PDA

View Full Version : Iraqis in U.S. Eager for Overseas Vote


BizarroCub
2005-01-17, 12:55 PM
See...this has really been bothering me and I'm not totally sure what to think about it, but in Iraq entire areas won't be able to vote, entire sections are refusing to vote, and the remainders might be to unsafe to vote, yet those planning the voting are in every way courting trying to get the vote of Iraqi's living not in Iraq.

Now, I thought we were trying to build legitimacy here. In my mind, if our election quite possibly could be decided by people that don't even live here anymore and hadn't for a while, I'd have a major problem with that. It seems to me in some ways, they're more interested in securing the ex-patriot vote, which will probably go to Allawi, but not dealing with the voting reality on the ground. That's sad. I mean, like polling is showing that 60-80% of the people who will be voting in Iraq think they're voting for a President, which they aren't. No one knows anything about the candidates, the whole thing is shrouded in secrecy.

I mean...come on...is this Democracy? I thought that's what this was supposed to be about. If the weapons and threat bs failed, it's supposed to be about the Democracy. Would you give the slightest bit of legitimacy to elections held in these terms and I'm sorry, but the "It's better than nothing" argument doesn't settle with me.

Iraqis in U.S. Eager for Overseas Vote


Monday January 17, 2005 4:31 PM

AP Photo DT102

By DEE-ANN DURBIN

Associated Press Writer

SOUTHGATE, Mich. (AP) - Abdulrasul al-Hayder was ecstatic. The 48-year-old Detroit resident registered Monday to vote in Iraq's first independent election in nearly 50 years. It was the first day of registration for 1 million Iraqis living outside their country.

``I was the first to register,'' he kept saying, holding a card aloft and smiling from ear-to-ear.

``This is a great moment for me and for the people of Iraq,'' said al-Hayder, a university professor in Iraq who came to the United States in 1992. ``This is the moment when Iraqis will put their stamp on the democracy. We've been waiting so many years.''

The Detroit area has the largest population of Iraqi immigrants in the United States. Up to 80,000 in Michigan are eligible to participate in this month's election. In the United States, registration also was taking place in the Los Angeles area, Nashville, Tenn., Chicago and Washington, D.C.

In Southgate, election workers constructed 30 to 40 ``rooms'' out of cloth inside an abandoned store. Periodically, cheers would erupt from one of the rooms after a successful registration was completed.

``It's the first time for the Iraqis,'' said Bushra Albrhi, who came to the United States in 1994. ``We'll be very happy if we get a president from the people.''

The run-up to registration has been plagued by confusion among potential voters, who have struggled to find out where, when or how to vote - and whether they are even eligible. Some were frustrated by the limited number of polling centers and by a prohibition on mail-in ballots and Internet voting because of fears of fraud. There were also concerns expressed about security.

A Wayne County spokeswoman said last week that officers from Southgate, the county and the state police would secure the building. Two private security guards checked visitors as they entered the building Monday morning, and other security personnel patrolled the parking lot.

The seven-day registration period ends Jan. 23. Voting will begin Jan. 28 and continue until the Jan. 30 election in Iraq.

In Nashville, about 25 Kurdish men waited outdoors in temperatures in the teens to register. The city is home to up to 8,000 Iraqis who are mostly Kurdish, a people who suffered under the regime of former dictator Saddam Hussein.

Sabah Badel, 40, a Nashville resident who has been in the United States for 12 years, said nearly all the expatriated Iraqis he knows are planning to vote.

He said other members of his family were not deterred from traveling from Dallas to register in Nashville.

``It's the first time in our lives we have an election,'' said Badel. ``We're very happy and very excited about it.''

Voter registration is open to those 18 and older who are present or former Iraqi citizens, those who were born in Iraq and those whose fathers are Iraqi. Voters must have documents to prove they are eligible.

Voters are being asked to pick members of the 275-member Assembly, which will have a one-year mandate. Their responsibilities will include electing a president and two deputy presidents, and drafting Iraq's Constitution.

The Southern California location - the only one in the western United States - is the decommissioned El Toro Marine Base in Irvine. Election officials estimate up to 35,000 Iraqis will register and vote there.

``I think we're going to lose some voters, but we're lucky to have an office here at all,'' said Basim Ridha Alhussaini, an Iraqi expatriate responsible for training some 320 poll workers in Southern California.

The Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq in Baghdad authorized an out-of-country vote in November and enlisted the non-governmental International Organization of Migration to organize it.

Other nations hosting overseas polling are Australia, Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Iran, Jordan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Syria and the United Arab Emirates and Turkey.

Light Touch
2005-01-17, 04:03 PM
Well, a lot of Iraqis left Iraq because it was non-democratic. That reason earns a pass for me.

I'd like to see as much "on the ground" coverage with election centers in Iraq itself, but I don't have a problem with expatriates voting.

BizarroCub
2005-01-18, 10:23 AM
Well, a lot of Iraqis left Iraq because it was non-democratic. That reason earns a pass for me.

I'd like to see as much "on the ground" coverage with election centers in Iraq itself, but I don't have a problem with expatriates voting.

I don't so much have a problem with expatriates voting, as long as they're still Iraqi's citizens. My problem comes when you have someone like Allawi that hasn't lived in Iraq for over a decade, but is now in charge of it. I'd rather see the determination of Iraqs future made by those who actually live there and have lived through what Iraq has been through instead of those coming at it with what's essentially a now forieng perspective. :shrug:

I mean...to give an example...how would you feel if the election to formulate our government could swing heavilly on the opinions of those who haven't even lived here or been active in our way of life for sometimes upwards of a decade or more?

I wouldn't be entirely comfortable with that. I get your saying and don't fault them for it, but I also think that when you leave, you lose out too...:shrug:

Bioteknik
2005-01-18, 10:36 AM
most people (in power) who lived in iraq the whole time were part of the problem!!

BizarroCub
2005-01-18, 10:38 AM
most people (in power) who lived in iraq the whole time were part of the problem!!

But we're not discussing the people who were in power, we're discussing the people who're going to be voting.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here Chris.

Light Touch
2005-01-18, 11:14 AM
I'm not sure what you're getting at here Chris.

Probably the fact that the great dissident voices in Iraq either left or were killed. I'm not saying that the expatriates should run the show, but there's a selection effect going on regarding who's left in Iraq, and it's not going to be a terribly pro-democracy crowd. It's going to be a "stop the violence and let us go back to some sort of normalcy" crowd, which might end up placating terrorist groups and allowing for their freedom to be curtailed for security.

Ahem.

:ontome:

BizarroCub
2005-01-18, 11:32 AM
Probably the fact that the great dissident voices in Iraq either left or were killed. I'm not saying that the expatriates should run the show, but there's a selection effect going on regarding who's left in Iraq, and it's not going to be a terribly pro-democracy crowd. It's going to be a "stop the violence and let us go back to some sort of normalcy" crowd, which might end up placating terrorist groups and allowing for their freedom to be curtailed for security.

Ahem.

:ontome:

Well...couldn't be argued that if that's what the majority of the people who live in the country want, isn't that what they should get? For example, the ticket that Al-Sistani is backing has HEAVY ties to Iran and I do mean heavy. Hell...Farsi is the primary language spoken at their headquarters. There is a serious chance this group could stomp Allawi's ticket. If they democratically vote in assholes, that's what they get and that's the process. Isn't the point that they're supposed to chose what they want for their own determination, not what others think is best for them?

I definately get what you're saying, but I'd also say that a countries determination should be based on it's citizens, not those who left because they weren't happy about the current situation. Might sound callous, but frankly, I wouldn't want a current election potentially being swung based on a whole bunch of now Canadian and European Americans who fled Vietnam drafting.

See what I'm saying?

I dunno...just part of me has a problem when I feel like they're making it easier for, people who don't even live there and haven't for years to vote, than the people who actually live in the country and can't vote, aren't allowed to vote, or it's simply to dangerous to them to vote. It really feels to me that they're more interested in aquireing a pro-Allawi/US vote than actually aquiring a vote that truly represents the desires of the Iraqi populance, e.g.-Bremer's last minute, unchangeable economic statutes.

Light Touch
2005-01-18, 12:27 PM
I agree with you in principle, Grizz.

If we're going to do the democracy thing, tho, I think you need to ensure a democratically-leaning population has access to vote.

Personally, I'd let them be run by warlords if that's their thing. We don't need to be heroes, they need to be their own heroes.

That said, we're not doing that, so if we're going to put in a democracy, we need to do it right, and that means expatriate voters.

BizarroCub
2005-01-18, 12:35 PM
And what I'm saying is that you cannot have a functioning democratic government that is from the get go, based upon illegitimacy in the eyes of those participating it.

You think things like this would provide those living in Iraq with a sense that their government is legitimate?

I don't see how it can. And to sometihng you said, if we're going to do it right, then legitimacy needs to be the foremost thought, not simply making it happen. If the vote happens and it is viewed as completely illegitimate by the people who live there and participated, then the whole process becomes moot.

Light Touch
2005-01-18, 01:13 PM
I'm not sure it would even get to the desired point of freedom without a somewhat illegitimate election process.

It's sorta like Afghanistan's elections -- let's get someone elected first, then work to reform the process to make it more legitimate and fair. We gotta get people used to democracy to open up all the liberties contained therein.

Again, I'd roll out, but if you're going to do it, it's not simply a matter of making the ideal, fair elections. There are other social factors at play here.

BizarroCub
2005-01-18, 01:16 PM
I see what you're saying, but you cannot, imo, start a democracy based on a fake shadow democracy, that isn't the way it's supposed to work.

I'm saying that in Iraq, I don't see it even getting to the point you're talking about without people chosing a legitimate start. You can't build and reform on a corrupted base. The government will never get off the ground if the people having to participate in it, do not see it as legitimate.

I mean, how can you build up a "democratic" government that you are forcing to be democratic. I don't see it working. I have a feeling that without forming a government inherantly based in legitimacy in the eyes of the Iraqi people, it is going to be doomed to be violent and eventually overthrown. :shrug:

If people had a real interest in "promoting democracy" instead of "forcing democracy", which is what dictators do, then you cannot start it off on the wrong foot, by creating the perception of illegitimacy in the eyes of it's participants, which is EXACTLY what's happening.

Hell...60% of the people there aren't even entirely sure what they're voting for. Sounds like a bad joke to me.

You see what I'm saying?

I know we're not disagreeing on the principle of it, but I don't see it functioning without being based inherantly on principle. That's the root of it all.

Light Touch
2005-01-18, 03:48 PM
I mean, how can you build up a "democratic" government that you are forcing to be democratic. I don't see it working. I have a feeling that without forming a government inherantly based in legitimacy in the eyes of the Iraqi people, it is going to be doomed to be violent and eventually overthrown. :shrug:

If people had a real interest in "promoting democracy" instead of "forcing democracy", which is what dictators do, then you cannot start it off on the wrong foot, by creating the perception of illegitimacy in the eyes of it's participants, which is EXACTLY what's happening.

Which is why I agree with you completely.

But, I don't think an election, in the purest sense, would be successful or result in a democratic state. You'd see Pakistan west.

BizarroCub
2005-01-18, 03:51 PM
And I guess the disconnect in our agreement is that I think if they want Pakistan West...so be it...that's democracy in action, as it were.

Light Touch
2005-01-18, 05:34 PM
No, that's not a disconnect -- I agree with you there, too.

I'm just saying, I think if we want a stable, true democracy there (we = U.S.A.) then we have to constrain the electoral process in some way. I'd prefer Pakistan west, FWIW.

zartan
2005-01-18, 06:21 PM
i think the ultimate goal should be to stage-manage this so sometime in the next 10 years the iraqis finally get real democracy. the idea that this election can be OR should be the perfect democratic process is obviously ludicrous. if we are lucky, we will be able to get enough legitimacy to reach some sort of tipping point with most iraqis where they can begin to share the administration's vision of a future democracy within reasonable reach. if we're not, the election will starkly demonstrate the divide in the country and plunge it into civil war.

empath
2005-01-18, 06:55 PM
my prediction, the election goes off amidst a massive outburst of violence, the us gets the fuck out of the way and Iraq devolves quickly into civil war. The Kurds declare independence, and the shi'ites and sunni's start slaughtering each other while the US does nothing other than sit on it's ass in Baghdad.

zartan
2005-01-19, 02:35 PM
has there been any evidence so far of significant sunni v. shiite conflict?