, 2005 at 7:08 PM

• extended discussion >>>Continued...

  Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 12 posts.

Member Login

Also by Burhan Wazir

• Celebrations of Iraqi Democracy Mask Uncertain Future