Many analysts were disappointed with the fact that George Bush was not acquainted with Iraq’s history. They ascribe the failures that were made by the US government in Iraq to his lack of knowledge of Iraq’s political history. Iraq’s political history has been one that has been marred by political violence. To get an understanding let’s look at Iraq’s history from the time of the British occupation.
The British mandate in Iraq helped establish a paradigm of political life in Iraq. It used its mandate to carve it out from the rest of the Ottoman Empire and establish British autocratic rule. This mandate remained in effect till 1958 when the revolution took place in Iraq. The British in an attempt to partially maintain control in Iraq installed King Faisal. They also tried to install him as the Syrian monarch. However, this attempt failed miserably. Even though Iraq was a nation that was divided on ethnicity and religious divisions, Iraqis in general were a very nationalistic lot and would not accept the rule of King Faisal. The new King knew this and was insecure about his rule and as such depended on governance counsel from the British.
When King Faisal passed on his son Ghazi I succeeded him as king. He had been mentored in the West and had no grasp of local tribal politics. In the eyes of ordinary Iraqis, Ghazi was merely a British puppet. This led to the first military coup on the royal family. Sidqi, the military general who overthrew Ghazi lacked experience and political vision though. His policies led to chaos throughout Iraq and eventually his own assassination.
In 1939 Faisal died in a car crash and his son Faisal II became king. It was during his time that the British and the Americans forced Iraq to sell its oil to them at prices that were described by one historian as having been “throw-away”. It was shortly after this that the British invaded Iraq. They however were met with fierce resistance from an Iraqi nation that believed that the British were intent on occupying Iraq once more. To quell this resistance the British Royal Air Force killed both Iraqi civilians and military personnel alike. Incumbent anti-British Iraqi Prime Minister, Gelani, was left with no option but to flee to Iran.
Faisal II was then put in control of Iraq once more. During this time a lot of Iraqis felt disenfranchised with Bayer government. They were disgruntled due to the fact that the British were siphoning their fuel in their fight against the Axis Powers. In 1952 a military officer led a coup against the Egyptian monarchy which was supported by the British. This caused ripples in the Jordanian monarchy which moved to have a federation with the Iraqi monarchy. This however proved too much for Iraqis to bear making them revolt against the monarchy.
Political Voting in Iraq
The provincial elections in Iraq were a sign that the election patterns in the country were changing albeit politically. However, there were a few incidences that were reminiscent of the country’s ugly past. Numerous allegations of foul play threatened to slide back parts of the country into violence. For instance, in parts of Anbar province which was once the center of Sunni insurgency incumbent politicians were accused by tribal sheikhs of rigging the polls. Apart from few and far apart incidents, peaceful voting took place in the other 14 provinces. This was praised as having been a huge success. Compared to the elections that were held back in 2005, the 2009 provincial elections offered great hope in the revival of democracy in Iraq. Back then the threat of terrorist attacks was so real that foreign election observers could not be deployed to the voting stations across Iraq. The death toll of candidates that were running for office also decreased greatly. Back in 2005 conservative estimates put the number of dead candidates at 200. In 2009 though, only eight candidates met their demise.
Peaceful elections are very important for the success of Iraq, especially with the United States in the process of pulling out its troops. As the election results started trickling in, it was evident that allies of the incumbent Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki had performed very well especially in the South. Evinrude Etec Once the results were confirmed Mr. Maliki must have been confident about running in the following year’s general election. However, it is worth noting that his success was not based to the traditional voting trend- religion. Mr. Maliki seems to have instead benefited from the State of Law coalition. Throughout the campaign the party campaigned on a non-religious platform choosing instead to focus on other pertinent national matters such as law and order and national unity. His apparent shift to secularism evidently benefited him in a huge and indisputable way. It was not full loss though for secular parties that were backed by former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. Mr. Allawi notably increased his chances of a political comeback. If anecdotal evidence is anything to go by at all, then the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, did suffer significant setback as religious parties did not do as well as they had in the past. The culture of corruption that is prevalent in the provincial councils is ascribed to these religious parties. best restaurants brisbane
Iraqi Parliamentary Elections
Nuri al-Maliki was claiming the early lead in the March 7, 2010 elections in what was a hotly contested race. electric dog collar The first results to be released were from 7 provinces out of the 18 that gave him a narrow lead over the former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. This was despite the fact that close to the elections the incumbent Prime Minister had a cyst removed from his stomach which interfered with his campaigns. In the end however, it was Mr. Allawi’s coalition that won the elections. Once taunted as being an American puppet, the former interim Prime Minister’s victory can only be described as having been wafer thin.
It is due to this that Allawi’s 2010 victory in Iraqi’s parliamentary elections was seen to usher in a time of political uncertainty that was believed then could have threatened the scheduled withdrawal of American troops from the country. Nuru Kamal al-Maliki, obviously didn’t take this all in calmly but went on to challenge the results the minute they were released, citing massive irregularities in the election process. However, an independent election commission and western election observers were quick to state that the irregularities were few and not widespread as had been earlier claimed. party venues brisbane
Mr. Allawi was quick to spring into action the millions of Sunni Muslims who had boycotted the previous parliamentary elections held in 2005. However, he still fell short of the 163 parliamentary seats that were needed to form a majority in the 325 seat house. The 2010 parliamentary election showed the wide dissatisfaction there was with Mr. Maliki’s performance. Some of the major issues that led to his defeat were security, high levels of unemployment and poor government services. Some of the reasons why Allawi appealed so much to the masses, was because Iraqi’s were in general tired of their country’s politics being dominated by religion and because he had strongman traits. stand alone solar power
Depending on which side Iraqis were supporting, there was a mix of reactions. user experience design Some people reacted with celebration while others were cowed in fear which led to stockpiling of food. This fear was well justified as 43 people had already been killed in two bomb explosions that had occurred before the election results were announced. Mr. Allawi however was quick to reassures Iraqi citizens. He said that he was willing to work with all sections of Iraqi society to build a much stronger nation. He also extended his hand to any of the other political parties that wanted to form a coalition government with him. pool safety certificate
Independent Electoral Commission for Iraq
The greatest reason that caused Iraqi politicians to delay in appointing a partial cabinet was due to prevalent opposition toward the rule of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Almost every political party felt burdened by the incumbent’s political administration during his previous tenure. Prime Minister al-Maliki has been criticized for attempting to take over the country’s security by placing his cronies in seminal positions in the country’s arms of security. He has also been accused of using security forces to try and cow his political foes. In addition, his administration is seen as being largely bureaucratic.
With talks still taking place to fill the remaining vacant ministries and the tussle of might in parliament, the Supreme Court made a decision that made al-Maliki more powerful (that is if he already wasn’t).= On the 18th of January 2011, it was ruled by the Federal Supreme Court, that the Iraqi Election Commission together with other independent commissions in addition to the Central Bank of Iraq, no longer would be under parliament’s jurisdiction. Details
In its ruling the Court said that the electoral commission would now be part of the executive arm of government as the responsibilities of the commission could only be categorized as being executive. This was despite the fact the ruling was blatantly unconstitutional. This is because, the Constitution of Iraq explicitly states that all independent commissions fall under the legislature’s jurisdiction. This ruling was immediately condemned by Iyad Allawi’s political party, the Iraqi National Movement, saying that the decision was a huge blow to democracy and a strike against the country’s constitution. outboard motors
Worth noting is that even before this very unfortunate incident occurred, the Federal Supreme Court was considered partisan and siding with Maliki. stop dog barking For instance, before the parliamentary election in the DeBaathification crisis, before the parliamentary elections of 2010 took place, the incumbent intervened in a judicial process and had appeals that had been already in progress sustained thus leaving most of the political heavyweights banned from taking part in the elections. Even after the election had taken place and Maliki had been defeated, the Federal Court ruled that the biggest list that had the right to form a new government, was one that had been formed either or after balloting. It was then that Maliki was able to secure his second term in office after forming a coalition government with the Sadrist Supreme Council. This was despite Allawi’s list winning the most number of seats in the election. bark collars