After almost a year of living with a lame-duck administration, Iraq has just given itself a government with the promise of stability for at least four more years.
On Dec. 21, the National Assembly, Iraq’s parliament, approved the 42 members of the proposed Cabinet headed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki — a long but exciting process as the parliament members discussed and then voted, one by one, on each ministerial candidate.
The good news is that the government was formed without foreign intervention. America, which still has more than 50,000 troops in Iraq, decided from the start to stay on the sidelines. The regional powers saw that as an opportunity for meddling.
The Islamic Republic in Iran reportedly spent almost $1 billion to help its Iraqi Shiite allies win seats in the general election. The result was a meager 45 out of 320 seats, divided among several groups.
Conceding its failure, Iran then tried to influence the government’s formation through political and diplomatic pressure.
Last autumn, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad offered to host a conference of Iraqi political parties in Tehran to decide the shape of the new government in Baghdad. Almost all Iraqi parties, including at least two financed by Tehran, rejected the offer with varying degrees of disdain.
Fearful that Iran might dominate Iraq after the American withdrawal, Arab Sunni countries formed a bloc to help their allies win power in Baghdad. Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia spent almost as much as Iran did to fix the results of the Iraqi election. They, too, failed.
Their next move was to propose a conference of Iraqi parties in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. The Iraqis turned down the Arab offer as they had the Iranian invitation.
The new Iraqi government represents a victory for all those who reject both Islamism and pan-Arabism as outdated ideologies. The biggest winners are those who assert Uruqua (Iraqi-ness) and ta’adudiyah (pluralism.)
Today, one can claim that the Iraqi government is the most pluralist anywhere in the Arab world, with elected figures from all of Iraq’s 18 ethnic and religious communities. It includes representatives from 12 blocs formed by 66 parties.
Alongside all that good news, there is some bad news. First, and possibly the most important, is that the new configuration reduces the parliament’s powers. With all major parties sharing power, chances that an effective parliamentary opposition can be formed appear slim. Together, the government parties have at least 290 seats. That leaves 40 seats, mostly held by a new Kurdish party, Goran (Change), and independents. Whether these newcomers to politics can effectively hold the government to account remains to be seen.
The formation of a National Council for Strategic Affairs could weaken the parliament further. The council may’ve been conjured to persuade former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and his powerful secularist bloc to join the coalition. Those who know Allawi, however, know that he won’t be satisfied with a ceremonial role and will try hard to turn the organ into a parallel parliament.
Second is the almost total absence of women from the new government. Only one woman has been appointed as an undersecretary; another is expected to be named minister for home and family affairs.
But the Iraqi constitution imposes a 25 percent quota for women’s presence in the parliament. It isn’t unreasonable to think that the same quota should be taken into account in the government’s composition. Interestingly, on the average, Iraq’s female parliament members are better educated and more experienced in their careers than their male colleagues. Thus, the women’s absence from the new Cabinet can only be blamed on pressure from Islamist parties.
Just seven years after its liberation from 30 years of Ba’athist tyranny, Iraq is reasserting its independence and sovereignty. A big part of the credit for its success goes to America’s determination to stand by the Iraqis as they tried to build a new life.