Iraq approves new government

Parliament unanimously approves Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his new government, ending nine months of deadlock.

Iraqi lawmakers have unanimously approved a new government to be headed by Nouri al-Maliki, the incumbent prime minister.

The vote on Tuesday ended nine months of political deadlock after an inconclusive national election in March.

Lawmakers approved 29 ministers, including al-Maliki, to form the new government, which includes members of all of Iraq's major political and sectarian factions, including Shias, Sunnis and Kurds.

Al-Maliki detailed to lawmakers on Tuesday the programme of his new parliament and vowed to make Iraq a truly democratic state that respects human rights and the rights of various ethnic and sectarian groups.

(Al-Maliki)

criticised the various political blocs for failing to nominate female candidates for ministerial positions. He also warned that there will still be obstacles ahead.

Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh, reporting from Baghdad, said al-Maliki will be the acting minister of defence, interior and national security "until appropriate candidates are found".

The most controversial appointment is Saleh al-Mutlaq to the role of deputy prime minister. Up until two days ago, he was banned from politics altogether for being a former Baathist.

english.aljazeera.net...

Al-Maliki is "saying" all of the "right" things: representatives from various ethic, religious groups, genders etc.

However, why didn't he fill the 13 other position needed for the full cabinet, i.e., why is he not fully "acting"?

Is this really going to work as a pseudo-democracy?

Thoughts?

reply to post by sonjah1


At this point ANY kind of Government would be good.
I can't think of any other kind of Democracies in the region "pseudo" or not.

Good for them! I'm glad each sect has representation. Hopefully, the everyday Iraqi citizen is now better off than with Saddam ruling the country.

reply to post by SLAYER69

At this point ANY kind of Government would be good.
I can't think of any other kind of Democracies in the region "pseudo" or not.

Egypt?....lol...

But seriously, I wonder who those other positions are going to and I'm afraid it's going to be Ba'ath.

Then, what will US do...go back over...if there is a major shift in power?

reply to post by tooo many pills


I hope so, too.

But Saddam was Ba'ath, and there are signs the new government is willing to allow the Baath back in.

New Iraqi government update:

Lack of female faces in Iraq Cabinet draws protest

BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraq's female lawmakers are furious that only one member of the country's new Cabinet is a woman and are demanding better representation in a government that otherwise has been praised by the international community for bringing together the country's religious sects and political parties.

Although women make up a quarter of the 325-member parliament, only two ministries were offered to women - with a female candidate refusing one of them in protest - in the 44-member Cabinet that was sworn in on Tuesday. Female lawmakers cried foul and demanded more women be appointed.

"We were shocked that there are no women in the Cabinet," said Safiyah Al Suhail, a lawmaker with Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's State of Law coalition, dismissing the lone female "minister without portfolio" in the government.

Suhail is among 50 female lawmakers who on Thursday pushed for a fairer share in the government by petitioning the nation's top leaders, the United Nations and the Arab League for more posts. The group blasted the prime minister and Iraq's male politicians for not taking women's political skills and their professional experience seriously.

"It seems that the leaders do not trust us as politicians or as ministers," Suhail said. She demanded women get some of the 10 posts that have been temporarily filled with acting ministers, including one of the country's three security posts.

Women were allocated only two posts in the new government. One was a ministry without portfolio - a post with no job description, no budget, and no office. The other was for women's affairs.

www.jordantimes.com...

So will their squeaky-wheel tactics effect Al-Maliki's decision-making regarding future cabinet post appointments?

You go, girls!!

reply to post by sonjah1


Anyone in Iraq who had a job that involved something other than scooping poop was in the ba'ath party. It made no sense to ban the entire party at all in hte first place, since that just put all the people who had some inkling of what to do out on their butts.

reply to post by sonjah1


I thought Cheney had the board of directors at Hallliburton running Iraq?

This article cleared that up.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


True, true.

And maybe the Ba'ath will take over again?

Should US take it upon themselves to try to prevent this if US doesn't believe it it is in the best interest of democracy?

reply to post by zroth


Never said Al-Maliki was not a puppet of the U.S.....ala Halliburton et.al.......

My thoughts are one stupid move...and he's gone.....

Deaths in Iraqi city bomb attacks

At least seven people dead after double bombing of regional government offices in Ramadi.

At least seven people were killed in a car bomb attack outside the provincial government offices in Ramadi [Reuters]

A car bomb and a suicide blast aimed at government offices in the western Iraqi province of Ramadi have killed seven people, four of them police, and wounded more than 50 others.

Police said that Monday's attack in the city of Ramadi, 100km west of Baghdad, marked the third time this year the provincial offices have been attacked and came a day after a new police chief for the province took up his post.

"A car bomb exploded near the Anbar provincial government offices around 9:30 am (0630 GMT) followed about 15 minutes later by a suicide bombing," Rahim Zabin, a police spokesman, said.

"Seven people were killed, including four police, and 51 were injured, among them women and children."

The bombings mark the first major attack since Nouri al-Maliki was confirmed for a second term as prime minister in office on December 21 and his new government, in which he retains Iraq's three security portfolios, received parliament's stamp of approval.

Al-Maliki has assumed interim control of the defence, interior and national security ministries. These posts will be responsible for assuring security after the planned pullout by end 2011 of the roughly 50,000 US troops left in Iraq.

FYI...anyone interested in the New Iraqi Govt:

Iraq's Baathist factions form new party in Syria

29 December 2010 | 03:10 | FOCUS News Agency


Five Iraqi Baathist factions declared on Tuesday that they have formed a new party with the base in Damascus, Xinhua informs.

The five factions, the Resurrection Party, Revision and Unification, National Liberation Movement and Monadiloon Gathering, formed a new group called the Resurrection and Renewal Party.

"This declaration is not a new split case as some believe, it is rather an expression refusing the national dispute and fragmentation," said Khalid al-Samurrae, secretary general of the new party.
"The party aims at getting Baath to its familiar principals through cooperation with the national parties to form a wide popular base," he added.

The Iraqi Arab Socialist Baath Party was founded in Iraq in 1951 and adopted pan-Arab, secular nationalism as its ideology.
The party came to power following a military coup in July 1968. Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who was assistant general secretary of the party, staged a successful coup in 1979 but he was overthrown by U.S. forces in 2003.
After the death of Saddam Hussein, many of the Iraqi Baathist leaders escaped to Syria which provided them with the freedom of political activities.

www.focus-fen.net...

Al-Malaki....New Baath party, Could Al-Samurrae = New Hussein?, hmmmm....

reply to post by sonjah1


I believe Iraq should get to run Iraq as Iraq wants Iraq to be run. If it wants the Baath as rulers of a single-party state, or if it wants American style democracy, or if it wants Iran-style theocratic council, or if they want to take political directions from a duck, I don't care. It's their country, they get to run it how they like.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Agreed, thewalkingfox....

This was my point in posting, as I believe Hussein, while unfair to the Kurds, IMO, *had* a pretty satisfied society in Iraq....Before the invasion...I visited Iraq pre-911, but not since, so I cannot honestly comment thereaffter.

Thanks for your input....

Now all is chaos...just like TBTB want them to be.....

reply to post by sonjah1


I... would have to strongly disagree with your assessment of Iraq under Saddam. The dude really was a monster, as much as I hesitate to apply that word to a fellow human. He was far more than just "unfair" to the Kurds - and he was worse to the Shia of southern Iraq. This is without going into what he perpetrated in Iran, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia as well.

Removing him and his sons from power is easily the one honestly good thing that came out of the US invasion of Iraq.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

I... would have to strongly disagree with your assessment of Iraq under Saddam. The dude really was a monster, as much as I hesitate to apply that word to a fellow human. He was far more than just "unfair" to the Kurds - and he was worse to the Shia of southern Iraq. This is without going into what he perpetrated in Iran, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia as well.

By no means, am I defending Hussein completely.

However, with the Kurds...already agreed upon....

Kuwait....well if you are American, you have been mislead...investigate the *source* that told him that according to the US, all was a-OK on the invasion of Kuwait...this was not in any US MSM outlet to my knowledge. But, the US ambassador to Iraq, at the time....told him essentially...A-OK on the part of the US....thus, he saw it as "approval" at that time and place.....

Iran....what Arab leader would not challenge the Persian machine?

And so, you say Baath is not a problem?

If so, expect retailiations, and what-not against the seculars, as the party is above the religious at hand?

Nine months to agree on a government, what party of "No" have the Iraqi's been watching?
I was hoping our bad examples ended at our two coastlines. Does this mean that our political "No"s reverberate from our Atlantic and Pacific coasts around the globe?
How about those G-20 Meetings in SE Asia a few weeks ago. Weren't we losing those votes 19-1?
When did our influential friends become so negative? Was this because of our inability to criminalize anything done by Wall St? Wall St, 1) the provider of the biggest 'whack upside the head' and 2) the
remover of the most money ever taken out of the pockets of our "friends".
Or was it the refusal on FinReg to legislate Wall St by the party of " _ _ "?

Suicide bomber kills scores in Iraq

The attack was the bloodies in Iraq since Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister, won support in December for his reappointment, following a nine-month political stalemate.

Iraqi police have told Al Jazeera that at least 60 people have died on Tuesday after a suicide bomber attacked a police station in Tikrit, around 150 km north of Baghdad, the capital.

A man wearing a vest filled with explosives detonated himself next to a crowd of police recruits, Ahmed Abdul-Jabber, the deputy governor of the Salaheddin province, said.

The powerful blast injured at least 100 people, making it one of the bloodiest attacks in recent months.

Tikrit is the hometown of Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi president, and authorities suspect the province remains home to those sympathetic to Hussein and his Ba'ath party and opposed to the current leadership.

english.aljazeera.net...

Much of Iraq is completely lawless; on its borders there are stalls posted up that openly sell black market goods (drugs, alcohol, weapons, etc..) literally a few feet away from the border guards of neighboring countries. Clearly this government does not have a strong enough hold on its people.

Egypt's President had an interesting take on the issue in a Wikileaks cable, he told the US to "Strengthen the (Iraqi) armed forces, relax your hold, and then you will have a coup. Then we will have a dictator, but a fair one. Forget democracy, the Iraqis by their nature are too tough."

Not that I agree with Mubarak (himself a dictator) or think Saddam was a good guy, but it raises an interesting point: perhaps some nations can't handle democracy?