What To Make of the Iraq Elections

Between Ayad Allawi’s recommendation to place Iraq under an impartial, internationally supervised caretaker government “to prevent the country from sliding into violence and counter what he says are efforts to change the vote results” and Nour al-Maliki’s rejection of it because it would undermine Iraq’s sovereignty, who between these two contenders for Iraq’s highest political office has a disinterested vision for a stable and united Iraq? If Allawi is willing to put his political future on the line and the welfare of his country in the hands of impartial (outside) judges, it is probably because he understands that the conditions in Iraq for genuine republicanism are still untenable. That is probably a sign of a reasonable and pragmatic leader who is willing to give up his own personal ambitions for the sake of what is good for his country.

Maliki’s interest in protecting Iraq’s sovereignty against foreign interference seems noble but idealistic. As it is, ethnic factionalism continues to divide Iraq. National reconciliation programs are unable to bridge the gap that divides the Kurds, the Sunnis, and the Shiites. For as long as ethnic division rules the day, a united and stable Iraq cannot come about. If it is true that Maliki is protecting Iraq’s sovereignty in the name of nationalism, two questions need to be asked: one, which Iraq is he protecting? And two, if there is indeed a fully functioning Iraqi nation, why should nationalism in all its close-mindedness be good for that country right now?