|
WSWS
: News &
Analysis : Middle
East : Iraq
Despite US pressure, no agreement reached on Iraqi constitution
By James Cogan
16 August 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
After six weeks of negotiations and intense pressure from Washington,
the Iraqi political factions supporting the US occupation of Iraq
failed to agree on the wording of a new constitution by the August
15 deadline set down by the Bush administration. At 20 minutes
to midnight, the parliament voted instead to give the committee
drawing up the document until August 22 to finalise a draft.
The reasons for the delay serve to highlight the utterly anti-democratic
and illegitimate character of the entire process. Under the protection
of thousands of US troops and completely sealed off from the Iraqi
people, the layers of the Iraqi ruling class who have been prepared
to collaborate with the colonial conquest of the country are using
sectarianism and communalism to try and lay claim to a portion
of the spoils of war.
The inability to reach an agreement by August 15 was due to
the refusal of Arab Sunni legislators to bow down to the demands
of the Kurdish nationalist and main Shiite fundamentalist organisations
that the future Iraqi state have a federal structure, with a weak
central government and powerful autonomous regions.
The three Kurdish provinces of northern Iraq are already an
autonomous zone, with its own regional government and armed forces.
The Kurdish leadership is demanding that the constitution expand
their territory to include the oil-rich area around the city of
Kirkuk. At one point, the Kurdish delegation proposed that the
constitution specifically give the Kurdish region the right to
secede from Iraq in eight years time.
The Shiite Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq
(SCIRI) has raised demands for the establishment of an autonomous
region in southern Iraq, incorporating nine, predominantly Shiite-populated
provinces where some 50 percent of the countrys oil industry
is located. Both the Shiite and Kurdish factions demanded that
regional governments be given control over most of the income
generated by the oil industry.
Federalism has been endorsed by the main Shiite cleric Ali
al-Sistani, who has consistently advocated taking advantage of
the US invasion of Iraq to gain greater wealth and political power
for the Shia elite and clergy. As well as autonomy, SCIRI and
Daawa called for the constitution to give a guiding
role to the Shiite clergy and assert Islam as the
primary source of the countrys legal code. Such a
measure would make way for Iranian-style religious courtsgiving
Sistani and the Shiite religious establishment another source
of privilege.
Representatives of the Sunni Arab establishment, which formed
the core support for the Iraqi state since the countrys
independence, denounced the calls for federalism as a recipe for
the countrys break-up. The head of the Sunni delegation
on the constitutional committee, Saleh Mutlak, declared: If
we accept federalism, the country will be finished.
Against a federal structure, the Sunni participants in the
constitutional committee advocated the maintenance of a strong
central government in Baghdad that controls the bulk of the oil
revenues. Their motives are just as venal as those of the Shiite
and Kurdish bourgeoisie. Under the Baathists, a dictatorial regime
in Baghdad was used to appropriate the lions share of Iraqs
energy wealth for a narrow Sunni elite, against their Kurdish
and Shiite rivals. The central and western areas of the country,
where most Sunnis live, have little in the way of oil and gas.
As the horse-trading has gone on, the US has made little attempt
to hide its frustration with the failure of the Iraqi factions
to produce a document. Bush and other officials repeatedly declared
that the deadline should be met.
In particular, US pressure had been brought to bear on the
Shiite parties that dominate the Iraqi government to make overtures
toward the Sunni elite. The main Sunni political and religious
organisations called for a boycott of the elections earlier this
year, while Sunni groups are fighting the bulk of the guerilla
war against the American forces in Iraq. As the war drags on,
and popular opposition swells in the US, the hope in Washington
has been that the insurgency can be weakened by buying off a section
of the Sunni establishment with promises that they will continue
to enjoy a privileged position.
More fundamentally, the constitution and the election to follow
in December are considered crucial to the transformation of Iraq
into an American client-state. The government that will be installed
by the end of the year will be able to begin the privatisation
of Iraqs state-owned oil industry and sign off on agreements
establishing long-term US military bases. The US military plans
centre on the Iraqi government having sufficient legitimacy and
armed forces to gradually reduce American troop numbers to 60,000,
making them available for use elsewhere.
The raising of autonomy demands by the Shiites in the past
few weeks, and Sunni recriminations, therefore stunned the
Bush administration, according to unnamed officials cited
in the New York Times on August 14. According to a report
by the British Observer, the impatience and anger reached
the point on Sunday where the US ambassador in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad,
simply handed the Iraqis a constitution written by US officials
and told them it was a guide to compromise.
Khalilzad told CNN later: This constitution can be a
national compact bringing Sunnis in, isolating extremists and
Baathist-hardliners and setting the stage over time for defeating
them.
The US draft dealt with the intractable divisions over Shiite
autonomy in the south by deferring any decision until after the
elections in December. While the Shiite parties agreed under US
pressure, however, the Sunni group allegedly rejected the deal
as it simply delayed the matter instead of ruling it out.
Over next days there is little doubt that vast pressure will
be brought to bear to reach a settlement and ensure a constitution
that is endorsed by all three of the main factions is ready for
August 22. There are only two alternativesboth of which
would dramatically heighten the problems facing US imperialism
in Iraq.
One is the dissolution of the parliament that was elected on
January 30, new elections and the formation of a new constitutional
committee. The other is the Shiite and Kurdish blocs using their
control of the existing parliament to ram through a constitution
that satisfies their demands regardless of the opposition.
This would be tantamount to a declaration of civil war against
the Sunni population by the US-installed Baghdad regime. As well
as fueling the insurgency, it would most likely result in a concerted
campaign by Sunni political and religious organisations for a
rejection of the document in the referendum that is scheduled
to be held on October 15. A two-thirds No vote in
three of Iraqs 18 provinces prevents the constitution being
adopted.
The three province veto clause was inserted into the political
framework on the insistence of the Kurdish parties, with the backing
of the US, so they could defeat any constitution that did not
deliver autonomy. It now has the potential to rebound against
them. At least four provinces have a clear Sunni majority.
None of the discussions and conflicts around the constitution
reflect, in any sense, the needs and aspirations of the vast mass
of the Iraqi people. The US invasion and occupation has produced
a situation in which millions of people are struggling to survive
without steady incomes and reliable electricity, water and other
basic services. Every day dozens of civilians are killed or maimed
by US-led troops or in indiscriminate bombings carried out by
Islamic extremist opponents of the occupation. As many as 4,000
civilians have lost their lives just since the January 30 election.
The greater the social catastrophe facing the Iraqi working
class, the more every faction of the ruling class has promoted
communalism to both deflect away from the crisis and as the means
of securing power and privilege for themselves. The logical outcome
is the outbreak of fratricidal conflict that will ultimately only
serve to benefit US imperialism and its agenda of dominating the
resources and territory of the Middle East.
See Also:
Sunni elite moves toward an
accommodation with US occupation of Iraq
[27 May 2005]
US issues more demands on
Iraqi government to include former Baathists
[20 May 2005]
US demands Iraq's new government
repudiate "de-Baathification"
[4 May 2005]
Who is Iraq's new prime minister
Ibrahim al-Jaafari?
[18 April 2005]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |