Iraq is running out of time to commit to October elections

The election date of October 10 is fast approaching, yet political parties have not started any actual electioneering and are not spending their budgets, which fuels speculation about a possible postponement.

Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, together with the president and speaker of parliament called for a meeting with political parties, the Independent High Electoral Commission, and the United Nations Mission in Iraq (UNAMI) on August 7, 2021 to talk about the elections. The prime minister's advisor for election affairs, Hussein al-Hindawi, said in a press statement that "the attendees confirmed their commitment to holding elections on October 10." 

A source who participated in the meeting confirmed that the boycott of some parties was discussed and they decided to send a delegation representing the political parties to meet with the Sadrist movement and urge it to reverse its decision to not participate in the vote.

Elections for the sake of elections

When protesters took to the streets in October 2019, they demanded a change of government and an overhaul of the entire political system. On October 28, 2019, Sadrist movement leader Muqtada al-Sadr called for early elections saying then prime minister "Adil Abdul-Mahdi must come under the dome of parliament to announce early elections, under international supervision."

Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani supported this call in his Friday sermon on December 20, 2019: "The people are the source of the authorities, and from them, they derive their legitimacy – as stipulated by the constitution – and accordingly, the nearest and safest way to get out of the current crisis and avoid going to the unknown, chaos or the internal fighting – God forbid – is to return to the people by holding early elections."

His call was for elections as "the closest and safest way to get out of the crisis." The crisis at that time had reached its peak amid an escalation of demonstrators’ fervour, suppressed by the government using excessive force, which led to Abdul-Mahdi’s resignation, which in turn led to significant complications in the political scene. However, those days are over and the crises of that time no longer exist. The demonstrations have ended and the hypothesis of internal conflict is no longer present. So we must ask: Why hold elections in spite of boycotts from those who called for the early vote and what is the purpose of the election?

Suppose the answer is that it is in response to the calls of the Marja [Sistani’s office]. In that case, we now know that he is no longer concerned with the issue. He has remained silent about everything in the political arena, has stopped giving advice and guidance to political and governmental forces in Friday sermons, and is no longer giving an explicit opinion on political matters.

Suppose the answer is that the elections are to fulfil the demands of demonstrators. In that case, the political parties associated with them and the leading protest activists have also announced their decision to boycott the elections and not participate in them. 

Suppose the justification is to seek to change the current political system. In that case, one needs to ask how the system could change with the participants in the elections being the same ruling parties responsible for its damage.

If the answer is to renew the government's legitimacy and not to create a constitutional vacuum, then the reply is that the current government is constitutionally sound and does not lack legitimacy.

The reasons for insisting on holding elections amid a boycott are not clear. There is no specific goal that we can refer, except that the call for early elections was due to exceptional circumstances that no longer exist. 

Suffice to say that those who insist on holding the early elections have their own goals and reasons, and they differ from one party to another. 

Sadr's participation

The debate about holding elections without the participation of the Sadrist movement is intensifying among the elite. Some believe that the political process is more significant than any party or political bloc, and the decision to participate or not is a purely self-chosen one. On this basis, they insist on holding elections on the specified date. Some believe that elections without the Sadrist participation are an adventure with ominous consequences.

The Sadrist movement represents a large segment of the Iraqi Shiite community and underprivileged class. It has a strong presence in the political street and can bring out tens of thousands of demonstrators in Baghdad and southern governorates. It can paralyze the work of any government that opposes it, as demonstrated in 2015 and 2019. Add to this the fact that the Sadrist movement possesses an effective military force on the ground capable of armed confrontation with the government and its military forces if it is cornered. 

The Sadrist movement is a balancing factor in the political arena and the Shiite street. It became a buffer between the hard-line conservative axis in the face of moderates. During the October demonstrations, they provided protection and logistical support to demonstrators, allowing protests to continue for several months. The protest momentum receded as soon as a dispute arose between demonstrators and the movement, which withdrew its protection and logistical support.

Parliament and government formation

The absence of the Sadrist movement from the elections means its exit from the parliamentary and government equation, which will allow the conservatives to dominate both. Sadr was a significant reason for the unsuccessful nomination of the al-Fateh alliance for the post of prime minister in 2020, even though they formally nominated Qusay al-Suhail. At the same time, the Sadrists played a crucial role in cooperation with the al-Fateh bloc in forming Kadhimi's government and choosing his cabinet. 

In the event of Sadr’s parliamentary absence, the conservative axis will undoubtedly lead the next government. One cannot rule out that they could choose one of their hard-line hawks for the premiership and thus the Sadrist movement will face a problematic fait accompli. 

Thus, we could face a dangerous situation of Shiite-Shiite fighting. Suppose the Sadrist movement doesn't choose the opposition. In that case, it will lose its political and public momentum and its followers will turn to the ruling parties to obtain jobs, services, and protection.

Observers believe the Sadrist movement may suffer significant losses if the elections are held in the absence of its participation. It may be the beginning of the end for it as a political movement. It could also be the beginning of a bloody opposition and a difficult period ahead.

Solutions in difficult terrain

Iraq has regressed significantly during the past 18 years. No one disputes that the current political system has failed to serve the country and citizens alike. The ruling political class was unable to carry out its responsibilities in building the state and its institutions. Instead, it was the very reason for the collapse of state institutions, ministries, and government departments that became political fiefdoms controlled by elites to harness resources. 

Undoubtedly, this situation is not sustainable in light of the insufficiency of the state's resources to cover public spending. An imminent collapse has become visible to everyone. Perhaps the only factor that kept the system going is the recovery of oil prices in global markets. When these prices fall, as happened in 2020, political parties will be unable to stand against the torrent of hungry crowds. The people will not stand idly by while the parties and their cronies enjoy the resources of the state.

The ruling parties must wake up from their deep slumber and know that they will face significant challenges soon and will not be immune from public anger. Empty promises of reform and change will not work. The Iraqi street has heard these slogans before and is tired of them. The political parties should reform the system and give up their privileges and gains for the sake of the people. Otherwise, they will lose everything they enjoy overnight.

The call for broad participation in the elections is the right start on the path of a realistic and acceptable solution, including calling on boycotting parties to participate and work together to amend the electoral law prior to the elections, to prevent fraud, and hold fair and transparent elections that guarantee broad participation. The alternative is the total collapse of this system as we know it. Action is required now as time is running out fast. 

Farhad Alaaldin is the chairman of the Iraqi Advisory Council. He was the political adviser to former Iraqi President Fuad Masum, the former chief of staff to the KRG prime minister from 2009 to 2011, and former senior adviser to the KRG prime minister from 2011 to 2012.

• SHARE ON
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on Whatsapp
• Share on Telegram
• Share on Viber
• Share on Messenger