Millions of Iraqis voted in the general elections held across Iraq yesterday and in 16 other countries in the previous two days.
Although the voting was, for the most part, relatively peaceful and orderly, some polling stations came under heavy mortar attacks.
The attacks, which left 38 persons dead and more than 100 wounded, were meant to discourage people from voting and thereby disrupt orderly transfer of power after the elections.
Shooting into the air by jubilant individuals in the city of Kirkuk and the province of Erbil after the polling stations were closed exacted an additional number of victims.
Although the Elections Commission declared that it would announce the number of individuals who cast their ballots later today, there is already evidence that the number of participants in the elections in 2010 has fallen below that of 2005. The threat of violence may have had its impact. However, unlike in 2005, when the Sunnis boycotted the elections, in the 2010 elections Sunnis voted in large numbers, particularly in Al-Anbar province and in the northern city of Mosul.
In the words of Sheikh Aifan Al-Aifan, one of the leaders of the Sahwa (Awakening) group in Al-Anbar province, the elections are a battle between the Persians [using the derogatory term al-furs) and the Iraqis.
According to unconfirmed figures, the competing parties and groups may have spent more than $600 million on the election campaign, or an average of $100,000 for each of the approximately 600 candidates.
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki accused a particular political group, which spent $30 million and controlled satellite television throughout the last month of the elections, of turning itself into "the star of the screen."
As soon as the polling stations were closed at 5:00 p.m. Baghdad time, accusations of fraud were heard. A common accusation was that many voters did not find their names on the lists of those eligible to vote and, therefore, could not exercise their constitutional rights. Whether the names were missing because of fraud or because of bureaucratic incompetence, we have no way of knowing at this time.
Another violation, recorded by the election observer organization Al-Shams, is that 18 polling stations were set up in such a way that the voters could not mark their ballots in secret. The most serious accusation is that certain parties were stuffing ballot boxes with fraudulent ballots.
The final results of the elections may not be known for a few days, as votes must be counted by hand. Random results from major urban centers suggest that Al-Maliki's State of Law slate did well and could emerge as the party with the largest number of seats. For the second place, there seems to be a real competition between Ayad Allawi's Al-Iraqiya slate and the National Iraqi Alliance, the Shi'a alliance, under Ammar Al-Hakim. If it turns out that al-Maliki is the big winner and Allawi comes either second or a close third, the results would confirm pre-election assumptions that the Iraqi voters have lost faith in the Shi'a-oriented political parties, mainly the Supreme Islamic Council and the Sadrists whose leader continues to reside in Iran.
Nothing would please the U.S. more and Iran less than a government coalition that leaves the two pro-Iranian groups, those under Al-Hakim and Al-Sadr, warming the seats of the opposition in parliament.
The next few days and perhaps even the next few weeks and months could eventually determine what type of government will be formed in Iraq.
Sources: Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, London, March 6, 2010; www.uragency.net, March 6, 2010; Al-Zaman, March 8, 2010 and al-sumariya.tv March 7, 2010
