Open Iraqi election thread

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
1. I think he clearly said, a timetable for withdrawal, rather than a timetable for training troops.
2. I do see a problem with that. Timetables aren't always conducive to peace (see India-Pakistan, Israel-Palestine, etc.).

OTOH, it's unlikely that the Sunni Arabs will stop their violence without an immediate timetable.

I'm conflicted over what to do.

I doubt the majority of the insurgents will stop their violence WITH an immediate timetable. Or even with actual US withdrawl. OTOH,to the extent that the US presence causes SOME to join the insurgency, a withdrawl of US troops from direct engagement (when arabic speaking Iraqis, with cultural sensitivities, take over from Americans in such sensitive things as house searchs, patrols, etc) will probably be more important than a paper timetable.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
As I said, he did say that he wants a timetable, not a tentative plan that could be changed on the whim of the gov't or coalition.

If you establish a process, and establish that the Iraqi govt gets say so, the coalition can hardly change things on a whim. As for the whim of the Iraqi govt, hes going to BE the IRaqi govt, would he want to bind it? On the will o the wisp that it would get some insurgents to lay down their arms?

[Ramo]

I do think that a timetable would help a lot in reducing the insurgency (in the short term, anyways) - though not eliminating it, of coruse. Remember that their leaders said they'd drop the boycott with a timetable.

[Gangerolf]

In Australia, only 15% of the eligible Iraqis registered to vote.

Worldwide, IIRC only 280'000 of about one Million eligible expats registered to vote

[Giancarlo]

The insurgents just want to inflict as much as damage on a new democratic Iraq as they can. They must be eliminated. Afterall, I've seen an article showing that there has been massive progress in this last year alone (15,000 insurgents captured or killed).

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050126/ts_nm/iraq_general_dc_1

"BAGHDAD (Reuters) - U.S. and Iraqi forces have killed or captured 15,000 people over the past year in their fight against an insurgency ravaging Iraq (news - web sites), the commander of U.S. forces in the country said Wednesday."

This is what the media rarely talks about. The progress made against insurgents.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

I read in Metro this morning that Sweden, of all places, is the country with the most expat Iraqi voters - about 31k. IIRC, the interviewed ones were both going to vote for Allawi on the grounds that Sistani's bunch isn't secular enough.

Ah, CIA outpost Stockholm is doing its job, I see.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
I do think that a timetable would help a lot in reducing the insurgency (in the short term, anyways) - though not eliminating it, of coruse. Remember that their leaders said they'd drop the boycott with a timetable.

The boycott leaders you mean - IIP and AMS. But theyve also said theyll participate in constitutional talks despite the boycott - without regard to a timetable, IIUC.

[Ramo]

AMS (the more important body), IIRC. Point is, they want this a lot, and the new gov't would risk an escalating civil war without a timetable.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
In Australia, only 15% of the eligible Iraqis registered to vote.

Worldwide, IIRC only 280'000 of about one Million eligible expats registered to vote

evidently some dont consider themselves expats, but "immigrants"

Also the voting places arent real convenient. Theres a polling place in suburban Maryland, IIUC its the only one for the east coast of the US - not every poor expat can afford the time and money to fly in from Boston, say. I presume the situation is similar in Oz, Euro, etc.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
AMS (the more important body), IIRC. Point is, they want this a lot, and the new gov't would risk an escalating civil war without a timetable.

Begs the question of how much help AMS is already giving to the insurgency. Id suggest its worth negotiating with AMS over. Of course AMS will also be asking for input on constitutional questions, despite having few or no seats in the assembly. Also to avoid AMS supporting the insurgency. You can only sell one horse so many times - at some point AMS has to decide what it really wants. AMS of course can hardly say its ok with an indefinite occupation - THEY have a constituency to answer to as well, and not necessarily the most politically realistic one.

[DanS]

I dont know - seems SCIRI and Dawa have lost some support in the URBAN areas in the south - apparently theyre blamed for the way theyve run Basra (corrupt, and too fundie for a secular town) Allawi party, and the ICP may have a shot at taking over the provincial govt there.

I hadn't heard much about this. I think Allawi's list will do OK, but they probably won't make it into the government.

The Kurds will also be big winners. They'll be overrepresented. They only have one list, as I recall.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS


I hadn't heard much about this. I think Allawi's list will do OK, but they probably won't make it into the government.

The Kurds will also be big winners. They'll be overrepresented. They only have one list, as I recall.

theres another Kurdish list, but the main Kurdish parties are on the same list.

[DanS]

It's possible that a unity government will be formed from the main winners. That wouldn't be so bad.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Sava
My prediction: this is a sham, Allawi wins... is US puppet.

I'm sure Allawi wil be a top three but my guess is list 169 backed by The United Iraqi Alliance (that's Sistani's group for those of you who don't know) willl likely be the top vote getter this Sunday. The Shi'as make up around 60% of the Population and they're very egar to vote as are the Kurds and christians who together make up 20%. For those three groups we can expect 60%-70% turn out while the Sunni Arabs seem intent of commiting political suicide by refusing to vote thus insuring they are excluded from any future government.

The Sunni Arabs will likely have a turn out ranging from the teens up to 50% depending up how active militants are in a given area. By and large if the Sunnis turn out at 25% then I'd say their turn out was better then expected. Over all we will likely see national turn out in the 60% to 70% range dispite bombings and threats of violence meaning turnout will be better then just about eveery western country.

Expect Islamists, baathists, and antiwar westerners to claim that level of turn out wasn't high enough and the election was illegitimate no matter how high the voters turn out. The big deciding factor for Allawi will be how many secular shi'a show up because that will be his base while the religious shia will vote list 169, Kurds will vote either KDP or PDK depending upon where they live, the handful of Sunni Arab candidates will get washed away because sunnis won't be voting very much, and finge groups like the communist and reformed baathists will get less then 5% combined.

That's my guess.

[Winston]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Theres a polling place in suburban Maryland, IIUC its the only one for the east coast of the US - not every poor expat can afford the time and money to fly in from Boston, say. I presume the situation is similar in Oz, Euro, etc.

It is. There's one polling place just West of Copenhagen which will serve all eligible voters in Denmark and Southern parts of Sweden.

But then the Iraqis managed to raise enough of a stink about it being too expensive, that the Danish government has agreed to cover travelling expenses for the Iraqis in Denmark. Heh, I guess we're not very good at ignoring complaints from immigrants, whether they're actually merited or not...