Iraq elections

[Moses]

Fear Shrouds Iraq's Elections in Secrecy, Confusion



 World - Reuters

By Lin Noueihed

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Election centers have been bombed, candidates and electoral officials threatened and even killed. With only a week to go, intimidation is turning Iraq's landmark polls into a new kind of secret ballot.

 <br>
Some Iraqis don't know who to vote for as most candidates keep their identities hidden, fearing for their lives.


Those who've made up their minds don't know where to cast their ballots, since the location of polling stations is being hushed up until the last minute to thwart election day attacks.


"We don't know these candidates, not their names, not their programs, not where they've come from. I will not vote for people I don't know," said Hussein Ali, a handyman in Baghdad.


"Until now, we don't know how to vote. I know there is an election center nearby, but I'm not sure exactly where it is."


Iraq's first national election since Saddam Hussein's fall will select a 275-seat National Assembly and 18 provincial assemblies.


But even Iraqis willing to brave bombs and bullets to vote may have little clue who they are electing until after the event, prompting veteran Iraqi politician Naseer Chaderji to label the Jan. 30 polls the first "secret elections" in history.


Voters will not be choosing individual politicians, but a list of candidates representing a party or coalition.


However threats mean most of the 7,500 candidates shy away from rallies. Only leading politicians dare appear on television.


In Iraq's third city of Mosul, the entire election staff resigned amid intimidation. Election officials in other cities have stepped down too. Seven have been killed, some dragged from their car in Baghdad in broad daylight and shot.


Salama al-Khafaji, openly running on the United Iraqi Alliance list, has survived three attempts on her life, the latest last week.


In the mixed Sunni and Shi'ite eastern province of Diyala, seven candidates have been killed in the past two months, said Governor Abdallah al-Jibouri, who is running in local polls and has himself survived 14 assassination attempts since mid-2003.


Of the 15 lists in Diyala's local election, only three blocs were campaigning openly and had released candidates' names.


"The other 12, we don't know who they are," Jibouri said. "The insurgents' aim is to use as much violence as they can to scare people into not going to the election."


Four candidates were invited to join a televised election debate on Diyala TV this month. Two people showed up -- the governor and a Communist Party official who was not running.


CLANDESTINE CAMPAIGNING


The secrecy shrouding Iraq's poll adds to confusion among a population that has almost no experience of choice in politics.

 <br>

Under Saddam Hussein, Iraqis had two options -- yes or no.

But the national ballot will offer a mind-boggling 111 lists, each comprising anywhere between 12 and 275 candidates.

A Dec. 26-Jan. 7 survey by the U.S.-funded International Republican Institute found that while 64.5 percent of Iraqis were very likely to vote, 38.4 percent thought they were electing a president not a national assembly.

"I know nothing about the people we are meant to elect. They don't tell us who they are or what their programs are," said Iman Jawdat, 41, a teacher from Basra in the south.

"Since I don't know how to vote or what will be on the ballot sheet, why should I risk the bombings?"

Racing to raise awareness, Iraq's Electoral Commission has taken out full-page ads in newspapers. Illustrated with cartoons, they show each step of the process from registration to voting to having their hands marked with indelible ink to prevent anyone voting twice.

"Iraqis haven't had real elections for over 30 years. Do you imagine we can raise full awareness in just six months?" said Commission official Farid Ayar.

Most campaigning takes the form of posters and banners bearing logos, slogans and list numbers, but no names.

Many urge Iraqis to vote for the United Iraqi Alliance, a 228-candidate Shi'ite list likely to dominate. Fewer than a fifth of its candidates have been named.

Slick commercials on satellite television urge Iraqis worried about security to vote for Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's list. Of its 260 candidates, 20 have publicized their names.

"They intentionally complicated the election so we don't understand and they can bring in pre-picked faces loyal to the Americans," said Jamal Ibrahim, 50, a shopkeeper from Falluja.

[Moses]

Bush hails Iraqi balloting, pledges continued support

By UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL

Published January 30, 2005

WASHINGTON -- President George W. Bush called Iraq's election Sunday a resounding success and reiterated continued U.S. support to stabilize the country.
     <br>    The statement, made in a live broadcast from the White House, came amid reports from Iraq of strong voter turnout to elect a transitional national assembly despite threats, intimidation and violence by terrorists and other rebel forces.
     <br>    Said Bush: "The world is hearing the voice of freedom from the center of the Middle East. In great numbers and under great risk Iraqis have shown their commit to democracy.
     <br>    "By participating in free elections, the Iraqi people have firmly rejected the anti-democratic ideology of the terrorists. They have refused to be intimidated by thugs and assassins."
     <br>    Actual voter turnout numbers were not immediately available, but eyewitness reports indicated many people participated nationwide in the process that will eventually lead to a permanent constitutional government. Even in Sunni Muslim areas, the prime target for intimidation, potential voters cast ballots.
     <br>    "The Iraqi people themselves made this election a resounding success," Bush said. There is more distance to travel on the road to democracy. And yet the Iraqis are proving they are equal to the challenge."
     <br>

[Moses]

Sun 30 Jan 2005
8:01pm (UK)
Blair Hails Iraqi Election Success[/size]

By David Stringer, PA, in Az Zubayr, southern Iraq, Andrew Woodcock and Caroline Gammell, PA

Millions of Iraqis today defied the threats of insurgents to go to the polls in the country’s first democratic elections for half a century.

Prime Minister Tony Blair said that the elections had dealt “a blow to the heart of global terrorism”, while US President George Bush hailed them as “a resounding success”.

But voting took place against a backdrop of violence and bloodshed, with at least 44 people killed by a string of suicide bombs, and an unknown number of British troops killed when an RAF Hercules transport plane crashed north of Baghdad.

Iraqi election officials said turn-out among the 14 million eligible voters appeared higher than the 57% that had been predicted, while UN officials described the process as “representative and fair”.

The Shia-dominated south and Kurdish north hailed the election as a spectacular success, claiming a turnout of as high as 70%.

But these relatively peaceful areas proved a stark contrast to the rebel towns of Fallujah and Ramadi, where insurgent violence stopped all attempts at polling.

Mr Blair said it was “moving and humbling” to see the determination and courage of Iraqis who turned out to vote despite threats from insurgents. Just days before the poll, fundamentalist militant Musab al-Zarqawi, believed to be linked to al-Qaida, issued a message that “if you vote, you die”.

“It may have been the force of arms that removed Saddam and created the circumstances in which Iraqis could vote, but it was the force of freedom that was felt throughout Iraq today,” said Mr Blair in a brief statement at 10 Downing Street.

“Democracy in Iraq is not just good for Iraq itself. It is also a blow right to the heart of the global terrorism that threatens destruction not just in Iraq but in Britain and virtually every major country around the world.”<br>
Speaking at the White House within hours of polling stations closing, Mr Bush said: “The world is hearing the voice of freedom from the centre of the Middle East.

“In great numbers and in great risk, Iraqis have shown their commitment to democracy.”

As evening fell, the streets of Iraq’s cities cleared for the election-day curfew, while polling officials counted ballot papers into the night.

The votes were being delivered by armed guard to regional centres tonight and will then be sent on for recounting in the capital.

With 111 lists of candidates for voters to chose from, it is still unclear when final results will be declared, with some estimating it could be weeks until those elected to the new 275-member national assembly are named.

The assembly will draft new laws and pave the way for further elections in December, when the people will decide on a fully constitutional government.

In the Kurdish north, polls were held to elect a separate, autonomous authority and across the country voters balloted for regional governments.

The catalogue of violence included two suicide bombers at opposite ends of Baghdad who killed at least ten voters and injured six more, while four policemen were reported dead in separate suicide attacks.

Bombers infiltrated their way into queues of people waiting to vote before detonating their devastating payloads.

In the Sadr City district, a further four were killed and seven wounded in a mortar attack on a voter centre.

Four others have been reported dead in Baghdad attacks and a guard was killed in an assassination attempt on the interim justice minister.

South of the capital, three people died in an explosion on a bus carrying Sunni Arabs to a polling station.

Explosions were reported in Mosul, Baquba and as far south as Basra, where voters flocked to polls.

In the southern town of Az Zubayr voters filled the air with a cacophony of song, chant and celebratory gunfire until nightfall.

Officials from the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq worked in the town’s counting centre with torches and candles, as electricity failed.

One official said: “Here we have had a very successful day.

“People from every region came to join our election here, some voters told us they had travelled days ago to be in Az Zubayr.

“Everyone was happy and excited, it has been a great day.”<br>
But Iraqis know that the violence and tension will not end today.

With Shiite Muslims – around 60% of the population – and the Kurdish community expected to dominate results, many are predicting further waves of violence from Sunni extremists.

Fears of poor representation for Sunni groups have fuelled attacks and led many moderates to snub the poll.

One Sunni walking past a crowded polling queue proudly showed off his fingers, unmarked by the ink used to stop people voting twice, and said: “I would never vote for this, it is an Iranian conspiracy.

“They want to take Iraq for their terrorists.”<br>
Iraq’s reformed police and military faced their biggest task since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, protecting voters alone, with coalition troops merely observing and handling supporting roles.

Three rigorous searches were conducted of every voter, borders had been sealed on Friday and movement between towns banned.

Nervous officers in the south often glanced up at British troops stationed along rooftops, hoping for reassurance that their actions were correct.

As a funeral procession crept past an election centre in Az Zubayr, anxious Iraqi soldiers forced open a casket, checking the corpse did not carry a hidden bomb.

With polls closed and votes being transported, anxious police dashed in their ageing, battered vehicles to respond to reports of gunfire.

Though some shots had been exchanged in anger, most were from jubilant voters, discharging round after round of celebratory fire into the evening air.

Iraq’s Interior Minister Falah al-Naqib said he expected foreign forces to leave the country within 18 months.

“We are building our forces and I think we will need 18 months, it’s my estimate that we will have quite a reasonable sized force, trained, well trained force, well equipped to protect the country,” he told Channel 4 News.

“So I believe very much that we won’t need more than 18 months.”<br>
Latest News:
  news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm

[Moses]

I'm just appalled by the cheerleading tone of US news coverage of the so-called elections in Iraq on Sunday. I said on television last week that this event is a "political earthquake" and "a historical first step" for Iraq. It is an event of the utmost importance, for Iraq, the Middle East, and the world. All the boosterism has a kernel of truth to it, of course. Iraqis hadn't been able to choose their leaders at all in recent decades, even by some strange process where they chose unknown leaders. But this process is not a model for anything, and would not willingly be imitated by anyone else in the region. The 1997 elections in Iran were much more democratic, as were the 2002 elections in Bahrain and Pakistan.

Moreover, as Swopa rightly reminds us all, the Bush administration opposed one-person, one-vote elections of this sort. First they were going to turn Iraq over to Chalabi within six months. Then Bremer was going to be MacArthur in Baghdad for years. Then on November 15, 2003, Bremer announced a plan to have council-based elections in May of 2004. The US and the UK had somehow massaged into being provincial and municipal governing councils, the members of which were pro-American. Bremer was going to restrict the electorate to this small, elite group.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani immediately gave a fatwa denouncing this plan and demanding free elections mandated by a UN Security Council resolution. Bush was reportedly "extremely offended" at these two demands and opposed Sistani. Bremer got his appointed Interim Governing Council to go along in fighting Sistani. Sistani then brought thousands of protesters into the streets in January of 2004, demanding free elections. Soon thereafter, Bush caved and gave the ayatollah everything he demanded. Except that he was apparently afraid that open, non-manipulated elections in Iraq might become a factor in the US presidential campaign, so he got the elections postponed to January 2005. This enormous delay allowed the country to fall into much worse chaos, and Sistani is still bitter that the Americans didn't hold the elections last May. The US objected that they couldn't use UN food ration cards for registration, as Sistani suggested. But in the end that is exactly what they did.

So if it had been up to Bush, Iraq would have been a soft dictatorship under Chalabi, or would have had stage-managed elections with an electorate consisting of a handful of pro-American notables. It was Sistani and the major Shiite parties that demanded free and open elections and a UNSC resolution. They did their job and got what they wanted. But the Americans have been unable to provide them the requisite security for truly aboveboard democratic elections.

With all the hoopla, it is easy to forget that this was an extremely troubling and flawed "election." Iraq is an armed camp. There were troops and security checkpoints everywhere. Vehicle traffic was banned. The measures were successful in cutting down on car bombings that could have done massive damage. But even these Draconian steps did not prevent widespread attacks, which is not actually good news. There is every reason to think that when the vehicle traffic starts up again, so will the guerrilla insurgency.

The Iraqis did not know the names of the candidates for whom they were supposedly voting. What kind of an election is anonymous! There were even some angry politicians late last week who found out they had been included on lists without their permission. Al-Zaman compared the election process to buying fruit wholesale and sight unseen. (This is the part of the process that I called a "joke," and I stand by that.)

This thing was more like a referendum than an election. It was a referendum on which major party list associated with which major leader would lead parliament.

Many of the voters came out to cast their ballots in the belief that it was the only way to regain enough sovereignty to get American troops back out of their country. The new parliament is unlikely to make such a demand immediately, because its members will be afraid of being killed by the Baath military. One fears a certain amount of resentment among the electorate when this reticence becomes clear.

Iraq now faces many key issues that could tear the country apart, from the issues of Kirkuk and Mosul to that of religious law. James Zogby on Wolf Blitzer wisely warned the US public against another "Mission Accomplished" moment. Things may gradually get better, but this flawed "election" isn't a Mardi Gras for Americans and they'll regret it if that is the way they treat it.



posted by Juan @ 1/30/2005 04:02:14 PM   

[camaxtle]

I'm in a quandary how to approach this whole election business. Why? Well I'm very pessimistic about the whole thing. I think it's a sham, and I think that probably more people outside of Iraq voted in the election than voted in Iraq. Plus the talk of Sunni, and Shia factions and majorities and minorities seems to say to me, get ready for civil war, especially when they people are already referring to the northern portion of Iraq as Kurdistan.
Will the Sunni's tolerate being governed by Shia's?
How will other neighboring countries with a Sunni minority in power react?
They say that this election has only proven that the "insurgents" lost. Maybe not. Maybe not at all. They still ended up killing 44 people in various attacks across the country. I think what will result is civil war. The Shia's and the Sunni's will go after one another, and the Kurds will hold the north, and we will be stuck in the middle not sure which side to support.
Or something that has crossed my mind, The Shia's Sunni's and Kurds put their differences aside and work together against the occupiers. That in my mind would be their best bet. Democracy could then prevail because the people are united against a common enemy and they are fighting for their self preservation, their right to decide for themselves how their country is going to be.
Democracy isn't something that you can just dump on someone and say "Here, be free". Democracy has to come from the people, from the roots. Our revolution is an excellent example. In that aspect this pretend election is nothing but pretend. Bush and others can claim victory all they want, but they see the world in simplistic terms. Black, white, good, evil. In time reality will intrude, and it won't be very pleasant when it does.

[Moses]

I don't think the Shia or Kurds are interested in power-sharing. In fact, what you hear from the Kurds, mostly, is their desire to get on with ethnic cleansing of the Arab population there. They (and their Israeli backers) are looking for independence from Iraq. Sistani was silent during the attacks on Fallujah, a silence that was noted by all. He was in favor of the elections and anticipated that his ticket would prevail.

The Americans resorted to fomenting a civil war and factional hostility and would likely simply provide death squads to their puppet/allies in the government to take down any opponents.

[Moses]

An historical precedent:

"U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote: Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror

by Peter Grose, Special to the New York Times (9/4/1967: p. 2)

"WASHINGTON, Sept. 3- United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.

"According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters-.. "

[Moses]

www.juancole.com/

Az-Zaman reports that 150,000 angry Iraqi Christians in Ninevah Province (Mosul) came out to protest on Monday. The ballot boxes arrived in their areas too late on Sunday, and they say they were promised that they could vote until 10 am Monday to give them time to cast the ballots. In the end, however, the Electoral Commission declined to make an exception for them, and they just won't get to vote. Iraqi Christians have been the victims of terrorist attacks, many have emigrated, and many fear Kurdish control over their regions. (see: www.nineveh.com/whoarewe.htm)

Turkmen and other groups in Mosul also bitterly complained that often ballot boxes did not arrive in time, or at all, depriving thousands of the franchise.

The Turkish government is clearly very worried about possible Kurdish control of the oil city of Kirkuk.

[Moses]

www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?emx=x&pid=2166


....The meaning of the vote in Iraq is another question entirely. It's not just a matter of the actual turnout -- how high in Shiite and Kurdish Iraq, how low in Sunni areas of the country, or what the irregularities were -- but of what exactly Iraqis were turning out for. Were they, for instance, voting not for George Bush's version of freedom, but to end the American occupation itself, as unembedded reporter Dahr Jamail suggests at his blog? Was it to grasp that will o' the wisp, a land that will not be a "republic of fear" in a place where "the only institutions… with real power are the US and UK military," as BBC reporter Rageth Omaar recently suggested in the British Guardian? Was it to end centuries of Sunni dominance and establish Shiite dominance (and so possibly cause a civil war); or, in Kurdish areas of the ! north, to establish the basis for future independence (and a possible Turkish intervention)?

And then there's that other question: Whatever Iraqis thought they were voting for at polling places where, due to security concerns, most didn't even know the names of the candidates, what exactly are they going to get from this election? Was it even possible, as Brian Whitaker asked in the Guardian, to achieve anything like a genuine democracy when the Bush administration has paid so little "attention to the slow and laborious business of creating the civil institutions that make elections meaningful"? Or was it, as Pepe Escobar suggested in the Asia Times, a means of further embedding American power in the country? ("[O]nly the naïve may believe that an imperial power would voluntarily abandon the dream scenario of a cluster of military bases planted over virtually unlimited reserves of oil.") Or might the Bush ! administration not even mind a post-election descent into something approaching civil war, as James Carroll of the Boston Globe suggested in a devastating column on the election and George Bush?

And what will be possible for a future Iraqi government in a land still occupied by a foreign army and a foreign power whose "advisers" are now emplaced in every important ministry, whose bases or "enduring camps" are now gargantuan, permanent structures, whose officials control much of the money that will be available to any new administration which will also face a fierce home-grown insurgency not about to go away any time soon? Still, Iraqis at the polls represented at least one modestly hopeful face of Iraq.....

Over a week ago, President Bush offered an official American face to the world when, in his inaugural speech, he plunked for the messianic global spread of "freedom" (as defined by his administration), essentially by force of (or the threat of) arms. But how different the face of America we see and the faces we turn to the rest of the world.

[Moses]

www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=3696


A voting plot staged by Kurds in Kirkuk has been revealed. One week before the elections, 110,000 Kurds moved back to Kirkuk en masse to vote. Ankara received information that these Kurds were placed in the Azadi and Rahimova ghettoes of Kirkuk ready for voting in the election.

The number of voters in Azadi on January 24 was 31 thousand and in Rahimova, 22,000. Within 6 days, the number of registrants in Azadi had sky rocketed to 90,000 and in Rahimova the numbers reached 76,149.

Officials of the Iraqi Turkoman Front said that they will document this situation and appeal to the Iraqi High Election Board.

Source: Hurriyet

Iraq
2005-02-05 05:17:16