Though overshadowed by recent news coverage focusing on Iraq’s still-fragile security situation, the country’s political stalemate remains a matter of concern. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki refuses to share power with his rivals. But while Maliki’s relative influence is large, he is constrained by Iraq’s parliamentary and federal systems, a gift of the now-departed Americans. Meanwhile, his opponents are weakened by divisions over ethnicity, region, ideology and competing personal ambitions. As a result, they have been unable to remove Maliki from office or force him to yield back the powers he has steadily accrued during his six years as prime minister.
A power-sharing agreement brokered in November 2010 at Erbil among Iraq’s key political actors was meant to establish a balanced coalition government, in which key executive branch posts were to be distributed among the main parties in rough proportion to their electoral strength. A newly created National Council for Strategic Policy was also meant to broaden representation in policymaking beyond the cabinet. The resulting checks and balances, it was thought, would prevent the government from adopting extreme positions by requiring compromise policies acceptable to all the major stakeholders. ...
To read the rest, sign up to try World Politics Review
Sign up for two weeks of free access with your credit card. Cancel any time during the free trial and you will be charged nothing.
Request a free trial for your office or school. Everyone at a given site can get access through our institutional subscriptions.
- Strategic Horizons: Obama’s Islamic State Strategy Avoids Failure—but Also Success
- Yemen’s Women Fight to Protect Uprising’s Gains Amid New Turmoil
- Russia Becomes the Middle East’s Preferred but Flawed Nuclear Partner
- Diplomatic Fallout: U.N. Serves as Perfect Alibi for Big Power Inaction in Unfixable Crises
- Qatar Ties Reflect India’s Middle East Balancing Act