The political scene: Iraq’s Sadrists and Coordination Framework reach deadlock, Kurdish rivalry intensifies

Iraq’s government formation is once again moving forward now that the Federal Court deemed the first session of the new parliament constitutional, paving the way to elect Iraq’s next president and then designating the candidate of the largest bloc as prime minister.

In a statement issued January 25, the Speaker of Parliament Mohammed al-Halbousi announced that February 7 is the date set to elect the president. As a result, Sadrist leader, Muqtada al-Sadr, arrived unannounced in Baghdad on January 26. However, even with this momentum tense situations and entrenchments between the competing fronts continue.

Sadr reveals his cards and the Coordination Framework resists

Sadr published a televised speech on January 25, in which he recounted the reasons for his positions on the largest bloc and the formation of the national majority government. He started by saying, "our defenders are diminishing," and he is following in his father's footsteps who resorted to televised speeches to defend himself. Sadr revealed hidden discussions with other Shiite parties before and after the early elections, defended his insistence on forming a majority government, and called on the competing parties to accept the principle of the democratic game and turn towards the opposition. He stressed, we "still insist on the government of the national majority," relying on the participation of some parties within the Coordination Framework, but not all of them. He added that Hadi "al-Amiri came alone [January 15], and we sat down and agreed that some within the Framework would join, and Amiri agreed to that without Nouri al-Maliki. And later we waited for a few days, and then the news came back to me that no, we retracted our agreement."

The Coordination Framework continued to reject the idea of a government of the national majority without the participation of others. “The continuation of the exclusionary approach means pushing the entities that obtained the majority of citizens' votes in the last elections combined to go to the opposition or boycott,” reads a January 25 statement. The Framework considers that excluding parts of it is at the expense of the Shiite component, warning: "this is a cause of unfairness and injustice that leads to more instability."

Sadr had expressed in his televised speech his hope that the Framework and the head of the Fatih Alliance, Hadi Al-Amiri, would change this position. An informed source stated that Sadr came to Baghdad to hold dialogues with political forces, particularly with some leaders within the Framework. Still, with the lack of response from the Framework and a failure to arrange any meeting in this regard, he returned immediately to Al-Najaf empty-handed.

The presidential race

In conjunction with the leading Shiite forces reaching an apparent deadlock, the dispute escalated between the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) led by Bafel Talabani and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) led by Masoud Barzani over the position of the President of the Republic. The PUK considers the position as theirs according to the political custom since 2006. The post is seen by many as essential to preserving the balance of power, with the KDP receiving the presidency of the Kurdistan Region. At the same time, the KDP believes that its numerical majority and its alliance with the Sadrist Movement and the Sunni Sovereignty Alliance are enough to win the position in a well-defined strategy to dominate the Kurdish presence in both the Iraqi and Kurdish political arenas.

The competition for the Presidency will be fierce with the approaching date of choosing and naming the next President on February 7. The two parties both have reasons that reinforce their conviction of victory. Some observers believe that the tripartite alliance gives the KDP solid ground and more chances, especially since the speaker of parliament is in their grip. In contrast, other observers believe that the political atmosphere in Baghdad is in favor of the PUK regarding the presidency. And the majority of political forces consider the PUK's winning the position as rebalancing the political equation. As a result, these forces will vote for the PUK candidate. In other words, it is going to be a close race between the two, and it is difficult to tell who will come out on top.

Return of the Federal Court to the foreground

The Federal Court may come back to the fore to decide on a crucial legal argument related to article 70 of the Constitution. There is a deep debate among legal scholars about the interpretation of the said article, which states: "First: The Parliament elects from among the candidates a President of the Republic by a two-thirds majority of its members. Second: If none of the candidates obtains the required majority, the competition will take place among the two candidates obtaining the highest number of votes, the one who obtains the majority of votes in the second ballot shall be declared President."

Legal expert Jamal al-Asadi says that "the principle of quorum by which the mechanism for electing the republic's president is established, which is two-thirds of the number of members of the Parliament, or 220 deputies."

In contrast, other legal scholars believe that the quorum for any session in the Parliament is half plus one, as stated in Article 59 of the Constitution. And that Article 70 does not require the presence of two-thirds during voting but instead stipulates the candidate must obtain two-thirds of votes to win in the first round. Otherwise, there will be a second round, and the winner can become president by obtaining a simple majority of votes.

Observers believe that the speaker of parliament may go with the second opinion and start the voting process as long as the quorum exists, even if two-thirds of the members do not attend.

Therefore, the Federal Court should intervene before the session takes place on February 7 to avoid any controversy over whether or not two-thirds should attend before the vote on choosing the President of the Republic.

Political troubles reflect on Iraq’s security situation

What is clear here is that the political process has entered a deadlock. Sadr's visit to Baghdad and his abrupt departure without meeting with the Coordination Framework leaders is clear evidence that both sides are stubbornly sticking to their positions rather than being flexible. Amid a noticeable increase in security violations, such as the targeting of the speaker' guest house by Katyusha rockets on January 25, the rocket attack on Baghdad International Airport on Friday, and the attacks on the headquarters of the parties within the tripartite alliance, in addition to a series of security events that observers see as efforts to put pressure on specific political forces.

These violations increased the condemnations and the exchanges of veiled accusations by the political leaders. Sadr tweeted, "Do not target the interests of the people, for the people and the country are a red line. We will continue with a national majority government with our partners in the country." The leader of Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, Qais al-Khazali, tweeted, "There are agendas that want to shuffle the cards, especially at this critical time. There are forces, political figures, and media outlets that want to exploit these events for political misrepresentation by explicitly or implicitly directing accusations to specific parties without any evidence."

The security situation is expected to deteriorate in the coming days due to the failure of the security forces to monitor and prevent the movements of the armed groups carrying out these attacks.

On the other hand, the rift between the two main Kurdish parties over the position of the presidency is deepening day after day, with each of them trying to win over the political forces in Baghdad. It is difficult to predict the losing party's behavior and position, whether in Baghdad or the Kurdistan Region. Still, there are great fears that the gap between the two parties will reach the point of dividing the region into two administrations.

So far, no evidence on the horizon indicates the possibility of resolving political matters between the Kurds on one side and the Coordination Framework and the Sadrists on the other. There is no neutral party mediating between them to ensure they do not collide.

There is no doubt that the next few days will be more complex than those that have passed, as conflicting political forces adhere to their hard-line positions. The Shiite dispute will escalate when choosing the Prime Minister-Designate and government formation starts. We will be approaching the possibilities of political confrontation during that time, which may develop into physical clashes among supporters.

The country's higher interest requires everyone to be calm, resort to the language of wisdom and deliberation, and choose the path of dialogue and understanding instead of trying to break each-others wills. Everyone must realize that it is nearly impossible to change the consensus system overnight; bypassing the customs of the past two decades takes time. An escalation will likely result in the devastation of the Shiite and the Kurdish houses and Iraq will not be spared.

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 the former senior adviser to the KRG prime minister from 2011 to 2012.

The political scene: Iraq’s Sadrists and Coordination Framework reach deadlock, Kurdish rivalry intensifies

Justice is the Language Survivors Understand

How much revenue does each province in the Kurdistan Region contribute?

The silent drug epidemic: Why Iraq, Kurdistan risk losing a generation?

Related Articles

Justice is the Language Survivors Understand

How much revenue does each province in the Kurdistan Region contribute?

The silent drug epidemic: Why Iraq, Kurdistan risk losing a generation?