Considering the voting results, it is evident that no group in Iraq can form a government alone and there will be some new coalition efforts to form a government in Baghdad. The surprise of the vote returns in Iraq, which is controversial, is that Allawi became victorious by leaving the President Maliki behind. While during the elections Allawi had announced that his group could have 50 seats in the parliamentary, it was seen that he doubled the amount of votes he had expected according to the election returns. Al Maliki harshly reacted against the results and demanded manual count of votes. The important reason of Maliki’s reactions is the suspicious condition of the corporations that provide technical and cognitive support in order to transfer the votes counted to electronic environment. One of the corporations that transfer the voting data to the electronic environment in Iraq is said to have American origins, and furthermore particularly the other one is thought to have more interesting connections.

 

This corporation is claimed to belong to the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, the permanent enemy of Iran. Moreover, it was claimed that this organization rigged the elections as a response to Maliki’s important steps to eradicate these ferocious enemies of Iran and send them away from Iran. That is why, al- Maliki is so insistent on his protests.

 

Al-Maliki stated that the election results could not be put into force in this way and threatened not to let the administration change silently. Moreover, the cities in the south of Baghdad announced that if their demands were not met during 24 March protests, they would be autonomous by refusing to support the central government in terms of economy and oil. And consequently all these illustrate how delicate the unity of the state is.

 

It is obvious that the delicate political structure in Iraq is closely related to the profile of voters. When we look at the profile of voters at the last elections in Iraq, we can classify the voters under three main groups. The first group composes of the people who make their political, social, and cultural choices in accordance with their religious, sectarian or ethnic identities and vote in this direction. The second group composes of the people who oppose the fragmented structure in the society which can cause discrimination. And the last group composes of the people who believe that it is not possible for the elections to reflect the will of the people in the context of the administration and who boycott the elections.

 

These choices also determined the results of the elections which were held as the second elections after the occupation period of Iraq in 2003 and which are vitally important. As it is seen at the last elections in Iraq, the people who are uncomfortable with ethnic and religious fragmentations use their influence by reflecting this discomfort to the voting process. However, it is seen that the primary players to determine the election results are the ones that vote according to their religious, sectarian, and ethnic identities. With the support of these voters, the Iraqi political groups try to shape the political atmosphere in the country in this direction; and consequently this attempt is not approved by the countries in the region, particularly by Turkey.

 

 

Under these circumstances which provide a basis for the political ambiguities in Baghdad, Washington does not want al-Maliki and other political groups, which have close relations with Iran, to have a major role in the process of the USA’s withdrawal from the country. It is basically argued that the USA, which is after new sanctions on Tehran administration, wants to take steps that will please its allies in the region without much appeasement toward Iran during this withdrawal process.

 

When the Baathist power, having the authority in the country were sent away with the USA’s interference in Iraq in 2003, it provided a basis for the demographically dominant power, Shiites, to constitute the new Iraq government. With the fall of Saddam (Iran’s ideological enemy)’s regime, the Iraqi Shiites have had more value in the country. As a result, it started the geopolitical power war between Iran and the USA. Similarly, the establishment of Iraqi Kurdistan due to the political ambiguity in Iraq deeply concerned Turkey. Therefore, Iraq has been the most important foreign agenda item of Turkey recently. The rise of Shiites in the region unsettled the Arab states in the region, particularly the Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

 

 

All these developments started an era in which Iraq’s neighbors are waiting for an opportunity to interfere in Baghdad’s new political life and there are various power struggles. This era triggered a period in which things fell into place in Iraq and not only the USA but also the other states in the region do not want to stay out of the structure in Iraq. That the last elections in Iraq were held in a ripening period illustrated that the outside powers that support the Iraqi political groups of the elections, entered a new phase with the elections in the power struggle. Having a negative attitude towards Shiite dominated Baghdad, with the fall of Saddam’s regime, in terms of the political choices, the Saudi Arabia supported the Allawi group at the last elections. The Turkmen, supported by Turkey, allied with the Allawi group. Planning to withdraw from the country next year, the USA supported Allawi again because it does not want the president during the withdrawal period to be among the Shiites who are close to Iran and it wants to be the main actor in Iraq even after the withdrawal. In fact, Allawi who was a high-level Baathist authority in the past and who was alleged to inform Blair about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and was given a role in the Middle East plans of the CIA’s toppling down Saddam Hussein in 1996 and the Bay of Pigs Invasion. And Washington, indeed, used Allawi and threw him away upon the start of the occupation period.

 

It is seen that in terms of Iraq’s neighbors and the US forces, the one that made the most profit through the elections is Iran. It is expected from Allawi, who have the majority of the seats in the assembly, to establish the administration. However, it will be realized that it will not be so easy considering the political process in Iraq. Because the Allawi group cannot form a government alone, they have to receive the support of Al-Maliki, Al-Hakim, and the Kurdish groups, which have close relations with Iran. In other words, the basis of the government which will be formed in Baghdad and how the government will be shaped, will be determined by Tehran in that sense. The clearest evidence of it is that the notable Iraqi political leaders went to Iran upon Tehran’s invitation without delay and they attended the meeting directed by Qassem Suleimani, who is responsible for Iraq issues in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.  

 

 

The Iraqi leaders’ tending towards Tehran in order to share authority is observed with anxiety by the states in the region, especially the USA. The USA is well aware of the fact that in order to actualize its withdrawal plans, it has to negotiate with Iran somehow and pursue attentive policies that do not drive the Tehran administration, which can change the atmosphere of stability in Iraq, into corner. The USA, Allawi, and Iran continue to bargain over who will be in the group that will govern Iraq on the basis of the other Shiite and Kurdish groups. As who will be Baghdad’s administrative group lurk in the results of this bargain between Iran and the USA.

 

However, the main point is whether Iraq will evolve into a political structure directed towards the Arab world and Turkey, which can stabilize Iran. And this is desired by the states in the region and the Western powers.

Under these circumstances, as a response to Iraqi Shi’ism that is reflected to the political life as a demographic determinism, notably Turkey and particularly the Sunni Arab states in the region have to accept this truth; find ways to live with a Shiite-centric Baghdad; and take steps to improve the relations. Each negative attitude towards the Shiite-centric Baghdad administration will make the Baghdad administration closer to Iran. And the consideration of using terror in the region as a means of politics will merely be for the benefit of the powers out of the region.

 

 

At this point, as a country in the region with its significant mission and duties, Turkey comes to the forefront. With the help of the multilateral relations and collaboration processes with all groups in Iraq and particularly with the Shiite-centric Baghdad administration, Turkey is the only country that makes also the Sunni Arab countries closer to the Baghdad administration. The attempt of shaping Iraq by ignoring the Shiites will never bring stability and security to Iraq and furthermore it can start a period, during which the stability in the countries in the region can be destroyed. Keeping all these in mind, the possibility for Turkey to be the equilibrant in Iraq, which is the arena of geopolitical war between Iran and the USA, is not weak.

 

It is evident that the process, in which the new government in Baghdad will be formed, will be very painful. Because during this process things fell into place in Iraq, not only the occupation forces but also the countries in the region do not want to stay out of the governing structure. As the election results indicate, Al-Maliki and Al-Hakim with 159 seats in the assembly need four more seats to form their government or to prevent Allawi from forming the government. But, it is obvious that Allawi, who is supported by some countries in the region and the USA, will also be supported by other groups for his attempts of forming the government and furthermore the outside powers that find Allawi’s power good for their interests, will benefit from all opportunities and advantages during this process. However, what should be kept in mind is that the most important factor in whether chaos or stability will be dominant in Iraq is waiting for Iraqi Shi’ism to finish its natural political, social, and cultural evolution by including it to the regional and international system. Otherwise, other attempts can potentially trigger the process which may cause the division of Iraq.

 

(Published in Star [newspaper] on April 11, 2010)

 

(Dr. Kaan Dilek, SDE Specialist)