|
Erbil’s Majority and Baghdad’s Partnership
2.5.2011
By Hiwa Osman - ekurd.net |
|
|
|
May 2, 2011
Those who follow the situation and political
developments in Iraq are getting quite baffled in
their search for the best possible formula to rule
the country – neither Erbil’s majority nor Baghdad’s
partnership governments seem to be working.
In Baghdad, the word “failure” is almost becoming
the trademark of the governmental and political
performance. According to many observers and
partners in government, the main reason for this is
because it is a government of national partnership,
previously called national unity.
The two governments, national unity and national
partnership have many similarities, but the main
point in common between the two is that each
participating party in government blames the others
for the failure at a time when the country’s
development, provision of services and eradication
of corruption remains static.
|
Hiwa Osman, IWPR Iraq’s country director, previously
served as Iraqi president Jalal Talabani’s media
adviser. |
Naming the security ministers, naming the
vice-presidents, national reconciliation, the
council of ministers’ bylaw, taking concrete steps
to tackle corruption and many more issues remain
unresolved because they need to have the agreement
of all partners over all issues.
This endless cycle is ongoing and every now and then
we get a new issue that proves the failure of this
formula in ruling the country because it is simply
an extension of the quota system that can not move
anything and the past few years proved that.
As a logical consequence of this argument, an
observer may think that a majority government is
better than a partnership one. But looking at the
situation in the Iraqi Kurdistan region, one can see
all the reasons of failure there, too.
The lack of agreement between the government and
opposition over the main issues such as the future
of the region, some of the fundamental laws, the
constitution and other issues have all contributed
to the situation in Sulaimaniyah today.
This is in addition to the imbalanced majority
government that has the KDP with the majority of
votes in Erbil and Duhok and the PUK that came
second after Gorran in Sulaimaniyah.
The latest development in Sulaimaniyah adds another
evidence to the inability of majority governments to
deal with crisis in an adequate way. This is
especially true when the junior partner is
exclusively ruling an area where it has received the
minority vote. Even more so, the Prime Minister of
the joint government is also the candidate of the
junior partner.
According to many analysts and observers, this setup
contributed to a greater disconnect between the
authorities and the people and left the door open
for the opposition groups that jointly have the
majority of Sulaimaniyah’s votes to have the
initiative and always be a step ahead.
Looking at the unsuccessful Kurdish model of
majority rule, one can see that this model is based
on a partnership agreement between the two parties (KDP
& PUK) when they had equal power,www.ekurd.netbut
today and with the quiet admissions of many in the
KDP leadership, the junior partner is becoming a
“burden” on the KDP. This could also change in the
next election.
As a result, anyone who is looking for an
appropriate solution to rule Iraq would be quite
confused, because neither Erbil’s majority nor
Baghdad's partnership seem to be working. And the
main reason is because they both stem from fear; the
Shia’s fear of the past, the Sunni fear of the
future and the Kurds’ fear of both brings things
back to the “quota” system and from there to
“consensus”, then to “national unity” and now to
“partnership.”
We could continue forever about the failure of the
models of majority and partnership rule. But the
real reason is the lack of a real technocratic
government that runs the affair of the state in a
professional manner away from politicizing and
quota. A government like this would only emerge if
there were true institutions of governance that can
produce real professionals who are able to lead the
country.
Hiwa Osman is IWPR’s country director in Iraq,
previously served as Iraqi president Jalal
Talabani’s media adviser, a regular contributing
writer for ekurd.net. You may visit Osman's website
at www.hiwaosman.com
Copyright © 2011 ekurd.net
-
Read more by Hiwa
Osman
-
The Kurds and the USA
partners or allies? 21.4.2011
-
Two Dictators, Two
Eras, One Cause 24.3.2011
-
Can Corruption Go?
15.3.2011
-
A way to avoid a
looming crisis 9.3.2011
-
A Paranoid, Confused
and a Vague Day of Rage 1.3.2011
-
To the champion of
‘Operation NRT’ 21.2.2011
-
A new country:
Facebookstan, Twitterstan & Wikileakistan
19.2.2011
-
Kirkuk: the case for
plan B 25.1.2011
-
Najaf: An Iranian shrine
or a Middle Eastern Vatican 16.1.2011
-
Security – a chronic
vacuum 14.1.2011
-
In the new Iraq, some
are more equal! 5.1.2011
-
Information first,
freedom & protection next 28.12.2010
-
Iraq’s Troubled Media 18.12.2010
-
Federalists, Separatists & Unionists 15.12.2010
-
A zero-sum game for
America 9.12.2010
-
On Our Kurdish Media
1.12.2010
-
An
ethno-sectarian democracy! 24.11.2010
-
End of power-sharing or
end of Iraqiya 16.11.2010
-
A
Stillborn Initiative 1.11.2010
-
Iraqi Kurds, Kingmakers
Again! 8.10.2010
-
Human
Rights - Iraq's first post withdrawal test
29.9.2010
-
US-Kurdish relations, short term venture or a
long term partnership 8.9.2010
-
Which one comes first,
democracy or federalism? 3.9.2010
-
...
Top |
The opinions
expressed in this commentary are solely those of the
author
|
®
