Iraq: Is This A Case of "Where is My Vote"? (Visser)

It is now seven weeks after Iraq's national election, and the democratic process has now evolved/devolved into a series of legal and political manoeuvres by rival factions to weaken their opponents. Reidar Visser reports on the latest developments:

Iraq’s powerful de-Baathification committee has dealt another blow to the idea of democracy in Iraq: After many conflicting reports over the weekend, it is becoming increasingly clear that the board’s attempt to de-Baathify 55 of the replacement candidates for other candidates that were themselves de-Baathified has been sustained by the special judicial board for the elections, along with an acceptance of its proposal to annul the personal votes for these candidates instead of transferring them to their [party's] list.

With respect to the politics of this, the de-Baathification committee...is largely controlled by the pro-Iranian Iraqi National Alliance, whereas the special judicial board for the elections is seen as leaning towards Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki after its decision to allow a Baghdad recount. The main victim of these decisions, Iraqiyya [led by former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and the coalition with the largest number of Parliamentary seats from the elections], has no significant influence in either body. The Kurdish chief of the elections commission (IHEC), Faraj al-Haydari, had previously expressed his distaste for the idea of annulling the votes altogether.


Because of the messy process in which candidates were struck from the ballots right until the last minute, it is still unclear exactly which individuals are subject to the new decision. Seat-winning candidates that could be in trouble include Ibrahim al-Mutlak, the replacement candidate for Salih al-Mutlak [the head of the Iraqi Front for National Dialogue, the second largest Sunni party], who got some 5,400 personal votes and a seat in Baghdad. The same situation may possibly apply for candidate number two for Iraqiyya in Anbar, another Mutlak (Hamid Abid), who was not listed on most IHEC lists prior to the election and therefore may have also been a replacement candidate --– in this case representing some 14,700 personal votes.

Crucially, these examples show that this is about more than candidates –-- it is also about voters. Here we have two examples and some 20,000 Iraqis whose votes may simply be stolen from them, according to procedures that are not based on any law or even any IHEC regulation. In particular, the decision to penalise voters who used the open-list system, annulling their active use of the ballot (a passive list vote would not have been cancelled), risks putting the whole idea of democracy in disrepute in Iraq.

The de-Baathified candidates have been given one month to complain the decision – another ad hoc legal concoction by IHEC and something which firmly pushes certification of the results towards June, regardless of what happens to the Baghdad recount as well as further demands for recounts by the Kurds in some of the northern governorates (which apparently remain pending).

Iraq: An Open Letter to Iraqi People from Two US Soldiers on the "Collateral Murder" Video

Earlier this month, we featured the "Collateral Murder" video, footage obtained and disseminated by Wikileaks of a 2007 US attack that killed Iraqi civilians and Reuters journalists. Two soldiers in the American unit depicted in that video have now written an open letter to the Iraqi people:

Peace be with you.

To all of those who were injured or lost loved ones during the July 2007 Baghdad shootings depicted in the "Collateral Murder" Wikileaks video:

US Military & Iraq’s Civilians: The “Collateral Murder” Video (Full & Short Versions)

We write to you, your family, and your community with awareness that our words and actions can never restore your losses.

We are both soldiers who occupied your neighborhood for 14 months. Ethan McCord pulled your daughter and son from the van, and when doing so, saw the faces of his own children back home. Josh Stieber was in the same company but was not there that day, though he contributed to the your pain, and the pain of your community on many other occasions.


There is no bringing back all that was lost. What we seek is to learn from our mistakes and do everything we can to tell others of our experiences and how the people of the United States need to realize what have done and are doing to you and the people of your country. We humbly ask you what we can do to begin to repair the damage we caused.

We have been speaking to whoever will listen, telling them that what was shown in the Wikileaks video only begins to depict the suffering we have created. From our own experiences, and the experiences of other veterans we have talked to, we know that the acts depicted in this video are everyday occurrences of this war: this is the nature of how U.S.-led wars are carried out in this region.

We acknowledge our part in the deaths and injuries of your loved ones as we tell Americans what we were trained to do and carried out in the name of "god and country." The soldier in video said that your husband shouldn't have brought your children to battle, but we are acknowledging our responsibility for bringing the battle to your neighborhood, and to your family. We did unto you what we would not want done to us.

More and more Americans are taking responsibility for what was done in our name. Though we have acted with cold hearts far too many times, we have not forgotten our actions towards you. Our heavy hearts still hold hope that we can restore inside our country the acknowledgment of your humanity, that we were taught to deny.

Our government may ignore you, concerned more with its public image. It has also ignored many veterans who have returned physically injured or mentally troubled by what they saw and did in your country. But the time is long overdue that we say that the value of our nation's leaders no longer represent us. Our secretary of defense may say the U.S. won't lose its reputation over this, but we stand and say that our reputation's importance pales in comparison to our common humanity.

With such pain, friendship might be too much to ask. Please accept our apology, our sorrow, our care, and our dedication to change from the inside out. We are doing what we can to speak out against the wars and military policies responsible for what happened to you and your loved ones. Our hearts are open to hearing how we can take any steps to support you through the pain that we have caused.

Solemnly and Sincerely,

Josh Stieber, former specialist, U.S. Army
Ethan McCord, former specialist, U.S. Army

UPDATED Iraq Analysis: At Least 69 Killed in Bombings

UPDATE 25 APRIL: An intriguing sign of the political effects of the latest bombing came on Saturday with the offer of Moqtada al-Sadr of his Mahdi Army to help the Iraqi government maintain security.



Al-Sadr's gesture points to his strengthened political position. From being the target of military attacks and even assassination attempts, he now is one of the leading players in Iraqi politics, thanks to the strong showing of the Sadrists in the March elections.

In the deadliest attacks in Iraq this year, at least 69 people were killed on Friday in six explosions, four in Shi'a areas and two in Sunni.


The sweep of the bombings points to an attacker who is not just seeking sectarian vengeance, and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki was quick to blame Al Qa'eda in Iraq: "The cowardly terrorist attacks...were intended to cover the great success achieved by the security forces through the killing of the leaders of wickedness and terrorism, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi and Abu Ayyub al-Masri."

Al-Baghdadi and al-Masri, leaders of Al Qa'eda in Iraq and Islamic State of Iraq, were allegedly slain last weekend by Iraqi security forces.

Al-Maliki's statement may have logic behind it, but it also has political motive. It is now seven weeks since the March Presidential election, and Iraq is no closer to a resolution. While a court decision this week gave al-Maliki a boost with the order of a recount of some ballots, the current Prime Minister is far from certain that he can retain his post.

The announcement of the killings of al-Baghdadi and al-Masri should have given a boost to al-Maliki's claim of his authority, even in unclear political times. Conversely, Friday's assault --- for which no one has yet claimed responsibility --- undermines the argument that al-Maliki's Government can assure security.

Iraq Update: Does the Sadr Referendum Change Outlook for Prime Minister?

The Majlis blog rounds up the latest news. The main effect of the referendum of the Sadrists, who have the most representatives in the third-placed Iraqi National Alliance, is to delay rather than advance the selection of a Prime Minister. Neither of the top candidates, Nuri Al-Maliki (State of Law) or Iyad Allawi (Iraqiya) won significant support. Personally, I can't see the "Jaafari compromise", floated here, as an alternative at this point, and does this development really make Moqtada al-Sadr a kingmaker?

US Military & Iraq’s Civilians: The “Collateral Murder” Video (Full & Short Versions)

Ibrahim al-Jaafari won the Sadrist movement's referendum on the next prime minister, with 24 percent of the roughly 1.5 million ballots cast.



Jaafar al-Sadr, the son of Dawa party founder Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr, placed second with 23 percent of the vote; Qusay as-Suhail, a Sadrist MP (and rumored candidate for the PM job), placed third with 17 percent.

Nouri al-Maliki was fourth, with 10 percent, and Iyad Allawi placed fifth with 9 percent (full results in English are here).

The referendum has no binding legal authority; the Sadrist leadership says it's merely a way to gauge public opinion. Jaafari is trying to position himself as something of a compromise candidate, a third party who wasn't involved in the pre-election fighting between Allawi and Maliki; the referendum gives him a boost.

The results of the referendum are clearly a roadblock to an alliance between Maliki's State of Law movement and the Sadrists (and, by extension, the Iraqi National Alliance). Maliki and Jaafari have an unpleasant history, and tensions remain despite recent efforts to bury the hatchet. Maliki won't be happy if the Sadrists condition their support on Jaafari's installation as prime minister.

Reidar Visser notes that Jaafari might also be unacceptable to the Kurdish parties:

Back in 2006 he was the PM nominee that was "unacceptable" to the Kurds, which led to his replacement by Maliki (who in turn ended up being seen as equally "unacceptable" by many Kurds).

Jaafari held a meeting yesterday with representatives from the Iraqiyya coalition; he issued a statement afterwards endorsing a government "formed without excluding any political component."

US Military & Iraq's Civilians: The "Collateral Murder" Video (Full & Short Versions)

UPDATE 7 APRIL, 1118 GMT: We are adding the full, uncut 38-minute video of the incident . We do so after The Weekly Standard, trying to discredit WikiLeaks, put out the false story that the organisation had edited the video to distort the record of events, implying that the unedited version had been buried. The New York Times repeated the lie. (The full video has been available all the time on the "Collateral Murder" site.)



The US military says, "We're attempting to retrieve the video from the unit who did the investigation."

This is the abridged version of the video obtained by WikiLeaks and released at a press conference today. It claims to show the killing of civilians in Iraq by US military forces in 2007. Wikileaks' coverage also has interviews with families of the killed, supporting documents, and the full 38-minute video.

(Warning: Images are graphic.)

FULL VERSION




SHORT VERSION