Michael Meacher: America is usurping the democratic will in Iraq

[NNN0LHI]

http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=626452

To forestall a clerical-driven religious regime, Washington has a plan to arm small militias

05 April 2005

It's two months now since the elections in Iraq, and still no government is formed. The struggle over the Sunni problem, the Kurdish claim for the massive Kirkuk oilfields, and the manoeuvring between religious groups and contending personalities continues unabated. But there is a deeper problem still.

There are two scenarios for Iraq. One, the American one, aims for a pro-Western government, an uninterrupted supply of Middle East oil to US markets, and a semi-permanent military base in the area to ensure that the first two objectives are secured. The other is more complex, and only now slowly beginning to emerge.

When the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq, they expected there would be a quick handover to carefully selected allies in a secular government that would be the opposite of Iran's theocracy, and perhaps even a counterfoil to Iran's regional aspirations. It is one of the greatest ironies of the US intervention that the Iraqi people instead used their first voting opportunity to elect a government with a strong religious base, and indeed with close links to the Islamic republic on their border. The US, having destroyed the sole major secular government in the region, is now at risk of replacing it with a theocratic regime.

Thousands of the Shia-dominated United Iraqi Alliance, the largest party which will name the prime minister, spent long years of exile in Iran. Most of the militia in its largest faction were trained in Shia parts of Iran. Even Jalal Talabani, co-leader of the Kurdish parties that won a quarter of the vote, despite his links with the Americans over Kurdish regional autonomy, is very close to Tehran. The Kurdish enclave for decades drew vital economic and political protection from its Iranian neighbour.

more

This has been posted at the request of new DUer unhappycamper
who asked me by PM to post it for him. Welcome to DU Ken. Thanks for being here.

Don

[DrDebug]

1. The most imporant part of the story was missing

Time magazine (27 September 2004) reported before the elections on a covert CIA operation to aid candidates favoured by Washington. It reported US officials as saying that the idea was to help such candidates, but "not necessarily" to go so far as to rig the elections. In the event, the United Iraqi Alliance of mainly Shia Islamist parties won only 48 per cent of the total vote, well below their share of the population. Interestingly, Reuters (13 February) reported a few hours before the election results were officially announced that "the United Iraqi Alliance said today it had been told by Iraq's Electoral Commission that it had won around 60 per cent of the vote in the country's election"

48% was a very convenient result, wasn't it? 48 as in NO mandate?

The commission has already thrown out 40 boxes and over 200 plastic sacks of ballots: sacks aren't allowed, only boxes. The latest word is that "around 300" ballot boxes are the problem, and need to be re-examined. The Election Commission claims that a number of ballot boxes were stuffed "by gunmen" in Mosul, and that the final results will be announced "later in the month."

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=4807

So how many votes exactly were thrown out because they were in sacks instead of boxes?

[KoKo]

2. Interesting read. They corrupted Iraq Elections just like they did in the

US and now they are planning an armed guerrila movement in Southern Iraq. Reminds me of the tactics in that CIA Manual on how to destabilze governments by infiltrating the peasant population and supporting guerilla warfare that was posted on DU this week. BFEE marches on with the same folks running the show that have been doing it since before Reagan.