WAR: Iraqs Shiites Announce List of Candidates - Muqtada al-Sadr Left Off

Shiite leaders have announced a slate of candidates comprising 228 candidates for the upcoming Iraqi elections. They are attempting to present a unified front. Also unspoken is a challenge to the Sunni minority who has threatened to boycott the election. The leading Shiite cleric, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani has approved the list, an important consideration. However, President Ghazi al-Yawer and Prime Minister Ayad Allawi are drawing up their own list and that could serve to draw votes away from the slate.




Absent from the proposed slate is cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. He was given a change to participate but declined. The reason given was he wanted to evaluate the process and if the elections fail, he can point tot he fact that he did not lend his support to it. This is a good gamble on his part. Beyond his personal army he may be a bit too radical to gain a lot of popular support. However, if the elections are a debacle, he may have a better shot of rising to power in the ensuing chaos.

So what they re doing is having what amounts to a popular vote and the one with the most will take office until the consitution is drafted then they will hold another Election right?

To me a democratic election is one where you have a primary first limit it down to one member of each party they hold the general election, which does not seem to be the case here or am I missing something?

It looks to me that if the US get his way and push elections on Iraq, its only going to be one group and one side.

I will predict that those elections will not stand and more trouble than good is going to come out of them.

Originally posted by shots
So what they re doing is having what amounts to a popular vote and the one with the most will take office until the consitution is drafted then they will hold another Election right?

The election will be Iraq's first popular vote in decades. Iraqis will choose a 275-member assembly that will write a permanent constitution. If adopted in a referendum next year, the constitution would form the legal basis for another general election to be held by Dec. 15, 2005.

It is a good step towards democracy in Iraq. The Iraqi people want it, and while the process will not be perfect at first, the birth of any democracy is rocky.

I'm a little puzzled by the fact that the electoral law requires that one third of the candidates be women. While I don't want to see women excluded, I think that imposing artificial limits at this stage could be counter-productive. It brings to mind the problems encountered with our affirmative action quota limits.

On the other hand, it is their country and I wish them success.

Originally posted by marg6043
It looks to me that if the US get his way and push elections on Iraq, its only going to be one group and one side.

Actually, marg, the list is not from the U.S. backed interm governmnet and no doubt that if thatr slate is elected the U.S. will be asked to leave. I suspect that the ties between Sistani and Iran are quite strong and a pupet government would be quickly put in place.

I think Iran is celebrating. The backbone of this party is the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Dawa Party. First one is obviously an Iranian pupet but enjoys greats support in Iraq and is lead by al-Sistani. The second is lead by Chalabi, also an Iranian puppet, and these guys are going to write the constitution. As I said, the Iranians are celerating like they never had before.

I wonder what the US government would do if the government put up a referendum and try to make Iraq an Islamic Republic. Or if they ask the US to leave Iraq. That would be the true test for the US, to see whether it is there for the Iraqi people or for it own purposes.

[edit on 10-12-2004 by Sep]

Oringally posted by jsobecky
I'm a little puzzled by the fact that the electoral law requires that one third of the candidates be women. While I don't want to see women excluded, I think that imposing artificial limits at this stage could be counter-productive. It brings to mind the problems encountered with our affirmative action quota limits.

Boy that does seem rather high and being honest I missed that part. I am puzzled on that also.