Iraqi voters
went to the polls Thursday to elect a new government that will lead
Iraq for the next four years. More than 300 political parties and
independent candidates competed to fill the 275 seats of the
Council of Representatives, which will select a new President as
the head of state and approve a new Prime Minister as the head of
government. Iraq's new elected leaders will have a vital
opportunity to mobilize popular support to restore stability and
security, promote national reconciliation, rebuild the economy and
society, and complete the difficult transition from dictatorship to
democracy.
At stake are
not only the future of Iraq and the success of U.S. policy in that
country, but also the outcome of the struggle of a critical front
in the global war on terrorism and the future of the Middle East.
The best possible outcome would the formation of a broad-based,
inclusive government that could effectively provide security to
Iraqis, boost the economy, drain away support for the insurgency,
and function as a reliable U.S. ally against terrorism.
This is a long
agenda that will take considerable time and effort to accomplish.
Although the election results determining which party won how many
seats will be the immediate focus of attention, in the long run the
balance of power in the legislature will not be as important as the
degree to which the various political parties can effectively
cooperate within a national coalition to address Iraq's many
problems. After the elections, the crucial work begins in forging a
stable ruling coalition, agreeing on a power-sharing formula, and
performing the daily work of government that is necessary to build
trust between contending political factions, forge a national
consensus for moving forward, and sustain hope for the future.
Iraq has made
remarkably rapid progress in establishing the foundations of a
democratic political system in less than three years after the war
that ended more than three decades of dictatorship. Despite the
doubts of many pessimists, Iraqis successfully pressed ahead with
the June 2004 transfer of sovereignty, the January 2005 elections
for a transitional government, and the writing of a constitution
that was approved in October with a 78 percent affirmative vote,
despite
opposition from many Sunni Arabs, who dominated and benefited from
Saddam's regime and now play a dominant role in the
insurgency.
Despite the violent opposition of insurgents,
a growing number of Iraqis have chosen to participate in the
political process: 8.5 million voted in the January elections,
almost 10 million voted in the October referendum on the new
constitution, and signs indicate that an even greater number vote
in this week's elections. A November poll conducted by the
International Republican Institute found that 85 percent of Iraqis
planned to vote this time around.
Sunni Arabs, in particular, were expected to
vote in far greater numbers than they did in January, when many
boycotted the elections or were deterred from voting by
intimidating threats from various insurgent groups. This time,
Sunni Arab political and religious leaders, who have openly
concluded that shunning the elections was a mistake that set back
their interests, called for their followers to participate in the
elections to provide a stronger Sunni Arab voice in the next
parliament. Sunni Arab parties also were expected to make a
stronger showing than in January because the electoral system
divides most of the 275 parliamentary seats by province,
guaranteeing that Sunni-dominated regions will get representation.
The number of seats won by Sunni Arab parties is expected to rise
from 17 in the current parliament to somewhere in the neighborhood
of 50 seats in the new parliament. The Iraqi Accordance Front (also
known as the Iraqi Consensus Front), a coalition of three Sunni
religious parties, is expected to be a leading recipient of Sunni
votes.
The lack of Sunni participation in the
transitional government has contributed to political instability.
The Iraqi political system, despite the presence of substantial
numbers of Turcomans, Assyrians, and other minorities, is
essentially a three-legged stool. The transitional government stood
on only two legs, supported by a coalition that represented Shiites
(more than 60 percent of the population) and Kurds (about 15 to 20
percent). If Sunni Arabs can be brought into the next government,
the stool would be much more stable. The inclusion of greater
numbers of Sunnis in the government would undermine the appeal of
Iraqi insurgents by making it clear that they are opposed not just
to the presence of foreign forces, but also to the elected
government.
Even if the Sunni
political parties decide to stay outside the coalition government,
they will wield considerable influence in the future debate over
controversial issues such as amending Iraq's constitution, the role
of Islam in the legal system, the pace and scope of
de-baathification efforts, the sharing of Iraq's oil wealth, and
the evolution of federalism. To the extent that the Sunnis are
given a voice to influence government policy over these and other
issues, they will be less inclined to support the insurgency.
The increased size
of the Sunni vote is likely to reduce the number of seats won by
the political parties that were the biggest victors in the January
elections: the United Iraqi Alliance, a Shiite religious coalition
that won 140 seats, and the Kurdistan Coalition List, a Kurdish
umbrella group that won 75 seats. The United Iraqi Alliance is
again likely to garner the most seats this time around, although
the defection of Ahmed Chalabi and other secular Shiite leaders may
further weaken it at the polls. Former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi,
a secular Shiite who leads the Iraqi National List, won 40 seats
last time but may do less well this time unless he can siphon off
some of the new Sunni voters.
There is likely to
be a length period of uncertainty following the elections, as rival
political parties jockey to gain enough support to form a new
government, which will require a vote of support from at least
two-thirds of the new parliament. Outsiders must be patient with
this bargaining process: it is more important that the Iraqis form
as broad a government as possible than that they form a government
quickly. Iraq's political process may be
messy and slow, but it holds the promise of drawing in enough Sunni
Arab political leaders to drain away support for the insurgency and
isolate and weaken the diehard Baathists and Islamic radicals who
are implacably opposed to democracy.
In the long run, it will be less important how
quickly a government is formed than how effectively it can deliver
political stability, security, the rule of law, and an economic
revival to the Iraqi people. While Thursday's elections were
important, what happens after the elections is even more important.
Elections are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the
establishment of democracy. A stable democracy requires a
supportive civil society and a firm commitment to the rule of
law.
The United States can help create the conditions for success, but
ultimately only the Iraqis can build a sustainable democracy in
Iraq. Iraq's new leaders must work together in an effective manner
to improve the daily lives of Iraqis or they will squander the
popular support bestowed by today's vote and risk plunging Iraq
into a bloody civil war.
James
Phillips is Research Fellow in Middle Eastern Studies in the
Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a
division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for
International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation.