Iraq's January 31 provincial elections were another important
milestone on Iraq's long and difficult journey toward becoming a
stable democracy.
According to preliminary results, the big electoral winner was
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law coalition. While 10
percent of the votes must still be counted, it is apparent that the
relatively peaceful atmosphere on Election Day was a triumph for
U.S. policy and a vindication of the Bush Administration's surge
strategy. But it remains to be seen whether all the contending
factions will peacefully accept the provincial election results
and, more importantly, the results of national elections slated for
December. The Obama Administration must be careful to maintain
adequate U.S. troops in Iraq to safeguard the prospects for
continued political progress.
A Vote for Security
Iraqi voters rewarded Prime Minister Maliki for his nationalist
and non-sectarian platform, which transcended the Shia roots of his
Dawa Party and gave him a decisive victory over rival Shia parties.
Apparently pleased with his successful efforts to stabilize the
country by cracking down on radical militias--some of which were
aligned with Iran--voters gave Maliki a mandate for a strong
central government. Maliki's State of Law coalition won a plurality
of the vote in 9 provinces, including 38 percent in Baghdad and 37
percent in Basra, two of Iraq's most heavily populated
provinces.
The results were a win for pragmatic nationalism over sectarian
ideologies. In general, voters favored nationalist leaders who ran
on non-sectarian platforms and drifted away from parties that
espoused Islamist platforms. The Iraq Islamic Party, a Sunni Arab
movement, and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), a Shia
Arab movement--both of which emerged from the 2005 elections as the
largest parties within their own sects--attracted significantly
fewer voters this time around. Both parties suffered from the
perception that they had accomplished little during their time in
power. The ISCI was also perceived as being influenced too much by
Iran.
Shifting Political Equilibrium
In addition to strengthening Prime Minister Maliki, the
elections boosted Sunni Arab representation in provincial
governments, an encouraging development for the bottom-up
development of stable representative government. Sunnis had largely
boycotted the 2005 elections, embittered by the loss of their
political dominance under Saddam Hussein's dictatorship and
resentful of the rise of the Shia-Kurdish coalition that had
displaced them.
The infusion of new Sunni-based political parties can play a
positive role if they are incorporated into a more broadly based
coalition government after national elections later this year. But
there is also a potential for increased political friction. Some
leaders of the Sahwa (Awakening) movement have charged that the
Iraqi Islamic Party, which controlled the polling stations, rigged
the elections to dilute their victory, and they have threatened
violence unless the electoral results are reviewed.
Sunni political parties in northern Iraq are also likely to
become more assertive in pushing back against the Kurdish political
parties that have recently dominated provincial politics by
default. The bitter dispute over the status of Kirkuk and other
territories could also fuel growing political violence between
Kurds and Arabs, unless it can be peacefully resolved.
The election results also revealed another cloud on the
political horizon: The radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose
militia was decisively defeated by Iraqi forces backed by U.S.
troops last year, demonstrated that he retains substantial
political support among Shiites. Although he was forced into exile
in Iran, he retains the loyalty of his family's powerful patronage
network and his allies did well in Baghdad and the predominantly
Shia southern provinces. As it has in the past, the Sadrist
movement may play a crucial role in Iraq's coalition politics in
the future.
The Need for a Continued U.S. Security
Role
Iraq has made dramatic security gains in the past two years,
thanks to the Bush Administration's surge strategy, which enabled
and expanded an Iraqi surge against Iran-backed militias, Sunni
insurgents, and al-Qaeda in Iraq. But Iraq's political progress is
tentative and fragile. It remains to be seen whether Iraqi
political parties have developed the maturity needed to accept
being voted out of power without resorting to political violence.
Moreover, the parties voted into power must demonstrate
considerable adroitness to defuse lingering ethnic and sectarian
tensions, build effective government institutions, deliver services
to their constituents, and provide hope for a better future.
The provincial elections were the first of several important
votes slated for Iraq this year. Iraqis also go to the polls this
summer for local elections, for a national referendum on the
U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, and for parliamentary
elections in December that will be critical to the formation of the
next national government. Iraq's shifting political equilibrium is
potentially destabilizing and requires a strong U.S. military
presence to assure adequate security. Iraqi security forces have
made great strides and have become increasingly effective, but they
remain dependent on U.S. training, logistical support, air support,
intelligence, and counter-terrorism cooperation.
U.S. troops also play a vital role in deterring Iran from
undermining Iraqi progress. For instance, Tehran has given support
and sanctuary to Shia Iraqi militias. Many of these militants, who
fled to Iran last year to avoid a government crackdown, are now
believed to be infiltrating back into Iraq. In order to contain and
defeat this destabilizing influx, the Iraqi security forces are
going to require strong American assistance.
President Obama described last month's elections as "an
important step forward," but building a stable democracy requires a
lot more than elections: It demands the development of a civil
society conducive to power-sharing and respect for the rule of law.
Further political progress requires a willingness to compromise,
which is increasingly unlikely without a secure political
environment that marginalizes extremists and promotes consensus
politics.
The Obama Administration must not become complacent and
imprudently withdraw all U.S. combat forces within 16 months, as
Obama pledged to do during his run for the presidency. Such an
early withdrawal could pull the rug out from under a young
democratic government and increase the risk that Iraq will slide
back into chaos. That is not change that Americans--or Iraqis--can
believe in.
James Phillips is Senior
Research Fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs in the Douglas and Sarah
Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the
Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International
Studies, at The Heritage Foundation