So what exactly did the Iraqis elect?
Written by Jack O'Reilly on February 6th, 2005This post is not to detract from the more than warranted jubilation over the Iraqi voter turnout, but we need to temper our enthusiasm with a sober look at what type of government the Iraqis elected. To make a long story short, it appears to me that we gave Iraq the worst possible electoral system that they could get.
The basic problem with the Iraqi electoral system is that it is a Proportional Representation (PR) system that was set up by the Euro-schmucks at the UN. PR is the love-child of small Scandanavian countries and France because it is the most “representative” and “equal” electoral system out there. Liberals love PR, Conservatives hate it. This book will give you a good idea of the types of people that favor PR and those that do not. The reason Euros like it is because it gives representation to everyone, including Communists. Stick to the party line comrade.
The basic problem with PR specifically in Iraq is that it will breed radicalism. For an excellent critique by AEI scholar Michael Rubin, click here. PR breeds radicalism by placing supreme loyalty with the party instead of with the people. There are no individual districts, like US congressional districts, where individual representatives have responsibility to a specific group of people. Rather the interest of the people are represented in the different parties elected. This system places the divisions and fractures within society into parliament. Voters may elect candidates of parties with specific religious or ethnic bents that are antithetical to liberal democracy.
Even if the number of “extremists” elected is of a small number, it can prove deadly when forming a coalition. I believe that last year when the Spanish socialists won the elections after the Madrid train bombing, they had to form a coalition with the Spanish communists to gain a majority in parliament. So regardless of whether or not the party with the most votes is extremist, it may have to appease Islamofascists within the coalition.
One of the most volatile aspects of Iraq’s PR system is that it has an extremely low threshold for a party to gain a seat. To be specific, a party only needs 0.36% of the vote to gain a seat in the Iraqi parliament. Most countries have a minimum threshold to combat wackjob candidates from being elected. For instance, Hitler was elected Chancellor under a PR system. Germany instated a 5% threshold for any party to gain admittance to parliament after WWII to exclude fringe parties. In Turkey, the beloved example of “Islamic” “democracy,” there is a 10% minimum threshold to keep the extremists, who believe that the only good infidel is a headless one, out of parliament.
If we had PR in the U.S., Michael Moore could probably form a party to gain 100 seats in Congress. How bad could this be for Iraq?
6
PM
It is surely not as bad as having Saddam Hussein in power. An imperfect democracy is far better than a stable dictatorship. We need free societies, regardless of how imperfect they are, to combat terrorism. Let’s just remember that many people, including yourself, believed that elections in Iraq would be all but impossible, as democracy and Arab Islam are “incompatible.” Right?? It turns out that Arabs have proven again that they have the capacity for democracy and freedom.
Now that you all have been proven wrong with the successful Iraqi elections, you are quibbling about the actual democratic system - which you didn’t believe was possible to begin with. It is hopeless with you people. What will it take for you to finally have faith in freedom?
We don’t even have the complete election results in, and you are already second-guessing and naysaying. This is the last thing we need now. Can you please give this fledging democracy a chance before condemning it as flawed and subject to the take-over of Islamist radicals? We are on the brink of history - democracy and peace in the Middle East - and all you can do is complain about nuanced facets of the Iraqi democratic system. Please give this process a chance before reflexively labeling it as hopeless and a failure. Don’t be on the wrong side of history again.
This sort of reactionary, petty, nuanced quibbling - a “litany of complaints” - reminds me of John Kerry’s rhetoric throughout the campaign. It is hard to decipher what the position and the vision actually is, for it changes about as quick as the wind blows. In the end it just amounts to abysmal leadership.
6
PM
Sorry we dared to question the Supreme Chancellor… uhh… I mean President. Give me a break, Iraq is not perfect and its not “traitorous” to say so.
6
PM
I never came close to saying that it was “traitorous.” Everyone knows Iraq is far from perfect. It is not particularly profound to keep highlighting this indisputable fact. It just amounts to petty complaining. You consistently miss the big picture; America is safer with freedom on the march in the Middle East. You have every right to question, but I also have every right to reject these baseless complaints. In the face of success, all you can do is point out imperfections, because Bush does not live up to your standard of the perfect conservative. Criticize all you want… but be prepared to be wrong again.
6
PM
Gary, I would appreciate a retraction of the first two paragraphs of your first statement. I, at no time, said that the Iraqi elections themselves would fail. My questioning has always been with the compatability of Islam and democracy, and this is on a theological and philosophical level. Whether or not it does or does not apply in practice is being determined as we speak. I have always believed that IF liberal democracy is possible in the heart of the Middle East, the best chance for it is in Iraq. I was saying that we, THE UN, has royally screwed the Iraqis over with this BS system of proportional representation. Why did we let an organization like the UN who didn’t want us to depose Saddam in the first place determine the Iraqis government?
Gary, the scholar that wrote the article is from the AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE. Are they quibbling like John Kerry? Come on. Read what I actually wrote. I never said that it would be better off with Saddam. Who are you arguing against? I didn’t think Michael Moore was blogging on this site.
6
PM
Sorry John, I could be wrong here.
I understood you to consistently doubt the possibility of democracy in the Arab world. This is based on the numerous conversations on the subject that we have had. As you stated at the March for Life rally and just reinforced on this blog, you believe there is some incompatibility between Islam and democracy, which has now been refuted twice in the Arab world (Iraq and Afghanistan), not to mention the host of other countries where majority Muslim populations live in democracy. You could be right about the flaws inherent in the proportional representation system, but only time will tell. You seem always to dismiss the successes and immediately focus on the potential problems, and there are obviously many in any nation-building endeavour. I am merely asking you to give this fledgling democracy a chance, before hastily proclaiming that it is destined for failure. We can all find myriad problems in this infant Iraqi democracy, but to harp on them and, in the process, essentially illegitimize this historic achievement is counterproductive - it discredits the entire mission. You always miss the big picture: freedom is on the march in the Middle East, much the way it spread across Eastern Europe with the fall of the Berlin Wall. We are witnessing historic, monumental events, and you are busy bickering about a proportional representation system. Again, it could result in real problems, but we have overcome far greater obstacles in the past. I just do not see the point in obsessively looking for every possible thing that can go wrong in a WAR, especially when we are on the brink of extraordinary democratic reforms in the region. I am sorry for sounding anti-intellectual, but right now I believe this argument should transcend pure academics. We will have plenty of time for that later. We are in a bitter, desperate struggle of wills here. The enemy cannot beat us on the battlefield, they can only defeat us politically. I worry about this reflexive cynicism that permeates throughout our culture hurting our mission, and resulting in another Vietnam. I am sorry for being old-school, but I think irrepressible dissent and defeatist rhetoric is DANGEROUS in such a desperate struggle of wills. Freedom is our only hope to defeat this enemy once and for all. Our effort to unshackle the chains of democracy in the region needs our unqualified, unequivocal support.
By the way the American Enterprise is not the gold standard on anything, but it is nice to know that you have the selective ability to take them seriously if they support your arguments.
7
AM
Gary, I don’t reflexively dismiss the successes that we accomplish. I feel that you and I and the average reader of this site are on the same page. Democracy is better than dictatorships. The Iraqi people went out and voted despite threats that they would be blown up and have their wives and children butchered. That’s some pretty kick-ass democracy if you ask me. If anybody wants to feel reinvigorated about democracy in advance go check out Victor Davis Hanson or Jonah Goldberg. That’s not all I want to do though.
The Iraqi people wanted freedom 13 years ago, but we turned our backs on them and let Saddam slaughter our supporters. It’s no wonder we weren’t greeted in the streets with flowers. The Iraqis weren’t sure if we were going to tuck tail and leave, and we were a 100,000 votes in Ohio from doing just that.
Like I said, my question is whether or not democracy is compatible with Islam. This is a theological and a philosophical question. As we know, a believing Catholic cannot be pro-choice, but John Kerry ran a campaign that said you could and 43% of Catholics voted for him.
The same could be true of Islam and democracy. In theory, they may be incompatible. In practice, it may work.
Democracy may very well be our best hope in the long run. But our other sure hope is superior military kick-assitude. If tomorrow every country in the world became a democracy, there would still be s#$%heads that would need to be picked up and thrown against a wall.
The best reason that we went into Iraq is that it opened up another front on the war on Islamofascism militarily and ideologically. We’ve proven that these thugs can’t fight in two countries at the same time, hence the amazing success of the Afghani elections. Iraq is also a much better physical and political geographic climae to fight these schmucks and promote democracy.
I think the danger is not in our hyping democracy, but in saying that democracy is the only reason we’re fighting this war. There are at least 5 equally good reasons that we went to war in Iraq as the advancement of democracy. Putting all of our eggs in one basket, like the media did with WMD is dangerous in case democracy happens to flop.
If democracy fails in Iraq, does that mean that we’ve lost the clash of civilizations? I think not. We can still smack these guys around as long as we have the will power to do so.
7
AM
I totally agree with the body of your statement. I agree that there are many valid reasons for using military force in Iraq. I also agree that Iraq has had the added bonus of opening up another front on the war on terrorism, where we can preoccupy the terrorists and destroy them in the Iraqi desert, as opposed to having to fight them in our American streets and cities. Also, if we did not use military action in Iraq, we would have only emboldened Saddam, for he would have defied the free world an 18th time. Surely, this would have inspired him, as well as other dictators and terrorists in the region to further pursue their deadly machinations against the United States. Still, I believe we have to destroy the Islamist totalitarian ideology that breeds and sustains terrorism, and the way to do this is to help spread freedom in the Middle East. Iraq was the most logical place to begin this process. We must now hope that this growing democracy will serve as an example and a source of inspiration to dissidents throughout the region. We must hope that it will inspire Muslims to fight, without the assistance of a full-scale American military invasion, for their freedom. Now these people know that we will never again “tuck and run” as we did to the Kurds at the end of the Gulf War. The success of the Iraq War has had the effect of shattering this notion in the minds of many reform-minded Arab citizens. They can truly trust us again.
8
AM
A very good post. Part of the process of success is looking at what has worked, what has not, and why. There is absolutely nothing wrong with applauding the elections while at the same time raising valid concerns that there is something built into the elections that make them less desirable then they could have been. We need to think long and hard about how to set up new democracies if we are serious about spreading democracy. Which is a better time to do that: when the Iraqi elections are fresh in our minds and people are paying attention, or when they are but a distant memory and nobody wants to hear about it?
There is one potential saving grace here though. While PR has proven to be a less than stellar way to actually govern, I can see a strong argument for using it to form a temporary body whose main job is to write a constitution. If the eventual government is going to be truly representative in the end, it may actually be useful to have as many ideologies at the table as possible in the framing of the constitution. It will make it more likely that the end product will be supportive of minority rights, and will make it difficult for serious claims of an the constitution being unjust to arise within Iraq. The big question is whether or not the constitution that they draft will also have PR built into it.
25
AM
Perfect site
I will recommend it to all my friends and fans
4
PM
I really enjoy looking through your website
10
AM
A very very nice site with helpful informations! So keep up the good work - I already added the site to my personal favourites. All the best!