Iraqi interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi reiterated on Friday that the elections would take place in January 2005. Addressing the UN General Assembly in New York, Allawi stressed that Iraq was capable of holding the country's first democratic elections on schedule, despite the continuing violence.
However, certain political circles still hold a skeptical view about the general elections in Iraq in light of the U.S. actions in the country.
Although U.S. President George W. Bush has called on the UN to dispatch peacekeepers to Iraq in order to stabilize the situation before the general election, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan stated that a credible election would not be possible in Iraq “if the security conditions continue as they are.”
However, Iraq’s most respected Shia cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, called for the general elections to proceed as planned, but expressed concern that January's poll could be delayed amid growing insecurity.
Sources close to the cleric announced that Sistani would not take part in the election if he believed it to be unfair and un-free and would declare it illegitimate.
The leader of the UN team organizing the Iraqi elections also criticized the U.S. defense secretary for suggesting that only a limited election might take place.
Carlos Valenzuela said he was under no illusions about the challenges Iraq posed, but believed elections could be held. He said the electoral commission organizing the poll "has found so far that it hasn't been helpful that different people have been speculating whether certain parts of the country will be able or not to participate in the election and whether the elections will be legitimate or not… and (this speculation) might create more danger of people feeling excluded from the process."
Insecurity and the fact that the prerequisites for holding an election currently do not exist in Iraq are blocking the democratic process.
A list of eligible voters has not yet been prepared; the country has failed to create 30,000 electoral posts required for this purpose or to educate the personnel responsible for holding elections. And, in light of the situation in Iraq, a casual observer could conclude that the U.S. forces are not interested in helping the Iraqis hold a free and fair election.
Unfortunately, most Iraqis doubt that it will be possible to hold a free election in view of the circumstances that have arisen since the occupation.
U.S. forces have even raised the possibility that voting might not be held in areas worst hit by violence.
It seems that the U.S. intends to limit the Iraqi election in pursuit of its own interests. Along these lines, the contradictory remarks made by certain U.S. officials on the Iraqi election and the overall U.S. plan have only muddied the waters.
It is clear that even before its troops set foot in Iraq, the United States not only decided to establish a long-term military presence in the country but also planned to attempt to block the establishment of true democracy in Iraq.
HL/HG
End
MNA
Your Comment