We note that the Iraqi parliamentary coalitions, large and small are formed by sub-blocs, and the sub-blocs are formed by different parties, political and social (streams, movements .…etc). Therefore it is difficult to unite these groups within a specific place.
Recent reports suggest that the “Iraqi National Alliance” (INA), is in talk with the “State of Law” to form a unified parliamentary bloc and to postpone their disputes over who will be the candidate for the prime minister post to a later time.
The four major coalitions seats:
- Al-Iraqiya List (Iyad Allawi)- 91 seats.
- State of Law (Nuri al-Maliki)- 89 seats.
- Iraqi National Alliance (Al-Jaafari-Al-Sadr-Al-Hakim)- 70 seats.
- the Kurdistan Alliance (Talabani — Barzani)- 43 seats.
This means that the new Shiite-Shiite coalition will get 159 members in the Iraqi parliament, since the total number of the members of the Iraqi parliament is 325, then the balance required is as follows:
- The overall agreement is 100%, and that is the total of the 325 members.
- The majority decision is 50% +1, and that is 163 members.
- The absolute majority is 66.6%, and that is 217 members.
We note that the new coalition (SoL and INA) will need to win the votes of four more MPs, from other blocs to reach the 50% +1 required. Add to this that they need the votes of an extra 56 MPs to get the 66.66%, the 2/3 majority required by the constitution for the first parliament meeting to choose a president, who in his turn will appoint the largest parliamentary bloc to form a new Iraqi government.
Much important, the view of the political process by both Shiite parties (INA and SoL), which is very clear in the their election manifestos:
INA’s (manifesto) “Election Action Program”:
SoL’s (manifesto) “Election Action Program”:
To achieve the principle of involving representatives of all components, but not on sectarian, quotas or electoral results basis.
The difference between (Iraqi National Alliance) and (State of law), is that the first doesn’t mind if the government is formed by a number of the winning (social or political) majority components, while the losers turn to be the opposition. While Maliki’s coalition-building model is based on the winners to form the Gov., while ensuring the representation of all the political factions.
There’s obviously still a long way to go before Iraqi coalitions, alliances, blocs and leaders .. etc) could reach agreement, especially if we know that a third-party intervention may become improbable.
Iran is supporting Ibrahim Al-Jaafari — Nuri al-Maliki (in less degree). Saudi Arabia — Syria are more supportive of Iyad Allawi.
As for Washington, Allawi in his last interview on the Guardian he put it like:
[Iraqi] politicians attempting to sideline his supporters and the international community standing idly by.
Spokeswoman of Al-Iraqiya List Mysoon Al-Damluji put it very plain (image above):
The U.S. administration is not interested in who obtain the Prime Minister post, but only to form a government as soon as possible to ensure the withdrawal of its troops in the scheduled time.
From the two statements made by Allawi and his sidekick Damluji, it seems that Al-Iraqiya List doesn’t understand the U.S. position in this Iraqi crisis.
Even Al-Hayat’s Iraqi affairs reporter “Mushraq Abbas” came half the way to understand the U.S. policy saying:
It seems that the U.S. Administration the Iraqis the chance to collide against each others to produce the strongest, and most widely accepted at the regional level, to see the possibility to deal with him later.
What Abbas missed is that, despite what appears to be Washington’s “shy” efforts to influence the political crisis in Iraq, the pace of the Iraqi-Iraqi political conflict had increased faster than Washington’s capacity to control it by political means.
There is no political choice left for Washington but to accept the status quo or seek military and intelligence means to change it.