In the Agora: Iraqi Elections

« Net Updates | Main | Tough Day at LewRockwell.com »

January 30, 2005

Iraqi Elections

By any measure the Iraqi elections appear to be a success. The New York Times is even reporting a "party atmosphere" in Baghdad. High turnout among the South Africans wasn't seen as the test of the South African elections'legitimacy, and neither should it be the sole test in Iraq. But turnout is estimated to be an astonishing 72% according to CNN and others, far beyond any number needed for legitimacy. Jonah Goldberg isn't happy about media coverage, and it's true that I've hardly seen any liberal blogs mention this, but mainstream coverage appears to be fair so far.

Iraqi expatriates living in Syria are able to take part in the vote, even though Syrians can't take part in the democratic process of their own country. What impact will this have on countries like Syria? A successful Iraqi election may very well be the most significant step for freedom and democracy since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Update: Adil al-Lami, senior official at the Independent Electoral Commission in Iraq, on al Iraqiyah TV, reports the early turnout numbers. All are quite high, including Sunni regions. Meanwhile a BBC headline reads, "Iraq election declared 'success'"

Flashback: Following WWII, Germany's first election took four years, and Japan's two.

Update 2: FOX News estimates turnout to be closer to 60%. Meanwhile Democrat Bob Beckel criticizes Kerry's recent negative comments by saying, "I don't get why any Democrat would want to dump on this election." No word yet from Josh Marshall or Balta, but Daily Kos still manages to see the half empty glass.

Update 3: L'esprit d'escalier responds to the South African point in detail, offering a compelling argument. But really the point is moot because turnout was in fact high. Good post, though.

Update 4: The AP offers this headline: "Arabs Mesmerized by Iraqi Elections."

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at January 30, 2005 10:22 AM

Comments

How much of that 18% that didn't make it to the polls is composed of Sunni though? I think that's the question that will decide whether or not this election brings about a chance for peace or increased interfactional struggle in a future Iraq.

Posted by: C M at January 30, 2005 11:54 AM | permalink

Why does their turnout decide the chance for peace? Sunni's are a minority in the country, so they would likely lose either way. The real question is whether the majority Shi'as will take steps to include them in the new government, whether or not they turnout.

Besides, many Sunnis voters were intimidated from going to the polls. How much of the turnout is accounted for by intimidation and how much by the rejection of the election will be the subject of a lot of debate.

Posted by: Joshua Claybourn at January 30, 2005 12:00 PM | permalink

I saw Kerry as being cautionary, not negative. After so many false or misleading claims by the Bush administration, we need to hear hope, not pie-in-the-sky.

Posted by: Joel Thomas at January 30, 2005 02:18 PM | permalink

Matt Yglesias has already had numerous posts about how well the elections have gone as well as how good our security has been to ensure them.

Posted by: jason at January 30, 2005 03:37 PM | permalink

Well Josh, if close to 20% of the population opts out of your democracy, and they are the 20% that are willing to blow the other 80% up in order to try to regain the power and prestige they once held, it bodes ill for future stability and legitimacy.

Posted by: C M at January 30, 2005 05:54 PM | permalink

A spectre is haunting Iraq: The spectre of ... success!

I exaggerate. It is not yet a success. Even if the elections succeed, that does not mean the constitutional convention will, nor does it mean the government elected afterward will, nor does it mean that Iraq will get through two peaceful transfers of power (the benchmark for establishing democracy). But given that the elections are going better than, well, frankly just about everyone predicted, I think it's premature to say we're about to FAIL! FAIL! FAIL!, don't you?

Posted by: Paul at January 30, 2005 06:24 PM | permalink

The original estimate of 72% voter turnout was reduced to a more probable 60%. Story here.

Posted by: Pieter Friedrich at January 30, 2005 07:21 PM | permalink

I'm not calling anything a failure, I'm just guarding my optimism. I hope beyond hope that it was an overwhelming success, as maybe that means it'll save my ass from going over there, but I see structural issues that I cannot ignore.

Posted by: C M at January 30, 2005 07:45 PM | permalink

The original estimate of 72% voter turnout was reduced to a more probable 60%.

Yeah, I noted that in my update several hours ago.

Posted by: Joshua Claybourn at January 30, 2005 09:04 PM | permalink

I think that cautious optimism is well in order, and I have nothing but respect for the millions of Iraqis who came out to vote -- without knowing, we should not, that it would really be as safe as it was when they did so. I hope that their bravery does not go unrewarded.

Posted by: philosopher at January 31, 2005 03:13 AM | permalink

Is it just me or was this a kind of anti-climax, but in a good way.

Posted by: C M at January 31, 2005 10:21 PM | permalink

Man is earth's Choicemaker. Psalm 25:12 He is by nature
and nature's God a creature of Choice - and of Criteria.
Psalm 119:30,173 His unique and definitive characteristic
is, and of Right ought to be, the natural foundation of
his environments, institutions, and respectful relations
to his fellow-man. Thus, he is oriented to a Freedom
whose roots are in the Order of the universe.

See the complete article at Homesite:
"Human Defined: Earth's Choicemaker"
http://www.choicemaker.net/

Posted by: Jim Baxter at February 1, 2005 07:53 PM | permalink