What do you think are the biggest challenges for post-Saddam Iraq and why? If you were to design a constitution for Iraq to provide for lasting stability, what would be its main components, and why? How could the right constitutional design appropriately manage the challenges you see?
7 thoughts on “Week 12”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
As I read through the assigned reading the most common theme to pop up was sectarianism. All it takes to realize the importance of the differences between the various groups is to consider the news coverage from most of the last nine years. Differences that were exploited by Saddam Hussein and his government for years leaving a legacy of strong divisions easily taken advantage of by those wishing to sow discord. In Shadid’s chapter “Myths of Resistance,” the author highlights how various groups attempted just that. Following the bombings in Shi’ite cities, in the eyes of their residents fell either squarely on American shoulders or on other religious sects. For the Iraqi government to stand, these differences must be bridged.
Another source of tension is the services provided by the government. Cycling between the issue of legitimacy and a desire for the government to fix issues such as electricity and the social safety net, the population and government have a hard time addressing legitimate concerns regarding services. While the people protest the lack of electricity, parties within the government jockey for position using unrest to threaten the dominant party. (Alkadiri)
The Iraqi Constitution set up in 2005 tries to balance those interests. I believe if the emphasis is placed on the federal aspect of the Constitution as well as the freedom of religion and speech provisions, the government would be able to address the issue of sectarianism. If representation at the national level was focused on equality of interests on a national level (although I am not terribly sure how to accomplish this, obviously not through a confessional system though), then the separate regions would be able to administer, to some extent, how they saw fit. This would allow the Kurds semi-autonomy but keep the group under the central government and not upset Turkey. One result of a workable political system would be governmental ability to address the service issues facing the country. Of course, properly administering services would likely shore up the government’s legitimacy. With the legacy of sectarianism so strong and continually fresh in the memory of the people, any attempts to form a cohesive society are bound to be riddled with mistrust at the beginning and consolidation of the Iraqi democracy is likely to take a long time.
I think everyone agrees that the primary issue standing in the way of a stable Iraq is both ethnic and sectarian divides. Judith Yaphe’s chapter on Iraq helped highlight just how chaotic Iraq’s ethnic/sectarian make-up really is. The Kurds take up about a quarter of the population and live in the north. The Arab Shiites are the dominant group in the country but live in the south, marginalized by the Arab Sunnis in Baghdad.
At a deeper level, however, I think Iraq’s long history of being colonized is to blame for its current ethnic landscape. The British literally drew random borders and created Iraq from scratch. The long years of Ba’thist rule, only to be toppled by an American occupation, probably doesn’t help the Iraqis learn to stand on their own two feet. This, however, is the hardest goal we have to achieve. Given Iraq’s unique ethnic-scape, what kind of government is most suited to govern the country?
Authoritarianism is clearly out of the question. If Shiites dominate the political spectrum, the Sunnis and Kurds will feel marginalized (vice versa). It would seem that a democracy would be the best bet. However, the Bush Administration has tried to prop up a democratic government — to no avail. As demonstrated in Shadid’s account and Alkadiri’s essay, Iraq has a long way to go. Its people are still lacking basic things like water and electricity.
I think Iraq’s 2005 constitution does a good job emphasizing that Iraq “is a country of many nationalities” that needs to encompass all of its components in order to form a functioning, working whole (Yaphe 143). Nonetheless, there is a clear de jure/de facto contradiction at play: by law, “All Iraqis have full equality” (143). In reality, however, people still hold tightly to their familial, tribal, and ethnic identities. What is at stake isn’t whether we have a good constitution–it’s whether the people of Iraq will truly come to believe and follow it.
I agree with Matt that one the biggest challenges for post-Saddam Iraq is secretarian divides. The Shi’a majority and Kurdish populations have gained political strength over Sunnis in post-Saddam Iraq. There have been disputes over the claim of each Iraqi community on political power and economic resources. The constant infighting over issues of security, elections, economic decision making, and foreign policy has contributed to political unrest.
Furthermore, another challenge in the Iraqi case is the popular resentment toward government due to its lack of responsiveness and widespread corruption. Alkadiri points out that security is no longer the biggest popular concern, rather, it is the inadequacies of the government that are on Iraqi people’s minds (New Arab Revolt, 194). Iraqis have protested against the lack of services, such as electricity, that has been rising in recent years. Although the government has pledged to respond to Iraqi needs with a slew of initiatives, they will be extremely difficult to carry out due to administrative weaknesses.
If I were to design the Constitution, I would write it with the grievances and needs of the Iraqi people in mind. It would certainly be a challenge to create a representative form of government which adequately protects the rights and interests of all individuals within the various Iraqi groups. A main component of my design would be to implement a power-sharing ruling system that specifies how power is to be divided between the Iraqi executive and legislature. Also, I would craft the constitution under a federal system in which regions have a degree of autonomy over their own affairs, but the center government in Baghdad retains overarching powers when it comes to rule of law, economic planning and security issues.
The Iraqi population is composed of many different ethnic and religious/sectarian groups who hold different political and social views and opinions, and who are all firmly committed to protecting their interests. I think the biggest challenge for post-Saddam Iraq is to create a cohesive Iraqi nation in which all of the sub-populations feel that they have equal rights, opportunities, and political participation. The Shi’a majority in Iraq has long been governed by the Sunni minority, and Sunni Arabs have historically constituted the great majority of the Iraqi elite and have “benefited disproportionately from modernization and education” (Yaphe, 144). The other ethnic and sectarian groups of Iraq, including Shi’as and Kurds, have often been marginalized, persecuted, and even targeted. In order for Iraq to function as a strong and stable state, all of the religious and ethnic groups in Iraq must feel secure, protected, and supported by the state.
In designing a constitution for Iraq, I think one of the most important aspects is determining the representation of these different groups in the government. This must be done in a way such that acknowledgement is given to the relative population size of each group, but that each group has the opportunity to contribute and affect policies–I’m not really sure how that can be accomplished. Additionally, I think the Kurds maintain their status as an autonomous state. Yaphe points out that the despite marginalization, the Shi’a population has “remained loyal to the Iraqi state” and has “never desired separation or self-rule” (145). Kurds, on the other hand, “have long resisted assimilation into the Arab Iraq” (145). Another critical component of an Iraqi constitution is the provision of civil rights. Iraqis lived in fear of the mukhabarat under Sadam’s rule, and were unable to express their views or opinions without fierce, and often fatal, punishment. An Iraqi constitution must give the population freedom of speech, the media, and expression.
One of the most difficult challenges Post-Saddam Iraq faces is finding political stability and a legitimate political system to replace the authoritarian regime that Saddam had created. Sectarian strife is a major factor that contributes to the instability, as Kurds in the north and the significant Shi’a minority near Iran present grave problems for any ruling regime in Iraq. Legitimacy must therefore be based on creating an Iraqi identity with significant autonomy for all minorities.
A constitution would most importantly have to recognize the importance of Kurdish and Shi’a minorities and provide autonomy, as is the case with the Kurdish north today. This needs to be translated in power sharing, and there must be a parliamentary set up where all groups can be represented fairly in a democracy. Ultimately, an Iraqi constitution might end up looking similar to the Lebanese case, as this is the only way to ensure stability in the short term, barring the creation of a new national identity. The proximity to Iran and the Shi’a minority, and the traditional autonomy of the Kurdish north make it unlikely that consensus will be reached easily. The developments in Syria and a regime change in that country could lead to yet another example of establishing a new order in a ethnically diverse country.
Undoubtedly the most important question concerning the future of Iraq is whether it can create and maintain a stable democracy that provides for the needs of all Iraqis. Under Saddam’s regime certain groups within Iraqi society were brutally oppressed. This was especially the case for a large proportion of the Shi’a and Kurdish populations. The underlying tensions within Iraqi society that resulted from this oppression remain relevant in a post-Saddam Iraq and have threatened to boil over into civil war.
An Iraqi constitution must deal with these divisions within Iraqi society. However, I do think it is important not to exacerbate these divisions by creating a political system akin to the Confessional system used in Lebanon. At the same time, it is hard to see any other system producing anything other than a Shi’a dominated government given that more than 60% of the Iraqi population are affiliated to Shi’a Islam. This would inevitably create resentment among the Sunni population.
Perhaps the best way of combating this problem would be to entrust provincial/local governments with significant powers. This way predominantly Sunni areas could be ruled over by Sunnis and predominantly Shi’a areas could be ruled over by Shi’as. This could prove to be particularly effective for the Kurds in Iraq who have long sought autonomy.
I think one of the biggest challenges that post-Saddam and Saddam Iraq faced is it’s sectarian tensions. The few ruling the many almost always breeds dissent. Iraq’s Shi’a majority has long felt discriminated against and opposed by the Sunni minority that was in power during Saddam’s reign. This is also true for the Kurdish population that so desperately wants full autonomy. These feelings have been carried over into post-Saddam Iraq, expressing themselves in the form of sectarian violence.
If I were to design a constitution for Iraq I would probably take a number of cues for the United States Constitution. I would include freedom of speech as the media and many of saddam’s opponents were systematically silenced by the baathist regime. I would include an equal protection clause that would ensure fair treatment regardless of ethnicity and religious background. I would want a system of checks and balances in place for the three branches of government. The issue of representation is iffy because politics are so closely tied to religion in Iraq and a form of proportional representation would lead to Shi’a’s dominating the political sphere. All the political checks in the world can’t stop debilitating measures from being passed as can be seen in the United States. I would also give the Kurds their own state because you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Iraq would be losing out on some oil money, but it’s impossible to meet all of everyone’s needs. However, i feel like putting an end to sectarian violence is gonna require something more besides a new form of government and i’m not sure what that something is.