Posted on 07/31/2007 4:07:23 AM PDT by leadpenny
31 minutes ago
BAGHDAD - Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki faces a revolt within his party by factions that want him out as Iraqi leader, according to officials in his office and the political party he leads.
Ibrahim al-Jaafari, al-Maliki's predecessor, leads the challenge and already has approached leaders of the country's two main Kurdish parties, parliament's two Sunni Arab blocs and lawmakers loyal to powerful Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Al-Jaafari's campaign, the officials said, was based on his concerns that al-Maliki's policies had led Iraq into turmoil because the prime minister was doing too little to promote national reconciliation.
The former prime minister also has approached Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq's top Shiite cleric, proposing a "national salvation" government to replace the al-Maliki coalition. The Iranian-born al-Sistani refused to endorse the proposal, the officials said.
"Al-Jaafari is proposing a national and nonsectarian political plan to save the nation," said Faleh al-Fayadh, a Dawa party lawmaker familiar with the former prime minister's contacts.
Other officials, however, said al-Jaafari had only an outside chance of replacing or ousting al-Maliki. But they said the challenge could undermine al-Maliki and further entangle efforts at meeting important legislative benchmarks sought by Washington. They spoke of the sensitive political wrangling only on condition of anonymity.
The officials would not give details of the rift between al-Maliki and al-Jaafari, saying only that it began two months ago when a Dawa party congress voted to replace al-Jaafari with al-Maliki as its leader.
Al-Jaafari and other senior Dawa members are questioning the legality of that vote and the former prime minister has since boycotted all official party functions, said al-Fayadh.
The usually secretive Dawa, which is made up of two factions, has 25 of parliament's 275 seats but draws its strength from being a key faction of a large Shiite alliance.
Ali al-Dabbagh, the government's spokesman, declined to comment on the rift between al-Maliki and al-Jaafari, arguing that it was a matter for the Dawa to deal with.
"There should be no objections for a figure like al-Jaafari to try and put together a new political bloc provided that this will be of service to the political process," he said.
Al-Maliki, a tough-talking Islamist, has so far failed to make significant progress on some of Iraq's major problems 14 months after his "national unity" government took office. Security remains tenuous in much of the country, services are near collapse and soaring crime and unemployment continue to take their toll.
Al-Jaafari's own record in office was not any better, but al-Jaafari was widely perceived as an open-minded Islamist who is at total ease dealing with his American backers.
To the Sunni Arabs he is courting now, the officials said, al-Jaafari was proposing a change in Iraq's sectarian, power-sharing formula. He wants the president's job, now held by Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, to be given to a Sunni Arab to achieve a better balance between Iraq's ethnic and religious factions and to improve ties with Arab nations.
To win the support of the Kurds, al-Jaafari is pledging the implementation of a clause in the constitution that provides for a referendum before the end of 2007 on the fate of Kirkuk, an oil-rich city in northern Iraq that the Kurds want to annex.
To compensate them for the loss of the presidency, al-Jaafari is proposing that they fill the post of parliament speaker, now occupied by a Sunni Arab.
Al-Jaafari's bid to topple al-Maliki runs counter to ongoing negotiations to form what is being billed an "alliance of the moderates" that would include the country's four largest Shiite and Kurdish parties and independent Shiites. It excludes hardline Shiites and Sunni Arabs.
It also comes at a time when al-Maliki is facing a threat by the largest Sunni Arab bloc to pull its ministers from his coalition unless he meets a long list of demands, which include overtures to minority Sunni Arabs, political inclusion and commitment to human rights.
Al-Maliki also has to contend with mounting pressure from Washington to meet a host of political benchmarks that should place Iraq's rival factions on the road to reconciliation.
AP, huh
.. couldn’t find any facts spewed out by Cindy Sheehan I guess
Dolt!
You got a problem with it? Take it up with the mods.
In spite of there having been elections in Iraq, the government leaders behave (and are expected by most Iraqis that they will behave) like U.S. Dimorats - all politics all the time.
Until someone in Iraq steps forward as, and can build a national following as, an Iraqi first and a Shia, Sunni or Kurd second, that will not change.
If any nation needs true Federalism (in the manner our founders intended) more than the U.S., it is Iraq.
sorry leadpenny,,I posting at the article, not you
I apologize for using a disparaging remark, but it still seems like a serious article, and to me it shows just how intractable the situation is in Iraq.
can almost guess who wants a revolt....
SNIP:
The report said that “the prime minister’s office has on a number of occasions intervened on cases involving political supporters.”
An al-Maliki adviser acknowledged to NBC that the problem of corruption in Iraq is “huge,” but denied that al-Maliki’s office has intervened in investigations. He said the prime minister is working hard to minimize the problem.
The draft report obtained by NBC said the Iraqi Ministry of Health, which oversees the country’s hospitals, is in the “grip” of the Mahdi Army, the anti-American militia run by Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
“Contract fraud and employee theft of medicines, food, vehicles are viewed by investigators as the greatest problems,” the report said, adding that “military sources have reported that the Mehdi Army [sic] finances operations from diverted medicines.”
/SNIP
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20043428/
Don’t know if I’d put Iraq in the same league as Israel and GB when it comes to functioning governments?
You’ve got your bearings straight. Just ignore the sheep. They will walk to slaughter while telling everyone there is no such thing as sheep slaughters anymore.
Of course Iraq is not in the same league. Iraq only has less than 3 years of democarcy. No match to GB and Israel.
Jaafary was a terrible PM and it was during his time that the militias flourished. He is the one who conveniently ‘lost’ the legal murder case against Sadr in return for Sadr’s support for Jaafary’s re-election.
BAGHDAD — Iraq’s largest Sunni Arab political bloc announced its withdrawal from the government Wednesday, undermining Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s efforts to seek reconciliation among the country’s rival factions.
Violence continued unabated, with 50 people killed and 60 wounded when a homicide attacker exploded a fuel truck near a gas station in western Baghdad. Another 17 died in a separate car bomb attack in a central region of the capital. The U.S. military announced the deaths of three American soldiers killed by a sophisticated, armor-piercing bomb.
Rafaa al-Issawi, a leading member of the Front, said at a news conference in the capital that the bloc’s six Cabinet ministers would submit their resignations later in the day.
Al-Issawi said the decision to pull out from the government followed what he called al-Maliki’s failure to respond to a set of demands put forward by the Accordance Front last week, when it gave the prime minister seven days to meet its demands. The ultimatum expired Wednesday.
Among the demands: a pardon for security detainees not charged with specific crimes, the disbanding of militias and the participation of all groups represented in the government in dealing with security issues.
(Story continues below)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291669,00.html
Sorry, but its not "democracy in action", even though it appears so.
It is the same power-holder struggle, and that struggle springs not from true policy differences or any belief in a "better way", but a desire to obtain the personal and social-group perks of power, power over others (that is all that the entire Middle East Arab political class knows, in every country in the Middle East).
At this point, even the Iraqi "public" has no realization yet of the real power they have been given in Iraq. Their attachments to the candidates have no more true political-philosophy, policy proscription, or values concerning how the government should operate behind them than is believed by the candidates themselves - which is none.
Those attachments are, in true Middle East fashion, fashioned on the belief that "if I side with this guy and he gets power in some fashion then he will be able to get something delivered by some treasury to me, to my group, to "our group". It is the politics of balkinization and constant factionalism endemic to Arab society and played out geopolitically in the fact that every Arab summit statement of "unity" in the entire modern era has, and has had as much value and shelf life as the air with which the words announcing the agreements were spoken. It is all for show and any true "agreements" (which are always behind the scenes) are bought and paid for, and usually in cold hard cash - and are not real actionable demonstrations of Arab "unity".
The Iraqi people and their leaders have been given a chance to rise above the cultural and social deficiencies that have kept the entire Middle East politically and economically underdeveloped. So, far, their leaders have demonstrated they are not up to the task.
Fortunately, the war that is going on to protect those leaders, the war on the ground, the war in small towns and villages all around Iraq continues to demonstrate the willingness of very local leaders to step forward in greater and greater means of assistance to the coalition and Iraqi military forces. That counter-insurgency effort is now, finally, making great success in producing the sense among local leaders that this fight is theirs and they are stepping up to join it and help it succeed for their communities. They may also supply (hopefully in less than a generation) a new-generation of political leaders and political organizations, built like the counter-insurgency program itself - from the ground up. If that were to happen, those leaders would have a chance to change the political landscape in Iraq and demonstrate a path for change to Arabs around the Middle East. Why, because it is at that level, at the local counter-insurgency-fight level (more than the "national" level), that Sunni, Shia and Kurd are forming working coalitions to defeat the terrorists and the sectarian insurgents. New, non-sectarian political organizations could evolve from those associations.
That type of demonstration is not within the capacities of any of the current Iraqi leaders; they are too invested in the political modalities that simply repeat failed cultural templates, and produce new failures.
I lived in Saudi Arabia and studies Islam, the culture and history of the Middle-East. I am no expert, but I think that Islam also inhibits the growth of a free and pluralistic society. It is not impossible, but Islam is in effect their culture. Unlike Western culture, there is little or no civic virtue outside of Islam. Also, there is a sense among the people there that fate (Allah) constantly controls their lives. We believe in free will in the West, they think Allah controls their fate.
Islam is an aggressive faith vis-a-vis other faiths. Most Muslims don’t seek to kill us and convert the world, but a goodly minority does.
Having said all that, I do think that with the election process, and the people having a voice in their leadership, it does require leaders to be concerned for the voters. Compromise will be hard, but some has been made. More must take place to avoid sectarian violence.
Excellent contributions from Wulli and George!
There is obviously a crisis among political leaders in Iraq. They have yet to learn to compromise and work together to achieve the minimum possible. There is this hated habit of ‘pulling out’ every time there is some problem. It seems to be restricted to Arab politics only. Every time some group or party doesn’t like what’s going on, they pull out of the forum they are in, which is totally counter-productive. Prior to this ‘Accord front’ pull out, there was another pull out from what is called ‘Dialogue front’ (funny how they choose their names) which is headed by Salih Mutlig. They said that they will keep away from parliament as long as their demands are not met. They then added that if there is a critical vote in parliament, then they will come back! In other word, they are saying to their follow MPs go ahead on whatever legislation you are working on, but if you deal with something serious, we will come back and screw it up for you! What kind of logic is that?
Yes there is alot of hard work among the military (Iraqis and Americans) and among local leaders. But the politicians in the Green Zone have been a terrible failure (most of them anyway).
I can’t wait for the next election (late 2009 I think) as I am pretty sure that this uselss lot will be swept aside.
“I can’t wait for the next election (late 2009 I think) as I am pretty sure that this uselss lot will be swept aside.”
That - late 2009 - is less than 24 months away. My guess is that the development of political positions “from the grass-roots up”, will not, by then, bear enough fruit from the local leaders who are stepping up against the terrorists and sectarian insurgents.
They will still - in 2009 - be busy helping to bring to greater success the counter-terrorism task.
The one position they will be in is to begin the process of locally-derived pressure on the current generation of leaders; because they, the local leaders building local consensus with the counter-insurgency operations, will have obtained the status and local leadership role from their communities.
I believe that when a certain level of stability against the terrorists and sectarian insurgents is achieved (it will NEVER END 100%) - and only then - that the natural rise of local leaders and their non-sectarian coalitions will be ready to reach for national roles.
The U.S. job will be most effective if its focus is primarily divided with the greatest amount of constant military focus at the local level in the counter-insurgency operations and only in the final critical analysis securing the people in national leadership roles and the institutions of the national government; only so far as to insure its survival and general functioning. The rest of the job is political and must be built up from the local leaders winning the counter-insurgency and from them into the national institutions. That will take more than 24 months from now to actually begin and more than one election cycle before Iraqi national politics begins to change from being centered on thugish power-holders whose main ambitions are no higher than simply having power for the sake of having power.
Actually, local leaders might get prominence even before the end of this year. There is local elections pending throughout Iraq. No date yet, but I understand that these local council elections have to be done before the end of this year. This is going to be very interesting indeed as there has been quite alot of change in the geopolitical landscape in the last few months, especially in the western sunni areas. This might explain the erratic behavior of some of the sunni blocs in parliament. They know that their dominance is being threatened by new groups in Anbar and elsewhere. So that’s why they are trying hard to achieve as much as they could before they loose prominence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.