Confessionalism and Electoral Prospects in Iraq
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Confessionalism and Electoral Prospects in Iraq Yasir Kouti Dlawer Ala’Aldeen About MERI The Middle East Research Institute engages in policy issues contributing to the process of state building and democratisation in the Middle East. Through independent analysis and policy debates, our research aims to promote and develop good governance, human rights, rule of law and social and economic prosperity in the region. It was established in 2014 as an independent, not-for-profit organisation based in Erbil, Kurdistan Region of Iraq. Middle East Research Institute 1186 Dream City Erbil, Kurdistan Region of Iraq T: +964 (0)662649690 E: [email protected] www.meri-k.org NGO registration number. K843 © Middle East Research Institute, 2017 The opinions expressed in this publication are the responsibility of the authors. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of MERI, the copyright holder. Please direct all enquiries to the publisher. Confessionalism and Electoral Prospects in Iraq MERI Policy Paper Yasir Kouti Research Fellow, MERI Dlawer Ala’Aldeen President of MERI April 2018 1 Contents Summary ........................................................................................................................................................4 Confessionalism and Party Alliances ........................................................................................................5 Continued, Yet Weakened Confessional Trend .......................................................................................6 Key Alliances and Likely Winners .............................................................................................................7 Table 1: Distribution of (Predicted) Seats Per Alliance ......................................................................10 2 Confessionalism and Electoral Prospects in Iraq Summary Ever since Saddam’s regime was toppled in 2003, Iraq has three competitive parliamentary elections in 2005, 2010 and 2014. In all of these, pre-election alliance building and post-election coalition building processes were fairly predictable given the confessional nature of Iraq’s political system. Essentially, the system is centered on a politically conventional power-sharing arrangement among the country’s three main ethno-sectarian powerhouses: Shi’ite Arab Muslims, Sunni Arab Muslims, and ethnic Kurds (both Sunni and Shi’ite). This arrangement has prompted small political parties to forge alliances with these confessional powerhouses. This time round, this trend is likely to continue in the upcoming elections scheduled on 12 May 2018, but perhaps on a smaller scale. What gravitates political entities are political expediency and nationalist sentiments. These two factors seem to be shaping and forming some alliances such as between secular and civil-minded parties, the Shiite Sadrist movement via Hizb Istaqama (the Integrity Party), and the Iraqi Communist party. On 22 January 2018, Iraqi legislators ratified a decision to hold much-debated anticipated parliamentary elections on 12 May 2018, thereby ending the stalemate by some lawmakers to postpone it. Iraq is at a crossroads, and much of what is at stakes will depend on which of the 27 registered electoral alliances emerge as winners. The large number of alliances suggests that political entities are aware of the competitive advantages inherent to forming these, versus running independently. Indeed, because of Iraq’s particular parliamentarian arrangement, the 24 million eligible voters in the 18 national electoral districts, representing the country’s 18 governorates, will not be electing the next prime minister – they will, instead, be picking an electoral alliance, which will engage in post-election coalition building negotiations to nominate the prime minister and form the next government. While it is still premature to forecast the ultimate composition of the next government, it is most likely to be led by one of four viable options: Eitilaf al-Nasr (Victory Alliance) led by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi; Eitilaf al-Wataniya (National Alliance) led by former Prime Minister Ayad Alawi; Eitilaf Dawlat al-Qanun (State of the Law Alliance) led by former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki; and Tahaluf al-Fatah (Conquest Alliance) led by al-Hashd al-Sha’abi (Popular Mobilization Units) commander Hadi al-Ameri. However, given the unpopularity of Iraq’s political class, no single alliance is expected to win a majority of parliamentary seats, forcing the formation of a grand-coalition government, which, given Iraq’s oversized economic, security, and political challenges, would help build broad-based support and legitimacy. Furthermore, the next election is expected to maintain the status quo due to the existence of potent structural forces inspired by political and electoral confessionalism. However, and encouragingly, the status quo may prove ephemeral in the face of internal divisions within the traditional confessional centers of power, the rising popular discontent with the quality of the existing democratic system and the limited progress it has made over the past fifteen years. It would be safe to say that an inclusive government will increase popular support, reduce the likelihood of ethno-sectarian civil war, minimise the influence of external powers, and bolster the nation’s attractiveness to foreign investors. In the long term, Iraq needs a government that is ambitiously reformist to transform the state’s political, electoral, and economic systems. 3 Confessionalism and Electoral Prospects in Iraq Confessionalism and Party Alliances From the time Saddam’s regime was toppled in 2003, Iraq held a total of three previous competitive election cycles in 2005, 2010 and 2014, in which pre-election alliance building and post-election coalition building processes were fairly predictable given the confessional nature of Iraq’s political system. At its core, the system is centered on a politically conventional power-sharing arrangement, albeit with no basis in the Constitution, among the country’s three main ethno-sectarian groups: Shiite Arab Muslims, Sunni Arab Muslims, and ethnic Kurds (both Sunni and Shiite), determined by the population size of each group. As a consequence of this political understanding, the office of the Prime Minister is stamped to Shiite Arabs, the office of Presidency to the Kurds, while Sunni Arabs are allotted the presidency of Parliament. Like other aspects of Iraq’s political life, electoral politics is not spared the negative effects of the confessional arrangement. Indeed, it has become the norm that political entities (i.e. candidates, parties, and alliances) congregate along ethno-sectarian (i.e. confessional) lines, entrusted by voters to advance the interests of their particular groups. As a result, voters have over the years grown hesitant to vote for an independent candidate, whom the electoral system does not favor. Besides being ideologically convenient, electoral alliances serve an important practical purpose: because Iraq’s electoral law favours large political entities, alliances are simply an expedient vehicle to gain and maintain power. By contrast, small parties, if run independently, have little chances of success in this electoral environment. In fact, when they do, they often fail to meet the high threshold required to translate votes into seats, based on the Sainte Lague 1.7 formula for seat allocation. To explain how this formula works, consider the following hypothetical example. Assume that there are three electoral lists competing in an electoral district: one large alliance, one small bloc, and a small party candidate. Also assume that the number of votes required to gain a seat in parliament is 5000. Further assume that the small party candidate receives only 4500 votes. If this were to happen, the candidate would lose the chance to serve, for failing to meet the threshold of 5000 votes. This, in fact, occurred in 2014 parliamentary elections. There and then, a small party candidate in Baghdad electoral district (allotted 69 seats) won 17,575, and yet didn’t gain a parliament seat, because he ranked seven in the overall candidates’ list in Baghdad. Conversely, some other candidates affiliated with large alliances won seats even though they received far fewer personal votes than the small party candidate. This is one main reason why small political parties build alliances with traditional major powerhouses, previously known locally as the House of Shiites, House of Sunnis, and House of Kurds. Now, these ‘Houses’ are being dismantled, smaller powerhouses (lists and alliances led by established political entities or personalities) are replacing them, albeit still congregating along ethno-sectarian lines. Indeed, small parties recognize the difficulty, if not impossibility, of succeeding without allying themselves to this confessional system, i.e. adjusting to the logic and functionality of the system. Hence, the problem in Iraq is not a matter of the quality (good vs. bad) or nature (good. vs. evil) of candidates - the problem, in essence, is structural, rooted in the vertical ethno-sectarian system. More telling is why the majority of voters continue electing and re-electing the same roster of leadership. Given how disappointing the performance of leaders has been over the last 15