A flurry of media reports has pointed to a supposedly eroding
support base for Iraq’s premier Nouri al-Maliki.
For example, an Associated Press piece last week
entitled “Al-Maliki Quickly Losing Trust in Iraq” characterized the
“root” of the current “stand-off” in Iraqi politics as the
“unresolved power struggle between Iraq’s three main groups: the
majority Shiites and minority Sunnis and Kurds.”
The AP report added that “Al-Maliki, a Shiite, is under fire for
breaking promises to share power with his partners in a unity
government that includes the Sunni-dominated Iraqiya bloc, Kurdish
parties and loyalists of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada Al
Sadr.’
What the AP report and other news organizations have in mind is
the current talk of a no-confidence vote against the premier. The
MPs who are raising this prospect include members of Iraqiya — led
by Maliki’s rival Ayad Allawi and featuring the Speaker of the
Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi — Massoud Barzani and Muqtada al-Sadr,
both of whom are allies in Maliki’s coalition.
On this basis, al-Arabiya writer Musa Keilani
declared that Maliki “is facing an alliance of four major
political blocs in a confrontation that could bring down his
government and produce a new interim prime minister.”
However, these reports are generally based on sensationalist
narratives, and in the case of the AP, there is too much focus on
the sectarian paradigm. None of this is to deny that the four
aforementioned figures in Iraqi politics have publicly criticized
the prime minister and are toying with the idea of a no-confidence
vote, but the evidence suggests that Maliki is likely to emerge
from this crisis unscathed.
To begin with, the media reports overlook internal divisions
within the factions of Maliki’s opponents. In particular, Iraqiya
can only be called a political bloc in the loosest sense of the
word. It is a coalition that is torn by infighting, with constant
reports of defections and splits, something that was partly the
reason behind the bloc’s eventual decision at the end of January to
end its boycott of the parliament.
In addition, certain key members of Iraqiya such as the deputy
Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, who in December issued overblown
statements comparing Maliki to Saddam, have effectively reconciled
with Maliki.
This is not to say that the concerns over Maliki’s behavior
raised by members of the opposition are not justified. One can
point to many signs of monopolization of power in the premier’s
hands. For example, he is still maintaining his hold on the
positions of defense and interior ministers that should have been
granted to Allawi’s bloc as per the Arbil agreement forged by
Barzani. Further,
as Judith S. Yaphe points out, “As the U.S. military, in
particular the U.S. Special Forces, transferred responsibility to
their Iraqi counterparts, Maliki created several special brigades
within the army as counter-terrorism brigades and moved them out of
the defense ministry to report directly to him.” None of this,
however, makes Maliki the equivalent of Saddam.
Amid the talk of a no-confidence vote,
Al-Sumaria News reported that several MPs from Iraqiya came out
in support of the premier, including Ibrahim
al-Muhairi — an Arab MP from Kirkuk — and Yassin al-Obeidi,
also from Kirkuk. Meanwhile, the Iraqiya Hurra bloc,
which in April split from the White Iraqi National Movement (a
bloc that defected from Iraqiya last year), has urged lawmakers
from Ninawa, Salah ad-Din, and Diyala, among other places, to
reject a no-confidence vote against the premier.
This Sunni Arab and Iraqiya support for Maliki — undermining
the AP’s obsession with sectarianism — exists for two reasons.
First, these backers appreciate Maliki’s stance on dealing with the
Kurds, towards whom Maliki has adopted a delicate and careful
carrot-and-stick approach.
While the premier has made a number of concessions (e.g.
allowing the Peshmerga to annex the disputed Khanaqin district in
Diyala province last year), he is also perceived to have taken
tough stances on issues like Kirkuk and what is considered to be
illegal exportation of oil by the Kurdistan Regional
Government, such that he is seen by many Shi’a and Sunni Arabs as
someone who will preserve Iraq’s territorial integrity. This was
the rationale given by the Iraqiya MPs who signed a statement in
support of maintaining Maliki’s position as premier.
Second, there is growing frustration among Iraqiya members with
Allawi, who spends much of his time abroad and is detached not only
from the situation on the ground but also from ordinary members and
supporters of his own bloc.
As for Muqtada al-Sadr, it is certainly true that he has made
numerous fiery statements against the premier, declaring in Najaf
that the move to withdraw confidence from Maliki’s government is an
act of “divine
will.”
However, as is the case with Iraqiya, members of the Sadrist
movement have come out in support of Maliki. This includes Grand
Ayatollah Kazem al-Haeri, who, viewed as a spiritual leader by many
Sadrists,
issued a fatwa against voting for secular candidates and
implicitly forbidding withdrawal of support for Maliki.
Jack in Wi| 6.19.12 @ 6:35AM
6000 Americans dead, 40,000 seriously wounded, trillions wasted, millions of Iraqi's, dead, wounded, and displaced, the ancient Christian community, murdered, displaced, and dispersed. All this so a Shia dictator, friend of Iran, can replace a Sunni dictator, that was the balance in the neighborhood. This was some mission acomplished. To hell with Bush, Cheney, the Clintons, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice and all the neocons.
John786| 6.19.12 @ 6:49AM
Maliki: The phrase 'fiddling while rome burns' best sums up things. Iraq badly needs a serious concensus figure.
MelvinNC| 6.19.12 @ 7:10AM
Well my brothers look at the bright side of this situation. At least Maliki is in good company with the current White House resident.
I have spent some time in the middle east. I've even had the chance to converse with some Iranians that left that Godforsaken area of the world.
You know the average person over there just wants to be left the hell alone to worship as they chose, go to work and raise their families.
But !Oh hell no, some people or groups just cannot accept that fact. They got to be stirring crap up all the time to keep the people in fear or keeping their emotions at a fever pitch.
The reason you live in a middle eastern slum is because of the Infidels. "The why do you live in a sumptuous villa, while I live in a slum?" "Uhhh, uhhh, oh yes because Allah wills it."
Then we go over there all in the name of freeing these poor buggers and the end result is they become worse off than when this whole affair started. Which in turn makes them hate us even more.
Doesn't matter that we lost Americans and our allies by the score, because that is part of the political process of Nation building. Yea, that might sound good with a sound-bite but tell that to the poor widow over there and over here.
Stilton A. Cheese| 6.19.12 @ 8:29AM
"can only be called a political bloc in the loosest sense of the word. It is a coalition that is torn by infighting, with constant reports of defections and splits"
Just described the two main political parties in the USofA
TLP| 6.19.12 @ 8:34AM
We're dealing with a people who have no concept of Freedom, and Liberty, or even Basic Human Rights. All they know is Hatred. All they know is Cruelty, Slavery, Sujugation, and Murder.
The Ballot Box?
Unless they can fill it with Explosives, and Blow it up, or fill it with Rocks, to Stone their Wives and Daughters with, what use do they have for that?
Obviously, some people will never be able to Rule Themsleves. The Arab Muslims are a perfect example of such a people, along with Blacks, both HERE, and in Africa, and Haiti, in the Caribean, and wherever else they might be.
Those are just the Facts. Some creatures just can't get by, without the firm hand of a Cruel Overlord, just inches from their throat. They require an Alpha Male. This is the way of the Animal Kingdom.
The Ballot Box?
Self Rule? Freedom? Liberty? Basic Human Rights?
Those are for People.
canuckistani| 6.19.12 @ 10:31AM
Why do we waste space on here for political dialog about an Arab country?
US interests have never thrived when dealing with democratically elected Arab nations. It has thrived when the US can use shear force and economic incentives with ruling classes to exact the commercial and strategic concessions they require.
Our best and most durable relationship is with the Wahabbi's called the House fo Saud. Insular, paranoid, entirely against Israel and equally aligned with US interests ex Israel. They possess a gangster regime, creators and promulgators of religious strife, and retain the most barbaric desert traditions as common civil law.
Like Russians, Arabs do not have the cultural DNA to accept democratic decision-making. It is seen as messy, incomplete and rife with risk that cannot be cushioned by the cultural memory the west has taken centuries to develop.
Skippy| 6.19.12 @ 6:14PM
Marrying your first cousin for the last 1300 years has a cumulative detrimental effect on the anatomy of the brain.
Being poisoned by a religion based on hate, fear and death might have something to do with it as well.
Either way, we are out of Iraq and are leaving Afghan as well.
Next raghead that kills an American or threatens to, gets his shithole nation nuked back to the time of Mohammed.
Or just hand 'em the keys and place your head on the block.
I will not submit.