Breaking News: Iraqi Parliament Inflicts Defeat on al-Maliki, "Coalition" Forces

By a vote of 80-68, the Iraqi Parliament has rejected the draft law setting a withdrawal date of 31 May 2009 for troops from Britain and five other countries. Technically, the rejection means that the troops of the six countries should be out of Iraq by 31 December, when the UN mandate for their presence expires.

Practically, it's hard to see how the British contingent of 4100 --- who had a grace period until 31 July under the law to leave --- will be able to load up with all their equipment within the next 11 days. But that's only a secondary issue.



Instead, the significance of this news is symbolic. This is a major slap-down for the al-Maliki Government. For weeks, especially after the passage of the Status of Forces Agreement for US forces, many in the US and British  media have portrayed Parliamentary opposition as limited to the Sadrist faction of about 30 members. This vote indicates that there are a folks beyond Moqtada al-Sadr --- Sunni and Shi'a --- who are ready to see the back of al-Maliki.

That wish is exacerbated by unease at the Government's approach to foreign powers and what it means for Iraqi "sovereignty". The immediate reason for the defeat was that the Government tried to rush through an umbrella agreement, rather than submitting bilateral agreements with each of the six countries. The background reason was resentment at the deal with the US, which --- as it was not a formal "treaty" --- bypassed normal legal processes. As a Sunni member told the BBC, the deals should be "arranged, according to international law, through treaties or agreements".

Taking the Case to the Streets? Update on Muntazar al-Zaidi

The Iraqi Government's ploy to stem news coverage of Muntazar al-Zaidi's case, by releasing his supposed letter asking for a pardon, seems to have succeeded --- at least with the British and American press. There is nothing this morning except a summary in The Guardian, which leads with the confirmation by an Iraqi judge of al-Zaidi's beating.

The valuable McClatchy News Service, however, is onto what may be a significant development: the defense of al-Zaidi in the streets. It reports on a small but vocal demonstration outside Baghdad's Green Zone, joined by some politicians, al-Zaidi's family, and protesters from outside Baghdad. Other rallies took place throughout Iraq.



Whether this becomes a "shoe intifada", as an Iranian ayatollah colourfully labelled the protests, remains to be seen. Given the Iraqi Government's attempt to obscure the al-Zaidi case --- literally, as he still has not been seen by family and lawyers --- it may be the best hope to cut through the facade of "justice" around his detention.

Showdown for the al-Maliki Government? The Stakes are Raised

The manoeuvring inside the Iraqi Government just got very interesting:

Iraq’s interior minister said all 24 of his officers who had been arrested in a security crackdown this week would be released. And in a bold gesture of defiance, he publicly condemned his own government’s investigation, calling the accusations false and motivated purely by politics.

Beyond that information, all is muddle. The New York Times, for example, starts its analysis with the assertion that the Ministry of the Interior is "affiliated with members of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, a powerful Shiite party that is a rival to Dawa [the party of Prime Minister al-Maliki]". Hmm, given that ISCI is also part of the al-Maliki coalition, that far from clarifies matters.

Nor does the next sentence: "Some [Ministry of Interior] officers were members of the Baath Party before the American invasion." Hmm, again. The Baath Party of Saddam Hussein was Sunni, and since I don't think you can that ISCI is too well-disposed to the Baathists who jailed and killed its members.

So what do we have here? My snap reading was that the arrest of the 24 was a move to block a prominent Sunni role in the security services. However, it is significant that the Minister of the Interior who revoked the arrests, Jawad al-Bulani, is a Shi'a without affiliation to either Dawa or ISCI.

Soon after he became Minister in 2006, al-Bulani pledged to clean up the higher ranks of the Ministry, accused by many of supporting Shi'a sectarian killings of Sunnis: "Western officials and some Iraqi officials have said that he has lacked the political support to conduct the necessary purges, particularly at the upper levels of the ministry."

This time, however, it is al-Maliki's inner circle who have moved to purge, not al-Bulani. Does that mean --- as al-Bulani claims and as al-Maliki's American allies are privately saying --- that the motivation has little to do with corruption and sectarian violence and far more to do with manoeuvring before Iraqi elections in 2009?

I don't know. But I do know that al-Bolani's step is a major slap in the face to al-Maliki. If the 24 are reinstated in their posts next week, this Iraqi Government --- whatever its reasons for moving against the "early coup" --- will have been significantly weakened.

Follow-up: Showdown for the al-Maliki Government?

Reporting yesterday on the significance of the arrest of up to 35 Interior Ministry officials and military officers in Iraq, we wrote:

Assuming that all those arrested are Sunni, the Shi’a-led al-Maliki Government now faces a challenge that goes beyond plotters — both political and military — in its midst.

It has taken less than 24 hours for the political complications to emerge.



CNN has been told by "one knowledgeable Iraqi politician" that the arrests "stem" from internal conflicts between political parties ahead of the January 31 provincial elections". And, far from helping al-Maliki, a "senior US military official" concurred, that "the arrests appear to have been politically motivated".

That last quote is especially interesting. Could it be that the al-Maliki Government has arrested officials who have been involved in the American "surge" strategy of bolstering local Sunni groups?

Iraqi Shoe-Gate: al-Maliki Lets Muntazar al-Zaidi Dangle

Public Relations Act of the Day: the release of a letter to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, purportedly from Muntazar al-Zaidi asking for a pardon for his "big and ugly act". Al-Maliki's spokesman was far from subtle in his presentation of the letter, which has not actually been seen by anyone: it seems that Yaseen Majid spoke "exclusively" to almost every major American and British news outlet.



Doing this, the al-Maliki Government has given itself flexibility in its handling of al-Zaidi. It can now claim kindness and compassion by approving a lenient sentence for assault by deadly shoes. On the other hand, as Majid make clear al-Maliki was "leaning toward allowing the Iraqi judicial system to determine [al-Zaidi's] fate", the Government can also watch as the journalist gets a long term in prison.

And there's a bonus. With its dramatic release of the "letter", the Government could get rid of those troubling allegations that al-Zaidi, who has still not been seen by family, friends, or lawyers, was beaten by Iraqi security forces. I could not find any mention this morning of al-Zaidi's isolation and possible injuries.