Was the Beginning Correct?

Was the Beginning Correct?

During the Iraqi parliamentary session to grant confidence to Mr Ali al-Zaidi’s government, I, like millions of others, witnessed the manner in which the process was conducted. The Speaker of Parliament would simply announce, “I ask Parliament to vote on such-and-such ministerial portfolio”, and within moments he would declare whether the vote had passed or failed, without any visible counting of votes or electronic voting system in place.

It appeared as though the Speaker of Parliament was merely guessing who had received the council’s confidence and who had not. Even if the mathematician Pythagoras himself had been present, he would not have been able to count votes in the way the Speaker of the Iraqi Parliament supposedly did.

Another issue clearly visible during the session was the division within several political blocs, which led to the failure to approve some key ministries, most notably the Ministry of Interior, despite prior agreements between the blocs. These divisions, along with the emergence of new alliances, will undoubtedly affect the government’s future performance, especially since al-Zaidi lacks political experience and has never previously managed the complex affairs of Iraq, something far from easy in this land of endless crises.

Although Mr al-Zaidi is known as a legal figure and businessman, governing a state requires far more than technical expertise. It demands political skill, manoeuvring, and strategic calculation. Moreover, al-Zaidi will find himself caught between two powerful forces: the United States and Iran, both seeking influence over Iraq. Iran exercises its influence through armed militias and political pressure, while the Americans hold economic leverage, given that Iraqi oil revenues pass through American financial institutions before reaching the Iraqi treasury.

Should the United States decide to withhold those revenues, the Iraqi government would struggle to pay salaries or provide basic services.

Then there are the long-standing disputes between Baghdad and Erbil. Can the al-Zaidi government resolve them despite decades of obstacles since the founding of the Iraqi state? Will al-Zaidi truly adhere to the Constitution in addressing these disputes, or will he follow the same path as his predecessors?

Some individuals familiar with certain ministers have already indicated that several members of the cabinet previously took positions against the Kurdistan Region while serving in Parliament. Some even went so far as to file repeated lawsuits against the Region in the Federal Court.

Kurdish leaders, foremost among them Masoud Barzani, congratulated al-Zaidi, as did the President of the Region and regional officials. Yet all are now waiting to observe the first hundred days of his government in order to understand his philosophy in managing power and wealth in Iraq, and to see where he intends to lead a country exhausted by suffering and constant crises.

They are waiting to see whether his government will truly restrict weapons to the authority of the state and disarm the militias that have openly rejected such measures in the past. Erbil is also waiting for guarantees that the Kurdistan Region’s financial entitlements will be delivered regularly and no longer disrupted through the familiar political methods that have repeatedly deepened mistrust.

The parliamentary blocs, especially the Coordination Framework, currently support Mr al-Zaidi, but this support will put his decisions to the test whenever they conflict with the Framework’s interests and directions.

Yet we must remember that the beginning itself was flawed during the parliamentary confidence sessions. Therefore, al-Zaidi’s commitment to the Constitution alone in resolving disputes, and his ability to govern on the basis of partnership, consensus, and balance, will determine not only his own success, but also the success of Iraq in finding a path towards stability and safety.

And tomorrow is near for those who wait.