EDITORIAL

Iraq Polls Can’t Legitimise US Invasion

THE US imperialist-sponsored elections in Iraq have been held on January 30. While the complete results will take some time to come, US imperialism is tom-toming across the world that it has restored “democracy and freedom” to Iraq.  These elections are being used by US imperialism to legitimise its invasion which began two years ago.  Secondly, the US seeks to draw for itself an image of being the  “protector and propagator of democracy.” Thirdly, these elections are being projected as the end of Iraqi resistance and insurgency against American occupation.  Fourthly, the domestic sycophants in India are now urging the government to change its position on US occupation of Iraq and start doing business since a local government is in place.

Apart from legitimising the American occupation of Iraq, what these elections will do is to legalise the US control over Iraq’s rich economic resources and its future political destiny. Of the two major contenders, while the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), cobbled together by the Grand Ayatollah Sistani, is considered to be the front runner to win the majority of 275 seats in the national assembly, the Iraqi National Accord (INA) led by the US appointed prime minister Ayad Allawi appears to be in the second place. Now, with either of these two in power, or better in alliance together, US imperialism will seek to comfortably advance its interests, diabolically portraying to the world its control beneath the veneer of “freedom and democracy.” 

It is for this precise reason that the legitimacy of these elections will continue to be called into question. Preliminary information by the Election Commission in Iraq has claimed that 60 per cent of the 14 million had cast votes. This is an estimate, not based on hard information from the provinces. Despite trying to portray this as a turning point backed by televised images of enthusiastic voters, the reality cannot be concealed.   The majority of the Sunni population has stayed away from the polls.  Influential Sunni political parties, including the main Iraqi Islamic party and the powerful association of Muslim scholars, had issued a boycott call.   This was, by and large, obeyed by the Sunnis. The voting, which took place largely in regions dominated by Kurds, has in it a strong secessionist element which seeks the formation of an independent Kurdistan. 

Thus the elections may well have sharpened the Shia-Sunni divide, the Iraqi-Kurd divide as well as the pro- and anti-American divide. Thus, the resistance against foreign occupation is unlikely to decline. The Associated Press (AP) had documented the geographical spread of the resistance. It has noted that the only provinces that are not plagued by bloodshed as a result of the resistance are the three northern provinces controlled by the Kurds.  In all other areas, the resistance is significant. In the run-up to the elections in the third week of January alone, over a 100 people were killed in a spate of guerrilla attacks.

The claims, therefore, of having firmly restored democracy in Iraq remain completely untenable. The sharpening of the Shia-Sunni divide will, in itself, cast significant uncertainties for the future. Further, the cumbersome procedure for the elections also have the potential to allow manipulative groups to control power, thereby undermining the legitimate authority of democracy. In these elections, Iraqis were not choosing individuals but parties or coalition slates under which contesting individuals have been clubbed. Besides, many of the contestants have not revealed their names on the slates under which they have chosen to be grouped, because of the fear of militants. Consequently, Iraqi voters found themselves voting “blindly” in several cases, unable to identify candidates of their choice on the list.

Besides, even if the name of the preferred candidate were to be found on a popular slate, it would not necessarily mean that he or she would be elected. This is because of the system of proportional representation that has been adopted.

The number of individuals elected to the Asseably will depend on the percentage of votes that a slate has polled. For instance, if a slate showed the names of 275 candidates and got 20 per cent of the vote, only 55 of its members, who could be randomly picked, would enter the new assembly. 

Given this, the uncertainties in Iraq continue to multiply. With the second anniversary of US occupation nearing (March 19-20), it is necessary for international public opinion to mount the pressure for the immediate vacation of US and British troops from Iraq. 

An interim UN administration may be put in place to ensure the transition of power and administration to a sovereign Iraqi government. Further, US imperialism should not be allowed to retain any military base in Iraq. All agreements and laws promulgated to facilitate US and multinational corporations’ exploitation of Iraq’s economic resources must be scrapped.  

Finally, in the interest of natural justice, an international tribunal must be set up to try those guilty of war crimes in Iraq. US imperialism cannot be allowed to use these elections as an excuse to get away without being forced to accept these demands.