Iraq’s Election Result
Iraqis, if not all of their leaders, have unmistakably chosen to try democracy as a means of constructing a new political order.The results, however, may make it more difficult to build that order than the Bush administration hoped. The Shiite religious coalition that dominates the present government appears to have obtained a slightly lower percentage of the vote than in January, because of much greater Sunni participation. But it will still have by far the largest block of seats in the new parliament, and perhaps a narrow majority. Kurdish and Sunni parties appear to have won just under 20 percent of the vote each, in keeping with their share of the population. That means Sunni seats in the legislature will more than double compared with the present transitional body.
The big losers were secular and nonsectarian parties, such as that led by former interim prime minister Ayad Allawi. Iraqis “preferred to vote for their ethnic and sectarian identity,” as U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad put it. The problem with this result, Mr. Khalilzad candidly added, is that “for Iraq to succeed there has to be cross-sectarian and cross-ethnic cooperation.”
My read is that worries about Iraqi Shiite religious parties, while not groundless, are somewhat exaggerated. Time will tell of course, but I do not think that these groups are going to be willing to bow to Iran or that they will want to ferment a civil war. It is in their interest to create a unified and independant Iraq, and I expect them to act within their interests.
I also expect that while some trappings of religion will be promoted by these groups, it is extremely unlikely that we will see Sharia law. There are a very substantial number of secular and non-fundamentalist Iraqis, and while many of them are perhaps willing to see a moderately religious government I highly doubt that they would condone a genuine theocracy.
We cannot simply assume that because ten million Iraqis voted, they were indicating a willingness to subsume other concerns in the democratic ideal. To Iraqis the very idea of an election was novel. If it should all work out, Iraq will have nurtured democratic habits by indulging a total dictator for 30 odd years, and then submitting to an invasion by a western power. Acceptance of democratic rules can cause real changes of heart, and most of the western diplomats and warriors involved in Iraq pray in whatever theological idiom that this has in fact happened. They will be keen to spot some evidence that the change of heart is there.
It is wise to remember that democratic exercises are pointless except as they commit the participants to accepting the consequences of losing. If a political movement takes part in an election only in order to measure strength, intending no commitment to be instructed by the election’s results, we have only illusory adjudications of power.