| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Iranian Democracy in Iraq! |
| 2010-01-20 |
| [Asharq al-Aswat] It seems that the process of democratization in Iraq is evolving quickly; however, without doubt, it is evolving in the wrong direction. What does it mean when the Debathification commission, or what is now known as the Justice and Accountability Commission, is trying to break up all Iraqi political blocs that disagree with the Iranian program in Iraq, or oppose Tehran's allies in Iraq who have power and authority, before the upcoming Iraqi elections? The accusation that is always on hand is affiliation to the Baath party or sympathizing with it, call it what you like. Or [the commission just] carries out arrests and raids [against them]. After head of the National Dialogue Front Saleh al Mutlak and his bloc was targeted and banned from taking part in the forthcoming Iraqi elections on the pretext of sympathizing with the Baathists, (and this was said to be based on a joke between Mutlak and someone else), around 500 Iraqi figures were also banned [from participating in the forthcoming elections] including the Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul Qader Obaidi. Dr. Iyad Allawi considers this political, and expansion of the circle of revenge, as this will lead to a state of chaos, not a state of law. Therefore, when we say that the process of democratization in Iraq is evolving quickly but in the wrong direction [it is because] it is clear to us today that the Debathification commission, or the Justice and Accountability Commission, has come to resemble Iran's Guardian Council, which approves who is eligible to run in Iranian presidential elections. The difference is that the Iranian Guardian Council says whose nomination it accepts on an individual basis, whereas the Iraqi Commission is more comprehensive as its task is to tighten the grip on political blocs as well as on Iraqi political figures. It would have been easier for the Debathification commission, or whatever it's called, to say who can run in the upcoming elections instead of [letting] the list of banned [candidates] accused of being affiliated or sympathizing with the Baathists in Iraq reach a number that may exceed thousands. This is not sarcasm but the truth. The ongoing process of banning Iraqi entities and figures has become barefaced political maneuvering, and widening of the circle of revenge and deepening the authority of a group at the expense of all Iraqi components in the name of democratization. This kind of democracy only resembles the kind of distorted democracy that we are seeing in Iran; the results of which have led to oppression of the people, killing and imprisonment of women not to mention men and youth, and the accusation of being an agent for Israel and the West that is cast against anyone who challenges the authority. [They are also accused of] being against God and religion if they go against the instruction of the Supreme Guide to the extent that in Iran it is now against the law to use mobile phones or email to demonstrate opposition against Ahmedinejad's regime. The difference between the Guardian Council and the Justice and Accountability Commission, which is entrusted with uprooting Baathism, is that the latter wants to learn from the mistakes made in Iran by carrying out pre-emptive operations before the upcoming Iraqi elections to hunt down those who oppose Iran's influential allies in Iraq today before they succeed at the ballot box, which would make the process of removing them more difficult. Otherwise, Iran's allies in Iraq would be forced to pursue their opponents on the streets just as the Mullahs are doing today to the opposition in Iran. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #8 Iraq will never be a superpower. At best they will be a regional power, second to Israel. But more likely, it seems to me, Iraq and Iran will continue their rivalry. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-01-20 19:58 |
| #7 Glenmore: an Arab has family loyalty and loyalty to Islam (because it fits his kin advantage instincts perfectly). The pertinent consequence in this particular instant is that there is a very intense competition for domination among prominent Shia clans---the prize, in their eyes, is dominance of Iraq for ever. In that competition: (i)These who have Iranian backing have an immense advantage (Because USA refused to interfere, or even acknowledge the true state of affairs---Bush & co never bothered to learn anything about Arabs). (ii) Know that Iranians can easily find a replacement, should they prove unsatisfactory. Of course they plan to betray Iran in the future. But, meanwhile, when Ahmi says frog... p.s. What economy? Iraq has no economy. It has a lot of oil---underground. Getting it to markets (no money otherwise) may prove a, tad, difficult. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-01-20 15:02 |
| #6 Strategery! |
| Posted by: Black Bart Ebberens7700 2010-01-20 12:11 |
| #5 Iran's power will dwindle. Iraq may become a superpower. Iraq may become the most powerful Shia country on the planet. Posted by newc Behold! The "W" & Cheney plan. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-01-20 10:52 |
| #4 Moose hit it on the point. Iran's power will dwindle. Iraq may become a superpower. Iraq may become the most powerful Shia country on the planet. |
| Posted by: newc 2010-01-20 10:48 |
| #3 There are two ways to look at this, if what being done is unfair. This is one angle, but the other is not pro-Iranian, but anti-Sunni. Just because Shiites don't like Sunnis doesn't mean they like Iranians. And there are a heck of a lot of Iraqi Shiites who clearly see the Iranians as the enemy. To the point where it's not about the Iranian government, but the Iranian people. Finally, the sword cuts both ways. Every Iranian who visits Iraq, unless he is a hard liner, gets to see a form of government better than that of the Mullahs back home. And back home in Iran, he probably tells all his friends how much better it is. This is deadly to the reign of the Mullahs. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-01-20 09:01 |
| #2 grom, I don't see Iraq as an Iranian satellite. Too big, for one. And a stronger (or soon to be stronger) economy - which the greater Iraqi freedom will ultimately strengthen even further. Plus the need the rest of the Arab world has for a buffer (and tribes trump sects.) Good chance Iraq has more oil too (hard to say for sure.) Then there's the whole Iranian nuke thing - at some point that's likely to blow up in Iran's face (so to speak.) The only thing I see favoring the Iranians is that the Iranian people have a more recent history of intelligent behavior (inventions, cities, universities, etc. - of course many of those very things seem to be at the core of most of our own problems!) Recent developments in Iran might make one concerned about Iran ultimately becoming a satellite of Iraq! |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-01-20 08:49 |
| #1 Iraq is rapidly becoming Iranian satellite. That was a foregone conclusion [1,2]once Iraqis were allowed to vote. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-01-20 02:09 |