August 29, 2005
HEY, WAIT, WE'RE THE MINORITY?:
Opting out of Arabism in Iraq (Barry Rubin, 8/30/05, THE JERUSALEM POST)
There is one other fascinating definition of identity: the Arabs of Iraq – and not Iraq as a whole – are said to be part of the Arab nation.THIS DETAIL is psychologically explosive on a regional level. It means that non-Arab groups can opt out of Arabism. Arab nationalism would thus become a form of ethnic sympathy rather than national policy. This would be a real nail in the coffin of the way the Arab world has been organized in the past half century.
Regarding communal relations within Iraq, the constitution is very tolerant. Arabic and Kurdish have joint status as official languages, while Turkoman – a point that should please Turkey – and Assyrian will have equal status in regions where people who speak them live.
It is important to remember that federalism is completely unknown in the Arab world. Strong central governments have been seen – with good reason – to be the only protection against anarchy and the collapse of the state. Therefore, it is understandable that few Arabs think it will work in Iraq, and they might be right.
Still, the constitution has some very original features in regard to federalism. On the important and controversial question of dividing oil revenues, there is to be a commission including members from all national and regional government bodies to set up the system for apportioning wealth. This is also a gesture toward the Sunnis, whose areas have no oilfields. The principle is that the distribution of money should be in proportion to the population in every area of the country.
Another unique feature is that provinces have the right to set up regions, and regions have the right to merge. This can be done by the demand of voters or legislators, and on paper such a decision looks easy. Each region will have a president and a National Assembly that will write a constitution which must not contradict Iraq's national laws or constitution.
By making this process simple, presumably the goal is to make groups feel secure that they can get a degree of local self-rule if they want one. There is nothing to prevent Sunni Arabs from setting up their own region, too.
APPARENTLY, THOUGH, the Sunnis' fear comes not so much from a threat to their communal life as to the centralized system they have dominated in the past. In practice, though, the proposed constitutional order might be far more beneficial to them than a centralized system putting them at the mercy of a Shi'ite and Kurdish majority. Their problem is adjusting to the fact that as a minority – perhaps only 20 percent of the population – they would benefit from a system entrenching minority rights.
If there'd been a census and the Sunni realized how outnumbered they are--contrary to decades of Saddam's propaganda--they might be singing a different tune already.
MORE:
Saddam supporters denounce charter (Richard Beeston, 8/30/05, Times of London)
THOUSANDS of Sunni protesters took to the streets of Saddam Hussein’s home town of Tikrit yesterday, holding up portraits of the ousted dictator and denouncing Iraq’s proposed constitution as an American-Israeli plot.Posted by Orrin Judd at August 29, 2005 11:09 PMChanting: “We sacrifice our blood and soul for you, Oh Saddam!” about 2,000 demonstrators kicked off what is expected to be an impassioned campaign to destroy the new charter, which they say will deprive Sunni Arabs of their rights in favour of the Shia Muslim majority and their Kurdish allies.
The citizens in Alaska have been getting their share of the oil profits directly. This is a brilliant system because it keeps politicians out of the mix.
Why can't Iraq use that system as its model. If the people rather than the imams, mullahs, etc. get their share directly and spend it as they wish, the ruling bodies will need to go to the people and not the other way around.
There's speculation that a lot of the Sunnis that are marching against the Constitution will end up voting for it in the secrecy of the voting booth.
You don't want to publicly go against your imam who's defining "infidel" as anyone for the Constitution and calling for jihad. However, privately in the booth before you dip your thumb in the ink...
Posted by: Ken at August 31, 2005 5:06 PM