Plum Blossoms

« Laying Zhao to Rest | Main | Stop Taking Our Women! »

January 28, 2005

The Vote Must Go On

I penned a response to a recent Ubyssey editorial that questions the wisdom of the upcoming elections in Iraq. The Ubyssey, for those who don't know, is the official student publication at the University of British Columbia.

The Vote Must Go On

Your recent editorial, "Democracy under fire," brings up some important issues on Iraq's upcoming National Assembly elections and the future of the country, some of which I agree with. However, I find the overall editorial to be fundamentally flawed, and its conclusions notably differ from my own view of the facts.

Most of the arguments in the editorial were based on the premise that the upcoming elections are a "culmination" of the Iraqi political transition. However, this is far from being the case: the current interim constitution of Iraq clearly states that the elections are the beginning of the next phase of political transition, which shall end with the ratification by referendum of a permanent constitution. The United States and the international community have much more to do before Iraq can stand on its own: this election, therefore, is a weak excuse for the United States to terminate its commitments to Iraq.

The violence that plagues many parts of Iraq is a serious problem, and indeed does compromise the representativeness of the National Assembly to be elected. However, the alternative, to postpone elections, is an even worse scenario that will do little to curb the insurgency and create stability. Since the explicit goal of the insurgents is to prevent the elections, a delay would give them increased political legitimacy. A stable peace and political success in Iraq are intricately linked: even a partially successful election will accelerate the political process that will marginalize the insurgents, while delaying the election may cause a death spiral as insurgents grow bolder with each setback. More severely, a delay would weaken the position of the current political process in the eyes of the Shia majority and the Kurds, who are unsurprisingly wary of attempts by Sunni extremists to deprive their political rights. They may, therefore, seek alternative means of achieving political power, including partition, that would send dangerous shock waves throughout the Middle East.

An even more basic fact, going back to the letter of the law, is that the current elections are already delayed: the interim constitution states that National Assembly elections should have been held in December 2004. The current timetable is according to the legal provision in the constitution: any further delay, on the other hand, contradicts the interim constitution and compromises the political process that it outlines.

You doubt the legitimacy of the recent Afghan presidential elections, citing it as an example of a flawed and rushed political process. Yet the Afghan opposition parties that threatened to boycott the elections had decided to abide by the official election results even before the votes were counted. The final result, the victory of Hamid Karzai, was by such a wide margin that there is little reason to suggest major flaws that could have changed the election outcome. To have delayed the elections in Afghanistan would have, again, placed the interim authority there under increased stress and threaten the political transition into representative democracy.

There are many points that you and I both agree on: the Iraqi elections cannot serve as an excuse for the United States and the international community to abandon Iraq to eternal chaos and violence. Yet to move on, one must move forward. Delaying the elections, to prevent the US from "[passing] the mess they've made," would merely prolong the current instability: instead of fixing the "mess," a delay would merely allow it to fester. I also agree that the current violence will not end overnight after the elections, but again, delaying the elections would not be the solution. An elected Iraqi government, even one that is voted in under less than perfect circumstances, will have the increased legitimacy that would give it increased international support necessary for survival, as well as to serve as the forum for reconciliation and understanding between Sunni and Shia, Arab and Kurd, and individual Iraqis in the aftermath of decades of war and tyranny.

-Kelvin Chan
4th Year Science
28 January 2004

Relevant links:

• Law of Administration for the State of Iraq for the Transitional Period

• Afghanistan news at JURIST

Posted by Kelvin at January 28, 2005 7:22 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.kelvin-chan.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/34

Comments

Post a comment