Iraq: Provincial elections and displacement

In all the recent reporting that I’ve seen on the Iraqi provincial elections, and their now almost certain postponement, I’ve seen almost no mention of one of the biggest administrative/political hurdles to holding these elections: that of the conflict-driven displacement of some four million Iraqis — more than 12 percent of the whole national population–away from their earlier home communities.
Somewhere around or just under two million of those displaced have gone to other countries and are thus considered refugees. Somewhere around or over two million of them are displaced inside the country and are thus defined as ‘Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDPs.)
In all the ‘purple finger moments’ (electoral events) that have been organized inside post-2003 Iraq until now, the fact of those vast displacements was not relevant. Those elections were organized on a nationwide proportional representation (PR) system. Thus, there was no relevance to any voters having an affiliation with a defined constituency. People could vote in them from anywhere within or outside Iraq, based only on possession of an officially issued Iraqi ration card or other proof of citizenship.
But in the context of province-level elections, the large-scale ethnic and sectarian cleansing that has occurred in the country since 2003– and also, before then– becomes very relevant indeed.
Where analysts or media people have focused on the challenge these broad displacements pose to the holding of sub-national-level polls, this attention has nearly always been focused on the special referendum stipulated for Kirkuk. And yes, Kirkuk has been the locus of considerable “demographic contestation”– i.e. successive waves of anti-Kurd, then anti-Arab and anti-Turkmen ethnic cleansing– over the past 30 years.
But ethnic and sectarian “cleansing” (oh, how I hate that word) has been a huge issue elsewhere in Iraq, too.
If province-level elections are to be held throughout the whole country, how will the four million IDPs and refugees be guaranteed their right to participate?
Who will define eligibility to vote in each province?
If everyone is guaranteed the right to vote in the province named as their home province on their ration card, will they be accorded all necessary facilities and protection to go to that home province to cast their vote?
Or, would it somehow be arranged that they cast their vote in the elections for their home province but can do so from wherever they are, inside or outside the country?
These are not trivial matters, at all.
I note that in some of the crucial sub-national elections in Bosnia, voters were accorded full rights to go to their earlier home provinces and cast their votes there. But given the scale of the ethnic cleansing there, organizing that was a massive operation!
The fact is, once you start dividing any country’s national population into territorially based sub-national voting units, there are numerous, very tricky decisions to be made regarding who has political rights within each unit. Should the broad outlines of the ethnic and sectarian cleansing that has occurred since 2003 simply be accepted as a “fact on the ground”, and decisions on voter eligibility be made on that basis? I doubt if many Iraqis want that to happen. (It would also be a highly unethical outcome.) Also, even if that approach were to be adopted regarding the IDPs, where would that leave the two million external refugees?
Iraq doesn’t look close to having reached national consensus on these questions yet.
I note that within the UN there is a considerable body of experience of addressing precisely such questions of untangling complex, conflict-driven demographic changes in the context of conflict-termination projects in several places around the world. The one that I’ve looked at most closely was in Mozambique, which had been subject to massive demographic displacements during the course of its 15-year civil war. But undertaking the repatriation of refugees and IDPs to their earlier home communities is certainly the preferred approach to the plight of these people, within the context of broader DDR efforts.
I’m not sure, frankly, what use provincial elections would really have in Iraq in the absence of such efforts?
I gather the political hopes from the provincial elections in Iraq have mainly been that they would help to integrate the formerly marginalized Sunni parties and blocs back into the political system. But might not the problems of demographic displacement and voter eligibility that would be aroused in the context of a provincial elections be more destabilizing than stabilizing? (Especially given that the Sunnis have probably been disproportionately the victims of ethnic/sectarian cleansing.)
Would it not be better, perhaps, simply to scratch the idea of provincial elections at this point and work on having the largest possible participation in the national elections that are scheduled for next year?

4 thoughts on “Iraq: Provincial elections and displacement”

  1. Would it not be better, perhaps, simply to scratch the idea of provincial elections at this point and work on having the largest possible participation in the national elections that are scheduled for next year?
    Pretty well ANYTHING would be better than what the GOP geniuses are now presidin’ over.
    As Abú Aardvark summatorializes ,
    The controversial provincial election law has finally passed the Iraqi Parliament, accompanied by a mass walkout by the Kurdish representatives, a raft of procedural complaints about secret voting, and warnings that it is impossible to carry out an honest, credible election on the scheduled date. A happy ending! The law passed with 127 votes out of the 140 members in the room (out of 275 total). That’s 46% of Parliament voting in favor, but it’s legal, just barely – a quorum requires 50% +1, or 139 members. The procedures used by Speaker Mahmoud Mashhadani ruffled more than a few feathers. The Deputy parliamentary speaker Khalid al-Attiyah, for one, “said the secret ballot was unconstitutional.” Tareq al-Harb, identified by Aswat al-Iraq as a legal expert, seemed to agree and dubbed the vote boycotted by an entire Iraqi community as well as the failure to vote on the move to a secret vote against the constitution. The Kurdish walkout over the arrangements for Kirkuk likely spells trouble….”
    (( Almost enough to shake one’s faith in Big Management, that is! ))
    Happy days.

  2. Iraq has suffered through three wars in the last 20 years. The attack by the United States in 2003 and the removal of the Iraqi government has led to five Years of intense chaos and violence, ethnic and communal cleansing, and terrible suffering. An estimated two million refugees (Pdf) are in neighbouring countries,primarily Syria and Jordan,
    So there is considerable uncertainty as to the actual numbers of refugees.Iraqi refugees now from US and South America to China you can find Iraqi any where in the world now some from the old days some from the sanction time and more now after 2003.
    You should stop and thinking about the term ” ethnic and sectarian “cleansing” ” is it planed? Is it prepared to be? Or is it just happened?
    All those question have some validity, when we look back five years when a country in one days lost its military and police forces in one signature by stupid arrogant thug came to put the scenario of nation building on the Babylonian land.
    So nation building was in fact ended by “ethnic and sectarian “cleansing”” it is designed to make a nation that lived 5000 years scattered on dreams of some who came for revenge for greediness and some for to fill the power vacuum that generated by US.
    So back to the Helena post if we comparing ‘purple finger moments’ (electoral events) with today of province-level elections, the case here been more favourable to province-level elections, as there is no chaos there is no killing there is some sort of law not what was four years then.
    If the world refusing to regard Mozambique Election legitimate and not legal how those same agreed that Iraqi election ok and truthful.
    Maliki came with new brilliant idea, instead using the normal official system to help all Iraqis he went which to break through under helping Iraqis in their life “Handing out cold, hard cash to people on the street as they plead for help. Iraq’s prime minister has been doing just that in recent weeks, doling out Iraqi dinars as an aide trails behind, keeping a tally.”
    This shows what sort of democracy and fair election will be in Iraq.
    So what about these walls so may be next we got election for separations of communities surrounded by these walls

Comments are closed.