Tobbaco

[rooster59]

Cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc wins Iraq election

By Raya Jalabi and Michael Georgy

 

Iraqi Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr meets with ambassadors of Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Kuwait, in Najaf, Iraq May 18, 2018. REUTERS/Alaa al-Marjani

 

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A political bloc led by populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, a long-time adversary of the United States who also opposes Iranian influence in Iraq, has won the country's parliamentary election, the electoral commission said on Saturday.

 

Sadr himself cannot become prime minister as he did not run in the election, though his bloc's victory puts him in a position to have a strong say in negotiations. His Sairoon electoral list captured 54 parliamentary seats.

 

The Al-Fatih bloc led by Hadi al-Amiri, who has close ties with Iran and heads an umbrella group of paramilitaries that played a key role in defeating Islamic State, came in second with 47 seats.

 

The Victory Alliance, headed by incumbent Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, took third place with 42.

 

The victory was a surprising change of fortunes. The cleric, who made his name leading two violent uprisings against U.S. occupation troops, was sidelined for years by Iranian-backed rivals.

 

His bloc's performance represented a rebuke to a political elite that some voters blame for widespread corruption and dysfunctional governance.

 

Sadr's unlikely alliance with communists and secular Iraqis says it fiercely opposes any foreign interference in Iraq, which is strongly backed by both Tehran and Washington.

 

It has promised to help the poor and build schools and hospitals in Iraq, which was battered in the war to defeat Islamic state and has suffered from low oil prices.

 

Before the election, Iran publicly stated it would not allow Sadr’s bloc to govern.

 

In a tweet shortly after results were announced, Sadr said: "Reform is victorious and corruption is diminishing."

 

Winning the largest number of seats does not automatically guarantee that Sadr will be able to hand-pick a prime minister. The other winning blocs would have to agree on the nomination.

 

In a 2010 election, Vice President Ayad Allawi’s group won the largest number of seats, albeit with a narrow margin, but he was blocked from becoming premier, which he blamed on Tehran.

 

The election dealt a blow to Abadi, but he could still emerge as a compromise candidate palatable to all sides because he has skillfully managed the competing interests of the United States and Iran - unwitting allies in the war against Islamic State - during his term in office.

 

Amiri is regarded as one of the most powerful figures in Iraq. He spent two decades fighting Saddam Hussein from Iran.

 

Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani, commander of foreign operations for Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards and a highly influential figure in Iraq, has been holding talks with politicians in Baghdad to promote the formation of a new cabinet which would have Iran’s approval.

 

Negotiations are expected to drag on for months.

 

The government should be formed within 90 days of the official results.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-05-19

[canuckamuck]

Looks like a pleasant and forward thinking chap.

[Kiwiken]

Hard times for the other Sects of Iraqi Society. Welcome back radicalisation

[bristolboy]

5 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

Hard times for the other Sects of Iraqi Society. Welcome back radicalisation

Did you read the part where Sadr's bloc opposed the influence of both Iran and the USA, and was working with communists and other secular iraqis?

[Kiwiken]

14 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Did you read the part where Sadr's bloc opposed the influence of both Iran and the USA, and was working with communists and other secular iraqis?

Yes i did but I have heard the same from others and Yet they feather the nest of their own. I hope he proves me wrong i truly do.

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

Yes i did but I have heard the same from others and Yet they feather the nest of their own. I hope he proves me wrong i truly do.

Now you're saying something quite different from this:

"Hard times for the other Sects of Iraqi Society. Welcome back radicalisation."

Before you were accusing Sadr of radicalizing and now it's the possibility of venality. 

[The Renegade]

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

A political bloc led by populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr,

Populists also winning in the Arabic world, so not just confined to the West.

[Kiwiken]

12 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

Yes i did but I have heard the same from others and Yet they feather the nest of their own. I hope he proves me wrong i truly do.

No I am not. you have twisted what I said. I accused him of pushing Shiite agendas. Not radicalism. Please do not twist my words

[Kinnock]

3 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Populists also winning in the Arabic world, so not just confined to the West.

And equally dangerous in the West and Middle East.

 

Perhaps democracy is a bad idea after all?

[Kiwiken]

2 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

And equally dangerous in the West and Middle East.

 

Perhaps democracy is a bad idea after all?

The People of Iraq got to vote in Rulers for a term. Democracy in Iraq as in all So called Western Countries is tokenism. For Once in you are stuck with their agenda. Democracy is a ruse put upon the masses

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

No I am not. you have twisted what I said. I accused him of pushing Shiite agendas. Not radicalism. Please do not twist my words

Well, the Iranian government clearly disagrees with you. Its leaders have ruled out Moqtada's parting leading the government because of his party's inclusion of communists and secularists.

[unblocktheplanet]

Not America's business but they did their best to bomb the Shia out of him. Self-determination--every country needs to choose its own path. US troops home now!

[Srikcir]

9 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Sadr's unlikely alliance with communists and secular Iraqis says it fiercely opposes any foreign interference in Iraq, which is strongly backed by both Tehran and Washington.

That puts Russia in the forefront as Sadr's ally.

With that Russia might decide it doesn't need to operate with Iran for maintaining a high political profile in the region that might have otherwise put Russian in conflict with Turkey. In the longer term anti-American sentiment will increase in the region.

[bristolboy]

45 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

That puts Russia in the forefront as Sadr's ally.

With that Russia might decide it doesn't need to operate with Iran for maintaining a high political profile in the region that might have otherwise put Russian in conflict with Turkey. In the longer term anti-American sentiment will increase in the region.

You think because Sadr has allies who are communists that means the Russians are somehow natural allies. I suspect that the communists who Sadr is allied with actually believe in communism. Putin is now firmly allied with the Orthodox Church, whiich is bitterly opposed to communism. Don't think it means much. I haven't seen anything about Sadr and the Russians being especially friendly.

[pegman]

11 hours ago, The Renegade said:

Populists also winning in the Arabic world, so not just confined to the West.

Outside of the USA where in the West exactly?

[Grouse]

Why did we fight the Iraq war again?

[pegman]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

Why did we fight the Iraq war again?

 

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

Why did we fight the Iraq war again?

The Iraq leader tried to take out W's old man. It was a face thing. Seems the Brits joined in because they are the American's poodle, or so I've heard told. 

[Srikcir]

11 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Putin is now firmly allied with the Orthodox Church, whiich is bitterly opposed to communism.

I believe it's the other way around.

The OC is firmly allied with Putin and will not oppose any ideology that Putin pursues. https://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/europe/2017/10/putin-triumph-christianity-russia-171018073916624.html

Putin heads an oligarch empire of industrialists. Russia is not a communist state. So it's irrelevant whether the OC opposes communism. What is relevant is that Russian oligarchies are in power through nationalistic agendas and the OC serves Putin well to advcance that nationalism agenda with about 75% of the population considering themselves Russian Orthodox Christians (2007 VTsIOM poll).

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

I believe it's the other way around.

The OC is firmly allied with Putin and will not oppose any ideology that Putin pursues. https://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/europe/2017/10/putin-triumph-christianity-russia-171018073916624.html

Putin heads an oligarch empire of industrialists. Russia is not a communist state. So it's irrelevant whether the OC opposes communism. What is relevant is that Russian oligarchies are in power through nationalistic agendas and the OC serves Putin well to advcance that nationalism agenda with about 75% of the population considering themselves Russian Orthodox Christians (2007 VTsIOM poll).

So what exactly was the basis of your asserting this:

"That puts Russia in the forefront as Sadr's ally."

Any evidence at all to support this? An iota?

[Morch]

 

When the dust settles, there will be some sort of coalition government. While there's a host of small parties which could possibly be won over, a stable coalition would require a deal with one of the other major parties/blocs. In theory, this may result in a government leaning a bit toward cooperation (broadly speaking) with either Iran or the US. Probably not the choice al-Sadr wished for, but such is life. Another option, which earlier I would have said was far-fetched, is some sort of national unity government, including all major parties.

 

al-Sadr got 90 days to form a coalition, and Iran is already messing about with potential alternatives. Could be weeks before this is sorted. While it remains to be seen, wouldn't bet on the end result being politically stable or sustainable. As a friend more familiar with things opined - "rocky two years ahead". 

 

If talking about an inside track, IMO the winner here might be China. No regional partisanship, no involvement exceeding business, full pockets. Russia might have to curb Iran some in Syria, so getting into another ME political competition in Iraq could be a bit too much.

[pegman]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

When the dust settles, there will be some sort of coalition government. While there's a host of small parties which could possibly be won over, a stable coalition would require a deal with one of the other major parties/blocs. In theory, this may result in a government leaning a bit toward cooperation (broadly speaking) with either Iran or the US. Probably not the choice al-Sadr wished for, but such is life. Another option, which earlier I would have said was far-fetched, is some sort of national unity government, including all major parties.

 

al-Sadr got 90 days to form a coalition, and Iran is already messing about with potential alternatives. Could be weeks before this is sorted. While it remains to be seen, wouldn't bet on the end result being politically stable or sustainable. As a friend more familiar with things opined - "rocky two years ahead". 

 

If talking about an inside track, IMO the winner here might be China. No regional partisanship, no involvement exceeding business, full pockets. Russia might have to curb Iran some in Syria, so getting into another ME political competition in Iraq could be a bit too much.

China is winning everywhere else it seems so good assumption.

[Somtamnication]

Time to pay the piper!!!!