Slogger City and the Bazzázístán Times

Iraqi Papers Tues: A New Political Pact? Out With "De-Ba'thification", Enter "Accountability and Justice" By AMER MOHSEN Many of the intellectuals and policymakers who supported the invasion of Iraq and theorized for the war have been backtracking in terms of their expectations of the new “democratic polity,” which the war, in their minds, was designed to create. Notably, the war's supporters (on the American and Iraqi sides) seem to have abandoned the idea that Iraq will follow the “German” or “Japanese” models, whereby an invasion by a “benevolent” democratic force will lead to the creation of a healthy and prosperous democracy, almost in an organic fashion, once the shackles of authoritarianism are removed. One of the main tenants of post-war “reconstruction” that were lifted directly from the post-WW2 experience was the policy of “de-Ba'thification” in Iraq, modeled (at least rhetorically) after the de-Nazification laws in Germany. De-Ba'thification was aimed at removing the figures of the dictatorship from the decision-making centers, but also at uprooting the “culture” of authoritarianism in Iraq, which would open the gates of democratic participation, liberal party politics, and civic culture; not unlike the case of Germany (in fact, several historians cast doubts on the extent of de-Nazification in Western Germany following the Second World War.) Today, Az-Zaman reported on its front page that the Iraqi President, Jalal Talabani, and the Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki, made a joint statement announcing a radical review of the de-Ba'thification law and its replacement with a new law called “Accountability and Justice.” Al-Mada reported the same news, also on its front page, but without confirming the new proposed law. What is more notable is that, according to Az-Zaman, “Accountability and Justice” was the fruit of labor of the departing American ambassador, Zalamay Khalilzad, who “participated in intense meetings with Iraqi politicians and political parties, paving the ground for the promulgation of the “Accountability and Justice” law.” De-Ba'thification was one of the first policies to be applied, forcefully, by the invading Americans. Even the dismantling of Saddam’s army was, at the time, seen under the light of de-Ba'thifying Iraq. The reversal of the law (in addition to several major changes that are expected to come soon) may be a result of the deep instability and opposition to the American-sponsored “political process” in Iraq, which necessitates a new “political contract” with many sections of the Iraqi society. But it may also indicate a realization, on the part of the US administration, that the anti-Ba'thist forces that came to rule in Iraq are not exactly Jeffersonian democrats, but sectarian and religious parties that do not provide a platform for liberal politics, the way war-planners had envisioned and hoped. Establishing a new political pact, even with the old-Ba'this, may therefore be part of a process whereby the US upholds some form of a quasi-stable state in Iraq, allowing the bulk of its army “an honorable exit” from the costly war, in the words of Fouad Ajami, one of the war’s staunchest supporters. The timing of the new law could not have been more opportune for the Iraqi government, as the Iraqi delegation heads to Riyadh to join the Arab summit that is to be held there this week. Arab diplomats have been exerting pressure on al-Maliki to effectuate amendments to the Iraqi political system, including a review of de-Ba'thification, which is seen by Sunni Arab states as a tool for the exclusion of Sunnis from participation in the political system and the bureaucracy. In fact, Az-Zaman claimed that the timing of the announcement may be “an attempt to appease Arab fears in the Riyadh summit vis-à-vis the faltering situation in Iraq.” Az-Zaman admitted, however, that the law has been in the works for some time. Az-Zaman is still promoting the Arab summit as an event that could “pressure” the Iraqi government into amending some of the problematic articles of the constitution, and open a wider scope for Sunni participation in the governance of Iraq. Az-Zaman quoted several (mostly Sunni) Iraqi politicians who called on al-Maliki to use the summit as an occasion to “correct past mistakes.” Az-Zaman also took the adoption of the draft Iraq resolution (published in al-Hayat yesterday) as a sign of Arab determination to “rectify” the political process in Iraq. Az-Zaman may very well be exaggerating the effect and influence of the Arab League summits: the Arab League is known for having little or no mechanisms for the enforcement of the resolutions it adopts against member states; and many Arab countries (especially rich oil exporters) are notorious for not fulfilling financial obligations that they pledge during Arab summits. Two very sensitive dossiers will be discussed in Riyadh tomorrow: Palestine and Iraq; tomorrow’s deliberations might indicate whether the summit will be a turning point in Middle East politics, as its proponents claim; or another in a series of several summits (at least since 1991) that have failed to produce tangible effects.