Jean Blondel went into details in
Political Parties – The Decline of Parties in Europe – about the perils of patronage
in particracies. The exchange of favours and appointments in governmental
bodies owing to party calculations and favour exchanges has proven ineffective
and non-transparent, whether in majoritarian systems or those of a consensual
nature. The mistakes committed by parties in continental Europe throughout the
past century have been taken account of, with the hope that as party life
develops and new organisational structures emerge, citizens can be spared the
inefficiency of their elected governments.
What is being exported into the
new member countries of the democratic club seems to miss out on these lessons.
Theory trumps practicality and experience in the process of introducing democratic
systems of governance in these countries. Iraq stands testimony to this very
observation.
Iraq was ruled for very long
years by an Arab-nationalist party that employed European-inspired rhetoric of
socialism and nationalism. Parties of other ideological families also played a
role in the political landscape – such as the Communist party, which have also
been an offshoot of European parties established in the 1950s, or at least an
offshoot of their intellectual school. When the USA liberated Iraq from years
long of dictatorship in 2003, a new formula of party collaboration and
political organisation was introduced.
Iraq was viewed as a nation of
cleavages, and consequently, the system was organised in a similar fashion. It
was agreed that the presidency was to be headed by a Kurdish leader, the
Parliament by a Sunni leader, and the government by a Shiite leader. Parties
were organised along the same cleavage lines, and so were the votes of the electorate.
Most importantly, parties of the same ideological family – that of religious or
ethnic affiliation – started to exchange favours under a patronage-supportive
system.
Elections in Iraq in May 2018
envisaged drama. The prophecy was fulfilled. It took party factions and elected
members over 4 months to select a prime minister. Lengthier time is expected when
it comes to forming the government. The Blondel–feared party patronage prophecy
took place. Parties started forming coalitions across cleavage-lines in hope of
forming a majority and consequently form a government. Moqtada al-Sadr and
Haider al-Abadi created an alliance that includes the blocs of Vice President
Ayad Allawi and Shi’ite Muslim cleric Ammar al-Hakim, as well as several Sunni
Muslim lawmakers and ones representing Turkmen, Yazidi, Mandaean and Christian
minorities. A rival grouping led by militia commander Hadi al-Ameri and former
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki formed another alliance. Bickering commenced, and
so did implied favours and compromises on the hot files (Iran, Kurds, US
relations to name a few).
In a surprising turn of
events, Iraq’s new president tasked veteran Shiite politician Adel Abdul-Mahdi
with forming a new government. Neutrality and independence will not facilitate
the setting up of a government. Months after the country elected its new
parliament the country is as divided and ungovernable as ever – and it is all
attributed to a system that naively believed in consensual politics in an
ethnically and religiously divided nation. The exchange of favours and the
agreement of parties on their share of the pie will only entrench further
factionalism and favouritism based on party affiliation, AKA in Iraq
"religious affiliation". The new premier however astonished everyone
by announcing that the public can apply for a ministerial post by sending an electronic
application. He reportedly declined nominations by parties that were masked by
independent slogans. Is that the end of patronage?
Whether this is a political
stunt or an actual change in the modus operandi of Iraq politics remains to be
seen. Blondel's prophecies might not find ground in the Iraqi government, or so
one hopes.
Comments
Post a Comment