Opinions | Columnists
Kurdistan pleads for democracy
US must ensure free and fair polls in the Iraqi region where corruption and abuse of power hamper the development process.
- By Scott Carpenter and Michael Rubin
- Published: 23:09 April 19, 2009
- Image Credit: Illustration: Nino Jose Heredia/Gulf News
Shortly after taking office, US President Barack Obama congratulated Iraqis on successful provincial elections. "Millions of Iraqi citizens from every ethnic and religious group went peacefully to the polls across the country to choose new provincial councils," he declared on January 31. But this was not quite the case. In the three provinces that comprise Iraqi Kurdistan, the regional parliament postponed the vote until May 19. Only recently have plans been made to hold the elections.
In Iraq, elections are critical. They improve security by legitimising power relationships while allowing people to vent frustration. In the January 31 provincial elections, Iraqis chose to select candidates who they thought would abandon narrow sectarian objectives and best address their problems at the local level.
The question now is whether a similar degree of freedom will exist in Iraqi Kurdistan.
Iraqi Kurdish officials have long touted their region as democratic. In January, Massoud Barzani, President of Iraqi Kurdistan, declared, "The culture of democracy has to be promoted and deeply rooted". His son Masrour, head of the region's intelligence service, wrote that Kurdistan's "commitment to democracy and tolerance made us natural US allies".
The website of the region's investment arm describes Iraqi Kurdistan as "a place that has practised democracy for over a decade".
And before Saddam Hussain was ousted, Iraqi Kurdistan was certainly more democratic than the rest of Iraq. But this is no longer the case.
Barzani's Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), the party of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, refuse to compete in open elections, choosing instead to divide power equally.
While more benign than Saddam's Baath Party, Kurdish authorities have adopted the Baathist model, requiring party membership to guarantee university slots, qualify for the best jobs or win lucrative contracts. Independent candidates report intimidation and threats.
In the past four years, there have been three competitive elections in Iraq. With each election, Iraq's democracy has solidified.
In January 2005, voters selected parties from a nationwide list. Such a system undercut representative democracy by divorcing politicians from local concerns and making them dependent on party bosses to whom they had to pledge fealty.
The system evolved by the next round of voting, in December 2005: While still based on proportional representation rather than individual constituencies (as in the US), candidates ran by province, forcing them to be more responsive to constituents.
The provincial elections this year heralded more reform: Iraqis could choose individual candidates from lists or even choose independent candidates; they did not have to vote a party slate. And while in the 2005 elections the parties coalesced along ethnic and confessional lines, in January, Shiite parties ran independently of each other, allowing voters rather than party bosses the ultimate say in their representation.
In contrast to the rest of Iraq, Kurdish parties have already cemented alliances and power-sharing agreements. Voters in Iraqi Kurdistan will not have the benefit of real competition or open lists. Nor will they be able to choose among individuals.
In a region where corruption and party abuse of power have become dominant issues, this undercuts accountability. Furthermore, the Kurdish parliament - dominated by the parties of Barzani and Talabani - has forbidden independent monitoring, which contributed so much to the success of the elections in Iraq.
After five brutal years, the rest of Iraq is developing real electoral politics that is helping to defuse conflict, create accountability and foster stability. It is possible that, in time, other institutions of the democratic system, including a free parliament and media, will strengthen.
This would be a welcome development not only in Iraq but in the rest of the Middle East.
Once, Iraqi Kurdistan touted itself as a model for the rest of Iraq. Now, the Obama administration should do everything it can to ensure that it is not left behind. .
- Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service
Scott Carpenter is the Keston Family Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
Share this article
Popular in Opinions
-
Speak Your Mind
Focus: Halloween
Paranormal holds an insatiable appeal for our imagination, but do you believe in them
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Peace process depends on US
Obama must enunciate a clear plan to end Palestinian suffering and stem Israeli ambitions
-
Recycling should be part of our routine
By simply sorting your waste, you are doing your bit to ensure a green future
-
Healthy lifestyles prevent disease
Dubai Healthcare City is holding a festival to encourage people to look after themselves
