Iraqi Election Update

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


IRAQI ELECTION UPDATE….A reader writes:

I hate to be a “why aren’t you blogging about this” critic, but any reason you decided not to post about the passage yesterday of the Provincial Elections law in Iraq? It’s the sort of thing you and others would usually mention, and when I saw the story in the NYTimes I expected it to be a big topic of discussion, even with the bail-out and campaign antics taking up media attention. But instead, it got no mention at all on any blog I regularly read.

Say what? They finally passed an election law? Seriously? I had no idea. Marc Lynch provides some commentary:

Today it appears that the impasse has finally been broken as the Parliament overwhelmingly passed a new provincial elections law based on a compromise on Kirkuk engineered by the tireless UN envoy Staffan de Mistura….What’s more, they have agreed to push back the deadline for voting until January 31, 2009 (in the non-KRG provinces and Tamim province with Kirkuk). This will allow enough time for the Iraqi High Elections Commission (which will determine the exact date) to adequately prepare and organize and for the various political blocs to mobilize for the campaign.

….UPDATE: The Iraqi Parliament has released a detailed report, if not the actual text, of the law. Among the crucial details, beyond the elaborate compromise on Kirkuk: the vote will be open list, women’s quota but no minorities quota, can use symbols of non-candidates except for religious figures (so no Sistani? Is Sadr “religious” figure?), and some limitations on use of mosques and other places of worship for campaigning. All in all looks pretty good – the open list is key, and goes against the preferences of what the ruling coalition, plus a way was found to accomodate the women’s quota.

In my defense, it appears that even Juan Cole missed the news during the rush of events yesterday. Just goes to show what financial collapse combined with a day of world class political grandstanding will do.

The “compromise” on Kirkuk, by the way, is to go ahead and hold elections everywhere else while a commission convenes to cogitate for a while over the fate of Kirkuk. In other words, they’re just kicking the can down the road. Still, this is good news regardless.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest