The operation of the Iraqi elections on 15 December

Inquiry & Analysis - Iraq/Reform Project
November 15, 2005
No. 252

Iraqi Elections - Round Two
By Dr. Nimrod Raphaeli*

Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)

Introduction

On December 15, Iraqi voters will cast their ballots for the third time in the course of one year, to elect 275 members of the National Assembly under a new constitution which was approved in a national referendum on October 15. If no unforeseen circumstances arise, and if the Sunnis vote in large numbers this time as they have appeared determined to do since boycotting the first elections on January 30, the number of voters is likely to establish a new record, notwithstanding the threats of insurgency and terrorism. If the Iraqis have learned anything from their two previous voting experiences, it is that their votes count and that fraud and other forms of voting irregularities will be held to a minimum. But there is also a degree of disenchantment resulting from the failure of the present government to deliver on many of its promises, particularly regarding the security and economic issues.

The Competing Political Forces

The Iraqi voter will confront approximately 228 choices competing for his/her single vote. These are not political parties, per se; these are political entities or political groupings consisting of lists of small groups of people, or fairly large alliances. There are 21 major alliances or coalitions representing in excess of 100 political groupings around one or more individuals. In addition, there are another 207 lists of various combinations of personalities. The bigger alliances comprise anywhere from two political entities (kiyan siyasi) to as many as 17 entities. Another 27 entities or alliances have withdrawn, and others are in the process of doing so.(1)

The Elections Board has given each approved alliance or every list of candidates an electoral identification number, beginning with 501. The identification numbers were selected by the Elections Board through a lottery system conducted in the presence of representatives of the various candidates, as well as of the elections advisers from the United Nations. These numbers will help semi-literate or even illiterate voters to vote, often with prior instructions from their political or tribal leaders.

Barring a last minute surprise, about five of the 21 alliances will likely emerge with a lion's share of the parliamentary seats:

The First Alliance. No. 555, al-i'tilaf al-iraqi -muwwahad (the Iraqi National Alliance), comprises 17 entities, including the two major Shi'ite political parties which earned the largest number of seats in the January 30 elections. Among the significant entities in this alliance is the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), whose leader, Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim, is the number one on the alliance's slate, and the Da'wa Party of current Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Ja'fari, who is next on the slate, followed in the third place by Muna Zalzala of the Badr Organization. Other significant components of the alliance are the Sadrist Movement of the young Shi'ite radical Muqtada al-Sadr and the militia associated with SCIRI, the Badr militia (listed in the alliance as a group rather than militia). Absent from the alliance is Dr. Ahmad Chalabi, the deputy prime minister (see under No. 569) a central component of the alliance in the previous elections, the Virtue Party (hizb al-fadhila) has indicated its intention, according to its secretary-general, Nadim al-Jaberi, of withdrawing from this alliance.

In the previous elections, this alliance received the blessings of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. In the forthcoming elections, the alliance will not be so "blessed." Al-Sistani, through his representative, Sheikh Abd al-Hadi al-Karbala'i, has announced that he will not support any alliance or political entity, but he urged the Iraqi people to vote in the elections.(2) Al-Sistani's position reflects an agreement among the four Grand Ayatollahs – namely, al-Sistani, Muhammad Sa'id al-Hakim, Bashir al-Najafi, and Muhammed Ishaq al-Fayadth – to eschew political intervention in the future.(3) Al-Sistani has also directed his immediate aides not to run for elections and, unlike the ayatollahs of Iran, he has deliberately distanced himself from the political process.(4) The fact that three of the four Grand Ayatollahs (other than al-Hakim) are foreign born may have weighed heavily in their decision to remain, at least publicly, on the sidelines.

Al-Sistani Withholding his Support From the Alliance

With the ayotollahs withholding their endorsement, with growing disenchantment –even on the part of al-Sistani – with the performance of Dr. Ibrahim al-Ja'fari as prime minister, and with the emergence of a unified Sunni alliance, the predominantly Shi'ite Iraqi National Alliance is likely to do less well than in the previous elections. The alliance is also increasingly being seen as loyal to Iran, and as turning a blind eye to the growing presence of Iranian intelligence in the southern provinces of Iraq, particularly in Basra, the second largest Iraqi city.

Indeed, upon al-Sistani's withholding of his support, Iran rushed in to voice its support for the Shi'ite alliance.(5) Secular Iraqis, including many residents of that city, are alarmed by the actions of militant pro-Iranian organizations such as "thaar Allah," or "Allah's Revenge," which have been engaging in large-scale political intimidation or even liquidation of opponents to the Islamist way of life.(6)

Concession to Muqtada al-Sadr

To bring in Muqtada al-Sadr's movement, the Shi'ite alliance has offered the movement 30 seats (about one-quarter of the seats they expect to win). This concession reflects the growing realization that al-Sadr's popularity among young Shi'ite voters is on the rise and could, rather soon, overshadow the traditional religious establishment in Najaf, presided over by Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani.

In agreeing to join the Shi'ite alliance, al-Sadr made a number of demands, all of which were accepted:

(a) The Sadrist movement shall be allocated the same number of seats as allocated to SCIRI;

(b) The building of Iraqi armed forces shall be accelerated in order to expedite the exit of the multinational forces; and

(c) There shall be no normalization with the "Zionist entity" under any circumstances.(7)

The mercurial al-Sadr has not given his public support to the alliance; rather, he has advanced the faint argument that his supporters have joined the alliance in their personal capacity.(8) His spokesman, Sheikh Mustapha al-Ya'qubi, declared that "al-Sayyid Muqtada" will announce "next week" his official position regarding the elections.(9)

Dr. Ahmad al-Chalabi, who was the architect behind the Shi'ite list in the previous elections, was offered three seats in the next elections. He found the offer highly unsatisfactory, and opted to form his own alliance (No. 569).(10)

The Second Alliance. No. 569, qa’imat al-mu’tamar al-watani al-iraqi (National Congress Party) comprises 10 entities of a liberal and secular orientation, representing Shi'a, Sunni and Turkmen. This alliance is the creation of Dr. Ahmad al-Chalabi and includes his own old party, the National Congress Party, the Iraqi Constitutional Movement of al-Sherif Ali bin Al-Hussein who is a claimant of the Iraqi throne, Minister of Justice Abd al-Hussein Shandal, and former head of the Turkmen front Faruq Abdullah.

Ironically, al-Chalabi is estranged from the Shi'ite-oriented Iraqi National Alliance (No. 555), which he is presently representing in the cabinet as deputy prime minister. Interviewed on al-Jazeera TV about the reasons for the split from the United Iraqi Alliance, al-Chalabi said that the United Iraqi Alliance had adopted "an Islamist stance which is not compatible with the views of the people" he represented. Answering another question, al-Chalabi said, "Now that the constitution has been approved, praise be to God, it is obvious that there is a need for a list that represents a large cross-section of Iraqi people who are faithful Muslims and who also believe in a democratic, pluralistic, and federal system of government."(11)

It is not clear how al-Chalabi's estrangement from the Iraqi National Alliance will bear on his chances to become prime minister. It may have adverse effects. It is also possible that al-Chalabi, who is on good terms with both Al-Sistani and Muqtada al-Sadr, would hope to be elected independently of the major Shi'ite slate in order that he might be able, after the elections, to split the Shi'ite alliance and, with the help of other groups, including the Sunnis, the Kurds and other secular elements in the National Assembly, to emerge as a viable candidate for the prime minister post.(12) On his way to the U.S. during the week of November 7, al-Chalabi held meetings with senior Iranian officials, including the president of Iran. Fearing the rise in popularity of Dr. Ayad Allawi (No. 731), Iran has endorsed al-Chalabi as prime minister.(13) It is yet to be seen if such endorsement may not be counterproductive for al-Chalabi's prospects.

The Third Alliance. No. 618, jabhat al-tawafeq al-iraqiyya (The Iraqi Accord Front), the main Sunni alliance, comprises the three key Sunni entities, namely "The Iraqi Islamic Party," under its secretary-general, Tariq al-Hashemi, "The National Dialogue Council" under Khalaf al-‘Alyan, and "The General Congress of the Iraqi People" whose head, Dr. Adnan Muhammad Salman al-Duleimi, heads this alliance. This alliance includes many chiefs of Sunni tribes, such as Bani Malek, al-Jabbour and al-Sawa'id.

Al-Duleimi has said that there have been pressures on the Sunnis to participate in the elections en masse and to discard the insurgency option in favor of political participation. With the help of fatwas issued by Sunni clerics, he is urging the Sunnis not to repeat the mistake of boycotting the first elections, which resulted in the political marginalization of the Sunnis.(14) If the projections of a massive Sunni participation in the elections materialize, they are likely to emerge as the second largest body in the National Assembly.

The Fourth Alliance. No. 730, al-tahaluf al-kurdistani (The Kurdish Alliance), comprises eight entities, including the two major Kurdish political parties –"The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan" (PUK) of Jalal Talabani, the current president of Iraq, and the "Kurdistan Democratic Party" of Mas'oud Barazani, the president of the Kurdistan Region. Among the other entities in the Kurdish alliance are the Kurdistan Communist Party, and groups representing Turkmen and Christians (the latter have the largest concentration in Iraqi Kurdistan).

The Kurdish alliance stands to lose some seats, even if they obtain the same number of votes as in the last elections. First, in the absence of the Sunni vote in the previous elections, the Kurdish vote counted for a larger percentage of the total number of votes cast. With the Sunnis factored in, the percentage of the Kurdish vote will inevitably be smaller. Second, "The Islamic Kurdish Union," which was part of the Kurdish alliance in January elections, is running its own slate in these elections, and could drain some votes from the Kurdish alliance.

The Fifth Alliance. No. 731, al-qa’ima al-iraqiyyah al-wataniyah (The Iraqi National List), comprises 15 entities. This alliance is headed by former interim prime minister Dr. Ayad Allawi, and it includes well-known secular and non-sectarian political figures, both Shi'ite and Sunni, such as Ghazi al-Yawer, the Sunni vice president of Iraq; Hajim al-Hasani, the Sunni speaker of the National Assembly; Hamid Majid Moussa, the secretary-general of the Communist Party; Adnan al-Pachachi, the venerable Sunni Iraqi statesman; Sa'doun al-Duleimi, the minister of defense (Sunni); and former foreign minister and Shi'ite Sayyid Ayad Jamal al-Din, one of Iraq's most liberal and secular voices. The alliance also includes many leaders of the women's movement, including Fasia al-Suhail, the designated Iraqi ambassador to Egypt.

One member of this alliance is Dr. Ayham al-Samara'i, a former minister of power in the Allawi government. In an interview with the Iraq daily al-Zaman, al-Samara'i maintains that, as the secretary-general of the National Council for the Unity and Construction of Iraq (al-majlis al-watani li-wihdat wa-bina al-iraq), he was negotiating with 11 different insurgency groups to form a national front to "politicize" the insurgency and bring it into the political process.(15)

The Remaining Alliances

The remaining alliances are made up of mainly unknown entities which may lack the resources to campaign effectively and, by our estimates, will not do well in the forthcoming elections. The fact, however, that they can register and place candidates in the elections is a good indication of the competitive nature of the emerging Iraqi political process and the concomitant growth of the political culture in Iraq despite relentless violence by insurgents and terrorists.

The Distribution of Seats in the Next National Assembly

The system adopted for the December 15 elections is more complicated and bound to be, perhaps, more controversial than the system adopted for the elections in January.

In January, the election system was based on a strict proportional representation, with Iraq serving as one electoral district. Seats were subsequently distributed among the competing groups in proportion to the number of votes each group received in the elections.

For the elections in December, there will be two groups of parliamentary seats for a total of 275 seats – the major group of 230 seats are referred to as the Seats of the National Assembly (maqa’id majlis al-nuwwab) and the remaining 45 seats are referred to as the compensatory seats (al-maqa’id al-ta’widhiyah). The 230 seats are distributed to the provinces based on the number of registered voters in the January elections: Baghdad (59), Naynawa (19), Basra (16), Suleymaniya (15), Erbil (13), Dhi Qar (12), Babel (11); Dyala (10); Anbar and Kirkuk (9) each; Wassit, Salah al-Din, Qadisiyya and Najaf (8) each; Dhouk and Misan (7) each; Karbala (6); and Muthanna (5).(16)

This formula was arrived at through two arithmetic steps. At the national level, the total number of votes registered in the January elections was divided by the total number of parliamentary seats (i.e. 275). The quotient of approximately 50,000 represents the national average per seat (the Election Board refers to it as the National Quota).

At the next step, the number of seats allocated to each province is divided by the number of votes registered in the January elections in that province. The quotient could vary from a high of 50,000 in Baghdad to the mid-30,000s in the province of Dyala.

While all slates will compete nationally, under the new system each candidate, whether running as an individual or as a member of an alliance, must declare his/her candidacy in one of the 18 provinces. A large alliance, such as the Iraqi National Alliance, will place different candidates in different provinces, with their leaders placed on top of the slates in provinces where they expect a major turnout in their favor ("safe districts" in American or British parlance). For example, the Iraqi National Alliance placed slates of SCIRI candidates in three of its potentially strong provinces and slates of Muqtada al-Sadr supporters in another three provinces, including the religiously significant province of Najaf. By contrast, an individual or a small alliance might place their efforts in one province to maximize the number of votes cast in their favor.

The 45 Compensatory Seats

The system is designed to provide a sort of "second chance" for slates or individuals who are unable to accrue enough votes within the province where they declared their candidacy to earn a parliamentary seat. Even if a slate does not receive enough votes in terms of the provincial quotient to qualify for a seat in a province, the total number of votes cast for that slate nationwide may be sufficient to make the slate eligible for a seat.

There are some other configurations that could give preference to women if their number on a slate falls below the required one-third.

In the event that not all the compensatory seats are allocated in the first round, a special formula will be used to distribute the rest of the seats based on a combination of national and provincial votes.

In other words, every vote cast in any of the 18 provinces matters.

Difficulties with Voting

In addition to the voters' difficulty of making a choice among the large roster of candidates, there is the administrative difficulty of determining the roster of voters. The Iraqi Elections Board uses ration cards (al-bitaqat al-tamwiniyah), for lack of other reliable instruments, as the basis of preparing the list of voters. Each Iraqi has a ration card which entitles him/her to food rations at subsidized prices. However, these cards were issued in the early 1990s and many of the cardholders are no longer alive. Also, it was common for the Saddam regime to issue extra ration cards to their loyalists while denying them to their enemies. Moreover, some people may have moved to new locations and, given the security situation, may find it difficult –if not impossible –to vote in the designated electoral district.(17)

Voting Overseas

The Elections Board estimates that there are1.2 million expatriate Iraqis who are eligible to vote. Facilities will be available in 20 countries for those expatriates desirous of voting. These countries are likely to be: Australia, Canada, Germany, Iran, Jordan, The Netherlands, Syria, Turkey, the U.A.E., the U.S., Sweden, the U.K., Kuwait, Yemen, Denmark, Switzerland, Austria, Libya, Egypt, and Lebanon. Of these 20 countries, Libya, in which 45,000 expatriate Iraqis reside, may not authorize elections on its soil.(18)

In the previous elections, a mere 265,000 expatriates voted, partly because of the requirement that the expatriate must first register and then vote a week later. For those who had to travel, this requirement was quite restrictive. In the coming elections, one visit to the ballot box will suffice.

* Dr. Nimrod Raphaeli is Senior Analyst of MEMRI's Middle East Economic Studies Program.

Endnotes:
(1) Al-Mada (Iraq), October 29, 2005.
(2) Al-Sabah (Iraq), October 29, 2005.
(3) Al-Hayat (London), October 29, 2005.
(4) Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), November 2, 2005.
(5) Al-Hayat (London), October 29, 2005.
(6) Al-Hayat (London), October 31, 2005.
(7) Al-Hayat (London), October 28, 2005.
(8) www.sotaliraq.com, November 1, 2005.
(9) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), November 7, 2005.
(10) Al-Mada (Iraq), October 29, 2005.
(11) INCPPressBaghdad@yaahoogroups.com on behalf of INC Press Office. Sent 11/2/05 1:06 AM.
(12) Al-Hayat of October 30, 2005 discusses some of the political options after the elections.
(13) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), November 8, 2005.
(14) Al-Sabah (Iraq), November 1, 2005.
(15) Al-Zaman (Iraq), October 30, 2005.
(16) Information on the election system was gathered by phone from two candidates in Baghdad.
(17) Al-Zaman (Iraq), October 31, 2005.
(18) Al-Sabah (Iraq), October 30 and October 31, 2005.

Galloway party in gay rights row

Respect's grassroots rebel against alleged deal with anti-gay
Islamists

Respect leadership fails to apologise for excluding gay rights from
election manifesto

London – 22 November 2005

Grassroots members of George Galloway’s left-wing Respect party have
condemned as "unacceptable" the decision of the party leadership to
exclude lesbian and gay rights from their manifesto for the general
election earlier this year.

Respect MP George Galloway is now being asked to explain why his party
dumped gay rights from its manifesto. Allegations abound that
Respect's right-wing Islamist backers demanded the axing of gay rights
as a condition of their electoral support for the party.

At Respect's annual conference on Sunday (20 November), delegates
rebelled against party leaders who vetoed the inclusion of gay
equality in the party's manifesto for the 2005 general election.

The victorious conference resolution 47 stated: "Conference regards it
as unacceptable that our manifesto for the general election did not
contain any reference to the defence of LGBT rights."

From the conference platform, Respect leader Lindsay German, who is
also a senior leader of the Socialist Workers Party, disparaged the
resolution, claiming it had a "hidden agenda" and was moved in "bad
faith".

"Despite the motion being passed by the grassroots membership,
Respect's leaders offered no apology and no assurance that LGBT rights
will be included in future election manifestos," said gay left-wing
human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell of OutRage!.

"Respect claims to support LGBT rights but the exclusion of gay rights
from its election manifesto suggests otherwise.

"On the Respect website, gay equality is shunted to the sidelines,
listed semi-anonymously under 'Other policies'. This shows that
Respect regards LGBT rights as a marginal issue of no serious interest
or concern. Equally alarming, the policy section of Respect's website
has no section on women’s rights.

"Respect's disrespect for LGBT people is part of a pattern. One of the
party's top leaders, Lindsay German, notoriously warned that gay
rights are not a 'shibboleth' and should not prevent Respect forging
electoral alliances with homophobic religious fundamentalist groups.

"Respect is in alliance with the right-wing, anti-gay Islamist group,
the Muslim Association of Britain. Respect does not ally with liberal
and left-wing Muslims.

"The MAB endorses the recreation of an Islamic Caliphate where Muslims
would be subjected to the barbarism of Sharia law, which includes the
execution of unchaste women, apostates and gay people.

"Respect has betrayed progressive Muslims, in favour of an alliance
with Islamist conservatives and fundamentalists whose policies on gay
and women’s rights are even more reactionary than those of the
despicable neo-Nazi BNP.

"Respect has failed to defend gay Muslims against fundamentalist
Islamists and it attacks gay rights groups that support Muslim
queers.

"The politics of Respect on LGBT rights is reformist at best. It's
policies are far less radical than those of the Liberal Democrats.
Unlike Respect, the Lib Dems included gay rights in their manifesto,"
said Mr Tatchell.

Further information: Brett Lock OutRage! 0770 843 5917.

-------------

Respect annual conference, 20 November 2005, London

Resolution 47 - Lesbian, Gay, Transgender and Transgender (LGBT)
rights – South East Essex supported by Bristol, Lambeth and Sandwell

"Conference regards it as unacceptable that our manifesto for the
general election did not contain any reference to the defence of LGBT
rights despite policy adopted at last year's AGM and contained in the
founding statement. Conference resolves that in future our manifestos
and principal election materials will explicitly defend such rights
and call for an end to all discrimination against lesbians, gay men,
bisexuals and transgender people."

ENDS

Toby Dodge on rebuilding Iraq

Dr Toby Dodge in the Independent writes that calling for speedy troop withdrawal in the vain hope that things will somehow miraculously get better once British and American troops have gone cannot deliver this. He concludes that An honest and sustainable approach to the unfolding tragedy would be, first, to admit that the situation is very bad and getting worse. Second, it would admit that the rebuilding of the Iraqi state and reconciliation of its population is beyond the resources or capacity of any one state, even the world's sole remaining super power. Once these two things have been recognised, the only possible way out of the Iraqi nightmare is not a dishonourable abdication of responsibility, but the creation of a new truly international coalition to share the burden of helping the Iraqis move towards a brighter future. This would involve a multinational effort, organised through the United Nations, and an honest declaration to both the Iraqis and the wider world that this will take many years and a great deal of money to achieve.

Ann Clwyd defends herself

Ann Clwyd, the Special Envoy to the Prime Minister on Human Rights in Iraq defends herself in the Independent on the issue of human rights abuses in Iraq.

Peter Tatchell on far left collusion with Islamo-fascism

In this excellent article in the current edition of Tribune Peter Tatchell casts a critical eye on CND for inviting the Iranian Ambassador to its recent conference - Why would a progressive movement like CND give a platform to the representative of a clerical fascist regime that executes apostates, unchaste women, gay people and even children?

His article also examines the stance of the far left on Iran and concludes with the withering remark that the SWP’s atheist leadership used to dismiss religion as the opiate of the people. Now, for the sake a few votes, their hide their irreligiousness and collude with the right-wing Islamists of the MAB; selling out liberal and progressive Muslims, and turning their backs on the Iranian people’s freedom struggle. SWP. Socialists Without Principles?

Peter Tatchell urges solidarity with the Iranian people’s struggle against clerical tyranny

Guess who was the key-note speaker at the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament’s annual conference last month? No, it wasn’t the veteran peace campaigner Pat Arrowsmith.

Surprise, surprise. It was the Iranian ambassador, Dr Seyed Adeli. An odd choice. Why would a progressive movement like CND give a platform to the representative of a clerical fascist regime that executes apostates, unchaste women, gay people and even children?

“Given the possibility of an attack on Iran…we wanted to hear the view of the Iranian government,” explained CND Chair, Kate Hudson. “There was no implied support…but a desire for peaceful – but firm – lobbying and dialogue.”

So when is CND hosting anti-nuclear activists from Iran? Not any time soon, it seems. Moreover, when a handful of delegates heckled Dr Deli, they were ejected by CND stewards. All of which leaves Iranian left-wingers rather puzzled about the politics of the British peace movement. Peace at any price? With any blood-stained dictatorship?

The ayatollahs view Dr Adeli’s speech to CND as a big propaganda coup; giving them kudos and respectability. Anti-fascist Iranians feel totally betrayed. With good reason.

As Dr Adeli addressed CND, a Tehran court found a young woman guilty of adultery. Identified only as Soghra, she was sentenced to be stoned to death.

The good folks at CND were presumably unaware of this latest judicial barbarity, but I doubt they would have been much fussed had they known. Their agenda is anti-nuclear, not pro-human rights. They applauded the ambassador’s speech.

In the Islamic Republic of Iran, stoning people to death is not against the law, it is the law. The only crime is to use the wrong-sized stones. Too big, and the victim will die quickly without suffering enough pain. Too small, and they might not die at all.

Welcome to the new medievalism that is modern Iran, where the barbarism of Sharia law holds sway, and where superstitious, bigoted clerics have the power to decide whether people live or die for the most trivial offences. Women are threatened with lashing for “misplaced smiles” that arouse “satanic desires” in men. Last year, 14 year old Kaveh Habibi-Nejad was flogged to death in the town of Sanandaj for “eating in public” during Ramadan.

Franco’s Spain and Pinochet’s Chile were tea parties by comparison to Iran’s Islamist bloodfest. Since the ayatollah’s seized power in 1979, nearly 100,000 Iranians have been murdered – including socialists, trade unionists, communists, feminists, journalists, students, lawyers, writers, doctors, human rights activists and religious and ethnic leaders.

In the four months following the June election of hardline President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, over 80 people are known to have been executed or sentenced to death. Under Iranian law, girls as young as nine and boys as young as 15 can be hanged. So far this year, seven children have been executed.

Torture is endemic. The barbaric tortures inflicted in the name of Islam include the cutting out of prisoner’s eyes, crushing their heads in metal vices, and forcing boiling water into their ears. The Dark Ages are alive and kicking in modern-day Iran.

CND is not the only supposedly progressive movement that is lost for words when confronted by the crimes of the ayatollahs. The Labour government also ignores the cries of the Iranian people.

The Home Office says Iranian asylum seekers with torture scars all over their bodies are “not genuine.” It wants to deport them back to Iran, where they will face further torture and possible execution. The Foreign Office has prioritised action against Iran’s nuclear programme. Human rights concerns have been quietly dropped; much to the delight of the ayatollahs. When two gay teenagers were publicly executed in the summer, the Foreign Secretary declined to protest to Tehran. The government’s commitment to uphold universal human rights apparently does not apply to Iranians, or at least not to gay ones.

Despite its socialist rhetoric, the far left is no better. In Iran in mid-2003, a wave of strikes and demonstrations by workers and students was violently suppressed, with over 4,000 arrests. Where were the protests from the workers’ defenders, the Socialist Workers Party?

Only last week, two labour activists were jailed for taking part in a peaceful May Day rally in the city of Saqez in 2004. Mahmoud Salehi got five years and Jalal Hosseini three years. It is thanks to international trade union protests that these men did not suffer a more grisly fate. Even now, who can say what will happen to them in prison. If they are not tortured it will be the exception, not the rule.

Since the beginning of 2005, Iran has erupted with episodic protests by workers, students and the Arab minority in the south. These heroic struggles have been blanked from the pages of Socialist Worker. Why?

June’s general election in Iran was marred by widespread fraud. It bought to power the anti-democracy, fundamentalist candidate, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Yet the Stop The War Coalition (STWC), which is dominated by the SWP, boasts that ordinary Iranians are “making advances towards democracy.” Some advance.

The STWC and SWP are campaigning against a US invasion of Iran. Good. But they have shamefully vetoed any protests against the Tehran regime. This refusal to support Iranian democrats and socialists replicates their failure to back the anti-Saddam opposition in Iraq.

The indifference of the SWP to the tyranny of the ayatollahs is nakedly opportunistic. They know that criticism of the Iranian Islamists would fracture their political alliance with the Muslim Association of Britain, which is pro-Islamist and supports Sharia law. They fear it could also alienate pro-Islamist Muslim voters, who are being targeted as a support base for the SWP’s electoral front, Respect.

The SWP’s atheist leadership used to dismiss religion as the opiate of the people. Now, for the sake a few votes, their hide their irreligiousness and collude with the right-wing Islamists of the MAB; selling out liberal and progressive Muslims, and turning their backs on the Iranian people’s freedom struggle. SWP. Socialists Without Principles?

PETER TATCHELL HUMAN RIGHTS FUND

Donations are requested to help fund Peter Tatchell's campaigns promoting democracy, human rights and social justice, including action against tyrants and torturers. Peter is unpaid and receives no grants. To continue his human rights work, he depends on donations from friends and supporters.

Please make cheques payable to: "Peter Tatchell Human Rights Fund".

Send to: Peter Tatchell Human Rights Fund, PO Box 35253, London E1 4YF

Web: www.tatchellrightsfund.org
Email: info@tatchellrightsfund.org

Irish lessons for Iraq

The Irish Times (via www.nuzhound.com) reports that Iraqi foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari is studying the Northern Ireland peace process "very closely" to see if the same approach could help resolve the conflict in his own country but recognises that that the problem was the greater intensity and viciousness of the Iraqi conflict and that the insurgents had no political dimension. He said that the motto of those who are fighting us is very simple: Either we rule Iraq or we burn Iraq.'

Observers report on Iraqi referendum

The Next Century Foundation provided the only international observers operating at large in the interior of Iraq and accredited as election monitors to the Independent Electoral Commission for Iraq during the recent referendum on the new iraqi constitution. Their warts and all report concludes that Overall, we regard this referendum as having been fair -- despite minor local irregularities. Though these were regrettable, they had no significant effect on the final outcome.

Alternatives to Bush

The US Democratic Leadership Council sketches alternatives to president Bush’s strategy on Iraq.

President Barzani at Downing Street

The Kurdistan Regional Government web site carries a transcription of the joint press conference given by Tony Blair and the Iraqi Kurdistan President Barzani on 31st October.

Tony Blair met with Masoud Barzani at Number 10 and spoke briefly to journalists afterwards.

Opening statements

Tony Blair:

Good afternoon everyone. A very warm welcome to President Barzani. We are delighted to have you here, Sir. Thank you for everything that you are doing in Iraq at the present time. Obviously after the Constitutional Referendum the next stage is to have successful elections in December. We hope that they will be successful and that that will allow Iraq to become the stable and democratic country its people want to see. And thanks to you and all of your colleagues for your courage throughout this process. Thank you.

President Barzani:

Thank you very much Mr Prime Minister. Allow me to express our thanks and appreciation for the warm welcome and also the thanks and the appreciation of the people of Kurdistan and the majority of the people of Iraq for the brave role that you have personally played and also for your courage in helping the people of Iraq to be liberated.

And I would also like to express our condolences and sympathies to the families of the British soldiers who have sacrificed their lives in order to save other people's lives and also to create freedom.

Mr Prime Minister, we have started a democratic process in Iraq with the help and support from you, from the United States and from other coalition partners.

We are facing and confronting the terrorists who have tried their best in order not to allow for this process to succeed.

There might be voices here in Britain and in the United States and in our country of people who are anti-war, but this will have been imposed on us. If there is any weakness in dealing with this war, then the war will come to our doorsteps.

And I would like to assure you, Mr Prime Minister, that we in Kurdistan will do our best so that the election results will be very good so that after the election we will be able to form a government that will represent all the peoples of Iraq and also succeed in our efforts with the democratic process and we will try our best in order to work for the implementation of the Constitution that was ratified recently after the vote on the 15th of October so that we will be heading towards a future that will be prosperous for all of the people of Iraq and also for us to live in peace because Iraq is a key.

And once again I would like to thank you and express my appreciation.

Tony Blair:

Thank you Sir. Thank you very much.

Question and answer session

Question:

Mr Barzani, my question to you is regarding the coming elections. The elections that have been announced. Which of these lists to you feel is closest to the Kurdish people's aspirations and do you expect an alliance with the United Iraqi Alliance after the problems with this government?

Prime Minister, if I may ask you regarding the number of 26,000 Iraqi civilian deaths over the past 2 years, is this number as high as you expected and what are the responsibilities of the coalition troops to protect Iraqi lives?

President Baezani:

In Kurdistan we enjoy very good relations with all the different groups and lists and we have to wait for the results of the elections. We will work on the basis of commitment to the Constitution that was drafted and that was ratified. And we will continue to play our role, which was a mediatory role, and the role which we play with all the different groups and our coalition will be with all of them.

Tony Blair:

Let me make it clear, we regret any civilian deaths. Those who don't regret civilian deaths are the people engaged in acts of terrorism deliberately killing civilians, and that is not the Iraqi Security Forces nor the Multinational Force. It is the terrorists and insurgents who are killing people in order to stop the democratic process, and my point is very simple for everybody. Let the democratic process work, let people vote freely, let them decide their own government, and if the violence stopped today, the multinational force could leave tomorrow. It is the violence that keeps us in order to support the political process. So those who are responsible for civilian deaths are those who are engaged in acts of violence to prevent democracy.

Question:

Two questions, the first for President Barzani. After your visit and your meeting with the Prime Minister, I know that important issues have been raised and discussed. Could you give us some of the basic things which have been discussed between you which is relevant to the future of the Kurdistan region?

And a question for Prime Minister Blair, the coalition of the alliance between Kurdistan and Britain, could we call that one of the bases of this alliance is confronting terrorism?

President Barzani:

Of course we discussed the current situation in Iraq and the future, and we also stressed our full co-operation for the domestic process that we have started in Iraq so that it will make progress and will succeed and our views were identical.

Tony Blair:

Look, one of the interesting things about Kurdistan is that there, because there has been the opportunity for people to live and work in peace, that region is so much stronger. It is economically stronger, it is stronger in terms of the living standards of its people and what it shows is what Iraq itself could be like if the terrorism would stop and proper systems of democracy then shape the future of Iraq. This is a basic and important struggle for not just the freedom of people in Iraq against terrorism, but for the freedom of people everywhere against terrorism. The self-same people who are killing innocent people in Iraq are killing innocent people in India, in Egypt, in this country, in other parts of Europe, in other parts of the world, and therefore the bond between us is a very, very strong one. It is to stand firm for democracy against terrorism, and to be prepared to carry that fight to whatever corner of the world these terrorists operate.

Review of history of the Stop the War Coalition

Abdullah Muhsin and Gary Kent review a history of the Stop the War movement at Democratiya and conclude that This book should include a health warning. It embraces authoritarian language with little space for dialogue or even fair debate. It is glossy, visually busy and bitty in the modern style, with coffee table production values, attractive photographs, and appalling politics. One day a decent history of the Stop the War Coalition will be written. This isn't it.