Shias in the driver's seat

According to the results released, the most remarkable aspect of the election is that 58 per cent of the voters participated in the polls. The opponents of the elections, who were die-hard opponents of the occupation of Iraq by the US-led coalition, did everything possible to derail the elections. They carried on a merciless campaign of death against the occupation forces and indeed the Iraqi administration, whom they saw as collaborators of the occupying powers. On this point the entire Iraqi population appears united -- the occupation forces must quit Iraq as soon as possible.

The Shias have won 48 percent of the votes, the Kurds in the north nearly 25 percent and the Sunnis about 13 per cent. The Sunni vote is worth noting because there was strenuous campaigning within the Sunni ranks and the area surrounding Baghdad, which was mainly Sunni, for them not to take part in the elections. That so many Sunnis voted, defying death threats, is a measure of the pull of the elections. The Iraqis by and large have come to believe that elections will bring a better future for Iraq. It is evident that the Iraqis by their vote have decided to close the chapter on Saddam Hussein, the longtime dictator, ousted by the guns of the coalition led by the US. The chapter of supremacy of the Sunnis, thanks to the regime of Saddam Hussein has been left behind.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

The Shias made it possible for the Americans to hold the elections and thus find a possible honourable exit out of Iraq. The leader of the Shias, Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, has played a major role in the holding of the elections. He tamed his firebrand disciple in Karbala when the situation threatened to go out of hand. No wonder that Al-Sistani would expect a big prize from the principal occupying power -- the US. The very difficult choice before the US is that by putting Al-Sistani in the driver's seat, they have created a second Shia state after Iran, with her nuclear ambitions and nearly 70 million population.

It is well known that Saddam Hussein had to be removed mainly to placate Israeli Premier Ariel Sharon, for whom Saddam had become an implacable adversary. The question that is on everyone's minds is whether the Iranian leadership will have to face the fate of Saddam.

Iraq is an ancient civilization and the division along ethnic and sectarian lines is real. Yet over centuries the three ethnic groups, namely Shias in the south, the Kurds in the north, and the Sunnis in the middle, did not live in water-tight compartments but have liberally intermingled. The post-election scenario brings out the majority Shias on top and puts the ruling Sunnis at the bottom of the pile. Thus horse-trading is a mild expression. The US is at present running the show, but the contestants for power would want it to remain out of the arena, a near impossible feat so long as it is there with more than 150,000 troops facing the onslaught of the Iraqi fighters. The Americans are an impatient people and it is very doubtful if they plan to have a long stay in Iraq to work out the leadership contest among the Iraqis.

Along with the Shias in the south has forcefully emerged the Kurds in the north. They have been the most forceful supporter of the US, whom they literally invited into Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein. The voice in favour of continued stay of the US that is heard in Iraq, is mostly Kurdish voice. It is well known that it is a long standing imperialist plan to establish a Kurdish state in the northern part of Iraq with long borders with Turkey and Iran and Syria. Turkey has fought a nearly twenty year bloody war with her Kurds in the south east led by PKK guerillas. The Turkish armed forces defeated the PKK and their leader Abdallah Ocalan is currently serving a life sentence in Turkish jail. Both Britain in her heyday of the Empire and the US lately have tried their hand in fanning the Kurdish flame.

With their emergence within Iraq, through the electoral process, the dream of a separate Kurdish state is likely to get some support. Yet the states surrounding the Kurds, namely Turkey, Iran and Syria are strongly opposed to any such development. More importantly the Kurdish population in those countries (in Turkey there are many more Kurds than in northern Iraq) are fully integrated within the boundaries of those states.

The US and her loyal ally Great Britain have done away with Saddam Hussein, the foe of Ariel Sharon. In the process the US has planted a democracy in place of a dictator! Does the US have the ambition of transplanting democracy throughout the world in her own image? This looks like an impossible task given the vastness of the globe and the considerable number of states being totally unfamiliar with the parliamentary democracy. It seems more likely that the US targets the Middle East, an area that needs to be made safe for Israel and the area is very rich in oil.

The US adventure in Iraq- has it opened the door for the breeze of democracy to blow or has it opened the Pandora's box? Time alone can tell.

Arshad-uz-Zaman is a former Ambassador.