The Political Chase

Caution - Children at Play in Iraq’s Bush Democracy

To the extent there was a government in Iraq, it may now be just an entry in history books. The leaders of Bush Democracy in Iraq, acting like school children fighting over candy rather than high-ranking government officials, have packed their toys up and gone home. The Iraqi government may have just self-destructed due to the inability of government leaders to agree on the terms and conditions of Iraq’s critical hydrocarbon law (i.e., oil law), which is arguably the most important of the 18 benchmarks Iraq must pass.

The New York Times reports, “A carefully constructed compromise on a draft law governing Iraq’s rich oil fields, agreed to in February after months of arduous talks among Iraqi political groups, appears to have collapsed.”

I suppose technically it should be stated the leaders of the three sectarian groups in Iraq (Sunni, Shia, and Kurds), and prime minister Nouri al-Maliki serving as a fourth agitator-intervenor could not agree on the final terms and conditions of draft legislation. But the inability to agree is hardly fitting to the scenario played out in the Times piece.

Instead, the draft legislation that George Bush, Tony Snow, General David Petraeus, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker recently said was already working “de facto,” crumbled due to the absence of trust, recalcitrance, shenanigans, and an obvious absence of understanding the basics of a federal government system. Just yesterday, Tony Snow was asked about the hydrocarbon law in a press briefing, and Snow’s reaction was on the level of one of the Soprano’s “forget about it.”

MR. SNOW: First, you’re assuming that the Iraqis, themselves, don’t want change, and I think the events on the ground indicate that the Iraqis, themselves — especially the grassroots level — have had a significant change of heart. What you’re asking about I think is the political —

Q Right. But at the national level and the benchmarks that everybody seems to have forgotten, the 18 benchmarks — and now you’re talking about Anbar, it’s almost you’re redefining success.

MR. SNOW: No. Look, benchmarks were something that Congress wanted to use as a metric –

Q You signed off on it.

MR. SNOW: — and we’re going to produce a report. But the fact is that the situation is bigger and more complex, and you need to look at the whole picture.

But let’s talk about some pressure on the Iraqis. Number one, I’ve just talked about the fact that you’ve got these grassroots movements. Do you not think that people in Iraq, themselves, are putting pressure on the political system? My sense is that they probably are. Number two, the President has made it absolutely clear that he expects to see political progress, and he’s made it clear to the Iraqis that within the American political system there is an insistence that the political factions within Iraq figure out how to get together on important pieces of legislation. Again –

Q But, Tony, he’s done that for a long time, and there is no real significant political progress on the national level.

MR. SNOW: Well, actually — General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker pointed out some interesting things that have been going on at the national level, without necessarily the enactment of national legislation. For instance, there’s a lot of talk about the oil law, when do you come up with a hydrocarbon law. Well, it turns out the government has been redistributing oil and natural gas revenues to provinces –

Q It’s really their only revenue, right?

MR. SNOW: Well, but they’ve been doing it. You’re asking about —

Q At far lower levels than you wanted them to.

MR. SNOW: Look, they’ve started doing it sort of de facto. What we would like to see is an oil law passed. You have seen de facto de-Baathification. And the members — lower levels of the Baath party have, in fact, been readmitted to civil society in other parts of Iraq. You have started to see a recognition that these matters of reconciliation have to take place. Do we want to see more political progress? Absolutely. Absolutely.

The breakdown, which would be any lawyer’s dream come true, is a bit convoluted, so here’s the redux. Leaders from the sectarian groups have been conferencing on draft legislation created by Iraq’s parliament in February. The conflict, to an extent, can be segregated into five salient points: (1) no one trusted representatives external to their sectarian group (e.g., Sunni’s wanted protection from Shias); (2) Sects acted independently without having a formal law in place providing the proper controls (e.g. Kurds were selling oil); (3) parliament took too long to implement an oil law, and allegedly forced by default independent groups to take their own action (e.g. Kurds); (4) Kurds acting independently was seen as a declaration of their own independence; and, (5) Maliki was trying to turn the political wheels in his favor and also accused other groups of “not wanting him to succeed politically.”

As the respective elements combined the reactions became exponentially greater and whatever unity theoretically existed appears to be shattered as evidenced by the Kurd’s response to the rejoinder the Iraqi oil minister issued the Kurds.

“His views are irrelevant to what the K.R.G. is doing legally and constitutionally in Kurdistan.”

It is reasonably clear the Iraqis are having problems understanding or accepting, much less implementing, a strong central federal government.

The Kurds say their regional law is consistent with the Iraqi Constitution, which grants substantial powers to the provinces to govern their own affairs. But Mr. Shahristani believes that a sort of Kurdish declaration of independence can be read into the move [Kurds selling oil internationally without benefit of a federal oil law]. “This to us indicates very serious lack of cooperation that makes many people wonder if they are really going to be working within the framework of the federal law.”

Kurdish officials dispute that contention, saying that they are doing their best to work within the Constitution while waiting for the Iraqi Parliament, which always seems to move at a glacial pace, to consider the legislation.

“We reject what some parties say — that it is a step towards separation — because we have drafted the Kurdistan oil law depending on Article 111 of the Iraqi Constitution, which says oil and natural resources are properties of Iraqi people,” said Jamal Abdullah, a spokesman for the Kurdistan Regional Government. “Both Iraqi and Kurdish oil laws depend on that article,” Mr. Abdullah said.

That is just one example, but when combined and in context with various items from the Times’ piece, it is not hard to state establishing a strong central government appears to be an item for the next millennium, maybe. Each day it appears that a decentralized federal government with Iraq divided into three distinct entities may be the only solution, and that is indeed debatable itself.

There is one item in this disarray that I suspiciously question — the Kurds selling oil to Hunt Oil Co. in Dallas, TX. What part of Hunt’s due diligence process “overlooked” the absence of the federal oil law? What responsible corporate officer would not be knowledgeable of  the fact or properly ensure the most notable legal issue in the country was not intact?

Suffice it to say, the President’s sales pitch tonight for further rolling out Bush Democracy in Iraq has been dealt another blow.