banner
Jun 15, 2022
1 Views
0 0

How to cut the Gordian knot?

On the possibilities of the Constitution, to which Mossad had a hand in drafting

The US military invasion of Iraq under the false pretext that this country has weapons of mass destruction, the death of a huge number of civilians as a result of shelling (including the use of prohibited types of ammunition), the destruction of industrial infrastructure, the education system, medical and social security, and much more … A country with the richest reserves of energy resources and one of the regional leaders was thrown back in its development for decades.

The list of crimes should also include the imposed system of state administration, which also failed during the occupation, and today has led the country to a dead end.

The constitution, written in 2003 under dictation, was drafted in such a way as to prevent the resurrection of Iraqi power and forever eliminate the threat to Israel. Mossad employees had a hand in creating the new Iraqi constitution. They convinced their CIA colleagues by insisting that the Lebanese model of government be taken as the basis, which determined the assignment of the most important posts to certain confessions, clans and groups.

Paul Bremer, who headed the occupation administration, at first took the idea as ridiculous. Indeed, if someone in the US Senate came up with the idea of ​​amending the constitution so that only a white Muslim from Oklahoma and no one else could become president of the country, he would be taken away for a psychiatric examination. However, the argument in favor of the “Lebanese model” was that in Lebanon itself, such a scheme does not work satisfactorily – and this is just what is needed to paralyze Iraq, if necessary, “in full compliance with the law.”

In addition to the fact that the post of president of Iraq is legally assigned to the Kurds, the prime minister to the Shiite Arabs, and the chairman of the parliament and the minister of defense to the Sunni Arabs, there are many other legal nuances. Iraqi jurists, analyzing the current situation, shrug their shoulders – they do not see a way out of the impasse. And the situation is critical.

On October 10, 2021, early parliamentary elections were held, which Prime Minister M. Al-Kazimi insisted on. The head of government motivated his initiative by the need to bring down the intensity of protest in society, but as a result, the state apparatus collapsed. In the new composition of the supreme legislative body, not a single political group was able to secure a constitutional majority or get the support of other parliamentarians.

As a result of the elections, the “Sairun” coalition, headed by M. al-Sadr, received the largest number of mandates – 73 out of 329, significantly squeezing out the Shiite pro-Iranian groups. Al-Sadr’s supporters celebrated the victory, but they hurried: their opponents reacted vigorously, creating a new coalition called the Coordination Structure. This was done with the participation of Tehran – the commander of the “Quds” forces of the IRGC of the Islamic Republic of Iran visited Baghdad at least five times in six months. During the meetings with the leaders of the pro-Iranian groups, a program of action based on “constitutional opportunities” was developed.

Formally, the procedure looks like this: the parliament must elect a president, who must approve a candidate from the largest bloc in parliament for the post of prime minister within two weeks. Then the new prime minister forms the composition of the cabinet of ministers, taking into account the representation in parliament of other factions. But the devil is in the details.

In addition to the requirement for the leading political bloc to provide 166 votes in order to qualify for the nomination of its candidate for the post of prime minister, there is one more condition – any decision of the parliament is considered valid if there is a quorum. And its value is two-thirds of the number of deputies, which is what the opponents use. Three attempts to discuss a candidate for the post of head of government ended in the same way – a boycott organized by pro-Iranian parties. Only 178 deputies arrived at the meeting on April 1. Many Kurdish legislators did not arrive either, as a split also arose among them – representatives of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan believe that Barham Saleh should remain president, and MPs from the Democratic Party of Kurdistan nominated Rebar Ahmed for this post.

Another important point is the multi-party system, also a clear sign of the work of MOSSAD specialists, who at one time launched a joke popular in Lebanon: two Lebanese met and created three parties. For Iraq, this has resulted in the fact that today there are more than 350 parties, movements and groups in the political arena. It is impossible to understand in such a mess. The calculation of the architects of the “new Iraqi democracy” was fully justified. The bomb laid down in the constitution worked.

Eight months have passed since the elections, but there is no full-fledged president, government and other authorities in the country. There is no state budget, there are no people authorized to make decisions and be responsible for their decisions. M. As-Sadr’s movement made significant efforts to break the impasse, but to no avail. The program put forward by him to restore order in the state met with stiff resistance: as al-Sadr said, the “Coordination Structure” rejected the fight against corruption: “because of this, the prisons will be overcrowded.”

It would seem that it is time for the judiciary to intervene. The Federal Court of Iraq really tried to do something: it demanded that legislators decide on the choice of a new president by April 6, threatening otherwise with the dissolution and re-election of parliament. However, the Federal Court lacks powers. According to the law, only the parliament itself can dissolve the parliament, and two-thirds of the deputies plus one vote must vote for such a decision. The circle is closed.

The last straw that exhausted Al-Sadr’s patience was the decision of the Supreme Federal Court to block the adoption of the food security bill on the grounds that the interim government was not allowed to introduce bills. The leader of the Sairun bloc accused the court of making politicized decisions under the influence of one-third of the parliament. In a televised address, M. Al-Sadr said: “Now they have reached a level where they are blocking the adoption of laws that would serve the interests of the people.” His next step was the announcement of his transition to the opposition, and on June 10, the deputies of the largest parliamentary faction filed applications for resignation of parliamentary powers.

In this environment, the words of Muqtada al-Sadr that other parties now have a chance to form the next government sound ominous.

Credit: REUTERS / Alaa Al-Marjani

If you notice a mistake in the text, highlight it and press Ctrl+Enter to send the information to the editor.

Article Categories:
Politics
banner

Leave a Reply