http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GL20Ak01.html

Dec 20, 2005 


 Iran wins big in Iraq's elections
By M K Bhadrakumar 



"We knew ever since the beginning [of the Iraq war] that the Americans would 
become trapped in a quagmire ... Iraq has become a turning point in the history 
of the Middle East. If the Americans had succeeded in subjugating Iraq, our 
region would have suffered once again from colonialism, but if Iraq becomes a 
democratic country that can stand on its own feet, the Americans will face the 
greatest loss. In such an eventuality, Iran and other regional states will be 
able to play an important role in world issues since they provide a huge share 
of the world's energy needs. We see now that the United States has been 
defeated." 

Such a statement has to have come out of Iran, and without a doubt President 
George W Bush would attribute it to that "odd guy", as he referred to Iranian 
President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in a recent PBS TV interview. 

But, as with just about anything else these days concerning the Middle East, 
Bush would be dead wrong, as would be many others who have misread Iran at this 
momentous juncture in the region. The excerpts are from a speech at Friday 
prayers at Tehran University, made by someone whom the Western world has come 
to regard as the consummate "pragmatic conservative" (whatever that might mean) 
of Iranian politics, former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. 

There is one thing for which Rafsanjani is famous - he seldom mixes illusions 
with reality. And the reality is that the Middle East's political compass 
shifted last week. 

As the trends became available regarding the Iraqi elections of last Thursday, 
what has emerged is that contrary to all pre-poll projections, the Shi'ite 
religious coalition, the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), not only held together, 
but also can be expected to dominate the new 275-member National Assembly for 
the next four years. 

More importantly, the "secular" candidates who were believed to enjoy links 
with the US security agencies would seem to have been routed. Former premier 
Iyad Allawi's prospects of leading the new government seem virtually nil. And 
Ahmad Chalabi's Iraqi National Accord suffered a shattering defeat. 

The prognosis that Sunnis would flock to Allawi or that Shi'ite constituents 
were disillusioned with the "fundamentalist" UIA and would be drawn to Allawi's 
secular platform has also proved to be highly faulty. 

All indications are that in the Shi'ite provinces such as Najaf, Karbala, 
Qadisiyah, Maysan, Diwaniya, Amara, Nasiriyah and Samawa, anywhere between 70% 
to 90% of the votes may have gone to the UIA, and that even in the mixed Babil, 
Diyala and Baghdad provinces the UIA may well secure the most number of seats. 
Some reports indicate the UIA as getting probably as high as 70% of the votes 
in Babil - a magnificent performance in a mixed Shi'ite-Sunni province. 

According to reports, early returns show a strong performance by the followers 
of the outspoken Shi'ite cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr, on the UIA slate. Some 
reports estimate Muqtada's nominees winning almost one third of the UIA slate. 

Worse still for the US, the "Sunni factor" choreographed by the American 
viceroys also seems to have come up with surprises. Al-Hayat newspaper 
commented that the two Sunni politicians who would appear to have done 
extremely well were Islamist leader Adnan Dulaimi and Ba'athist leader Salih 
al-Mutlak. (The latter is already being billed as the "Gerry Adams of Iraq", a 
reference to the mercurial Sinn Fein leader.) 

Moreover, former members of the Ba'ath Party and other militia leaders have 
lost no time asserting that despite the Sunni participation in the elections, 
their armed resistance to the American military occupation would be resumed. 
(Since the elections, 10 Iraqis, including five police officers and an 
American, have been killed.) 

Al-Hayat quoted a Ba'ath communique condemning the elections as an American 
plot to divide Iraq along ethnic and religious lines and vowing that resistance 
would not end until US troops left Iraqi soil. So much for the delicate 
distinction that American spokesmen were making between "Ba'athists" and 
"Saddamists". 

With the ascendancy of Muqtada and Mutlak in the fragmented political spectrum, 
the calls for American troops to leave Iraq can be expected to become more 
strident. In the new climate, the incoming parliament itself may well make such 
a formal demand on the Americans. The hurried visit by US Vice President Dick 
Cheney to Baghdad on Sunday, his first ever since the US invasion in 2003, 
underscores the disarray surfacing in Washington. 

Iran has, therefore, every reason to be pleased with the outcome of the 
election. Tehran sees that Iraq is now irreversibly on the verge of profound 
change, and transition is already in the air. The US is increasingly finding 
that it must come up with a clear plan to withdraw its troops from Iraq. As 
prominent Lebanese political observer Rami Khouri wrote on Saturday, "Starting 
the American military retreat from Iraq is important because American troops 
will continue to be a divisive and destabilizing force, just as the American 
military presence in Saudi Arabia after the 1991 war was a major provocation 
leading to Osama bin Laden-type resistance and terror." 

Khouri (who cannot be described even remotely as "anti-American" on the 
intellectual plane) suggested 18 months as a "target date" for Washington to 
pull out its troops from Iraq. Tehran is conscious that any American withdrawal 
from Iraq cannot be summarily done. It will have to be preceded by a broader 
regional understanding over Iraq's stability and cohesion, which inevitably 
involves Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Equally so, new regional 
security arrangements also become necessary. 

No less important for Tehran were the local Palestinian elections last week in 
West Bank cities. According to the preliminary results, the Islamic militant 
group Hamas won resounding victories. Coming as it does barely six weeks ahead 
of crucial parliamentary elections (scheduled for January 25), this development 
significantly impacts on the Palestinian problem and also alters the scope and 
dimensions of Middle East politics as a whole. 

Hamas remains committed to the destruction of Israel, and is considered a 
terrorist group by Israel, the US and the European Union. The implications for 
the tepid peace process with Israel are bound to be serious. An existential 
dilemma forthwith arises for the "international community": can it any longer 
remain myopic and exclude Hamas from the the Middle East's political landscape? 

But, more importantly, along with the significant showing by the Muslim 
Brotherhood in last month's elections in Egypt and the incremental 
"Islamization" of Iraq that is unmistakably under way (and that will get a 
fillip from the Iraqi elections), Hamas' emergence at the forefront of 
Palestinian politics signifies a huge eruption of popular disenchantment with 
the prevailing governance systems. Simply put, Islamism has placed itself in 
the vanguard of the Middle East's democratization - like "liberation theology" 
did at one time in Latin America. 

There was a great deal of political symbolism in the fact that Hamas' chief, 
Khaled Meshaal, happened to be visiting Tehran as the results of the 
Palestinian elections became known. (Interestingly, Rafsanjani was among those 
in the top echelons of the Iranian leadership who received Meshaal.) 

The Hamas leader seized the opportunity to hold a press conference, during 
which he said: "If Israel attacks Iran, then Hamas will widen and step up its 
confrontation of Israelis inside Palestine ... Hamas and other Islamic groups 
will stand by Iran's side. We are defenders of Iran's obvious right [to have a 
nuclear program] ... Iran is our source of pride." 

Britain has done well by scheduling exploratory talks between the EU-3 
(Britain, France and Germany) and Iran at the official level on Wednesday. The 
political geography of the Middle East is transforming so rapidly that the 
protagonists cannot but factor in an entirely new matrix of regional security 
and stability. The time for indulging in sophistries and vacuous rhetoric over 
Iran's nuclear issue is running out. 

The challenge facing the EU-3 lies in breaking the deadlock by advancing its 
offer to Iran made in August under the terms of the Paris Agreement. As the 
former International Atomic Energy Agency head (1981-1997) and UN chief weapons 
inspector in Iraq, Hans Blix, said last week, "I am not convinced that the EU 
has offered sufficiently interesting things to the Iranians ... when you 
compare these things that have been offered to Iran with what has been offered 
to North Korea, I am not sure that one is at the negotiations' end." 

Blix was caustic that up to now, the EU-3 remained "constrained by the backseat 
driver whom they have in the car, the Americans". 

M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for 
over 29 years, with postings including India's ambassador to Uzbekistan 
(1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001). 

(Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us 
for information on sales, syndication and republishing .)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
For $25, 15 Afghan women can learn to read. Your gift can make a difference.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_smZ4B/SdGMAA/E2hLAA/BRUplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

***************************************************************************
Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg 
Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny. 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia
***************************************************************************
__________________________________________________________________________
Mohon Perhatian:

1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik)
2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari.
3. Reading only, http://dear.to/ppi 
4. Satu email perhari: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5. No-email/web only: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6. kembali menerima email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Kirim email ke