THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VI, Issue # 201, September 14, 2004
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
IRAQ'S ELECTORAL SYSTEM: A MISGUIDED STRATEGY
By Michael Rubin
FULL STORY:
With the conclusion of the Iraqi National Conference last month, the next milestone for Iraqi democracy will be the January, 2005,
elections for a 275-member Parliament. Already, the electoral system chosen for Iraq could dampen the prospects for a representative
as well as democratic vote. On June 15, 2004, in response to a recommendation by Carina Perelli, director of the UN's Electoral Assistance
Division, Coalition Provisional Authority administrator L. Paul Bremer decreed that Iraq would be a single electoral constituency, with
seats allocated through proportional representation (PR) based on national lists. Perelli's decision to avoid multiple districts was
colored by technical considerations. Treating all of Iraq as one district bypasses questions of internal boundaries and simplifies
ballots. The entire nation would need only one ballot, rather than separate ones in each district.
Such a system is bad for Iraq. Voting is only one aspect of the democratic element of constitutional democracy; another aspect is
accountability. Under a PR system, parliamentarians are not tied to a specific district, but rather to a party list. Instead of being
responsible to a town's voters, representatives will be loyal to party leaders. The pitfalls of such a system have led Poles to seek a
constitutional amendment to replace PR with districts. While more than ninety countries use some form of PR, its application to single
national districts is seldom without complication. Many Israelis complain that single-district PR allows radical small parties to hold
their political system hostage. In Germany's Weimar Republic, single-district PR helped bring the Nazis to power.
In Iraq, PR will breed radicalism. It is easier to forbid women from taking certain jobs, for example, if a politician need not answer to
women in his district. If elections are based on 275 different districts, then each district would have only 87,000 people.
Representatives would be closer to the people. Districts already exist, although Iraqis are keen to reverse Baathist gerrymandering.
Even in disputed areas like Kirkuk, Iraqis say they can reach consensus to put Kurdish, Arab, and Turkoman neighborhoods into
different districts.
Failure to base elections on districts may mean that some areas have no representation. This could breed violence. Residents of Basra
and Mosul accepted the former Iraqi Governing Council (IGC), for example, because IGC members hailed from their towns. Since
Fallujah and Sadr City had no such political outlet, they more quickly turned to violence. Under the UN plan, if local candidates are
not listed high enough on the party slate, whole towns may have no representation. Iraqis recognize the importance of geographical
representation. It was geography, not personality, that led the Iraqi Governing Council to recommend Ghazi Al Yawar, a tribal leader
from Mosul, over Adnan Pachachi, a former foreign minister, as its president. Any political body that did not include Iraq's second
largest city had little chance of success.
While Perelli has said that a single national district would allow geographically "broken" communities to vote together, it is simplistic
to assume that all religious or ethnic groups want to vote as a bloc. Such a system sets Iraq down the slippery slope toward
Lebanese-style communalism. Multiple districts would still represent Iraq's diversity. Fallujah would elect Sunnis, and Najaf, Shiites.
The real difference would be in protection of religious minorities. With local districts, Chaldeans would win seats in Al Qosh and
Yezidis in Sinjar even if they chose not to run on a religious platform. Under a national district system, the risk of disenfranchisement
would be greater. Because religious minorities divide themselves politically, they may not gain enough votes nationally.
The UN plan will also invite corruption. It is easier for outsiders to buy a party list than to channel money to 275 different candidates.
When constituents know their candidates, it is harder to hide outside money.
Some specialists have argued for replicating in Iraq what worked in Cambodia, East Timor, and Nigeria. But it is a mistake to treat Iraq
as analogous. Iraqi history suggests that a system privileging party lists over independent candidates will be counterproductive. Older
Iraqis blame political parties for inciting riots in the 1950s and 1960s. The younger generation associates organized politics with the
abusive Baath Party. In Iraqi Kurdistan, many students say that corruption revolves around the party structure. Some polls suggest
that only three percent of Iraqis have faith in parties. While the UN plan allows independents to run in theory, Iraqis saw how party
machination and backroom deals marginalized independents at the Iraqi National Conference.
The Iraqi election commission — and not outsiders — should decide Iraq's election system. The UN choice is not the only option.
After all, countries like Australia and Jordan combine multiple districts with proportional representation and bring representatives
closer to the people. There is still time to listen to Iraqis.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East & the Problem of Iraq
Page Two
Page One
Modern Constitutional Democracy:
Fundamental Character & Essential Ingredients
Constitutionalism: The First Essential Ingredient
of Modern Constitutional Democracy
Dictatorship: The Opposite of Constitutionalism
Representative Democracy: The Second Essential Ingredient
of Modern Constitutional Democracy
The Problem of Rogue States:
Iraq as a Case History
The Middle East & the Arabs
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
War & Peace in the Real World
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and Editor of The Middle East Quarterly, spent
seventeen months in Iraq between 2000 and 2004. The foregoing article by Rubin originally appeared in the September, 2004,
issue of Arab Reform Bulletin and can be found on the website maintained by the
Middle East Forum.
Republished with Permission of the Middle East Forum
Reprinted from the Middle East Forum News
mefnews@meforum.org (MEF NEWS)
September 13, 2004
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VI, 2004
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy