| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Looking Beyond Maliki (Krauthammer) |
| 2007-08-31 |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #3 That's what I like about Rantburg - analysis. Thanks, Anonymoose! |
| Posted by: Bobby 2007-08-31 16:25 |
| #2 Maliki became PM precisely because he was a “uniter” of Shiites. However, the situation has changed to *some* degree, in that a new division among Shiites is evolving. On one side are the “secular, nationalist” Shiites; and on the other, are the “religious, pan-Shiites”, who are closely aligned with the Iranian Shiites. This is why Maliki now appears to be weak, and has been largely abandoned by most everyone, because the momentum now is on Shiite division, not unity. The non-Shiites are wisely abandoning him to protect themselves. But here is where things get interesting. Now that re-alignment is happening, we must discover where power is shifting to. In this, the real players are hoping that if there is a full split among Shiites, that a new political coalition can emerge, with a more balanced government. The natural inclination is that this should point to new elections. But ironically, in this case, new elections should not be used to create a new majority, but should only come about once a new majority has come into being. It seems like a cart-before-the-horse scenario, but in this case, it is easier to form a coalition before an election than after the people have spoken. That is, there will be greater stability in the long run if a coalition is formed, and guarantees made, before the election. For example, even though Sunnis to a great extent boycotted the last election, they still got significant representation in parliament. But since then, so many have fled the country that after a new election, they could even lose seats. And while this might be technically “fair”, it would also be very destabilizing. Unless they had power guarantees from the new coalition before the election. This might even make it possible for some Sunnis to return from adjacent countries, where they now live as refugees. It has been noted that the “secular, nationalists” of all groups are gaining in strength in Iraq, at the expense of the religious parties and the pro-Iranians. So even though the easy solution might be for early elections, it might be better in the long run to wait and see who will dominate in the future. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-08-31 12:18 |
| #1 How about looking beyond magic fixes ("friendly" autocrats and/or "democratization") to Jihad? |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-08-31 09:10 |