The
Iraqi "Illegitimate Election" Scam
By Alan Nathan
FrontPageMagazine.com | January 25, 2005
The
influential Association of Muslim Scholars still
seem intent on leading a Sunni boycott of Iraq’s
first real election in over half a century. It’s
a bit like saying “as punishment for letting
me speak, I will now shut-up.” They wish to
boycott as a way of removing legitimacy from the
process. What they’re forgetting is that while
forced exclusion is a credible argument against an
election’s legitimacy, self-imposed exclusion
is not. Your right to vote doubles as your right
not to vote, and opting for the latter doesn’t
equal a removal of the former. The ploy is fundamentally
a self-fulfilling prophecy that has been embraced
by much of the press, willing to sacrifice their
craft in exchange for political gamesmanship out
of desperate antiwar zeal.
There
are a plenty of other more rational arguments for
opposing it beyond stooping to a fifth grader’s
grasp of logic. The goal is a successful election.
Unfortunately the insurgents, Saddam loyalists, and
the Association of Muslim Scholars wish for its demise,
while Middle Eastern governments, the UN, and many
Democrats in our own Congress (such as Representatives
Charlie Rangel of New York and John Conyers of Michigan)
give strength to their strategy by swallowing the
Sunni formula: not voting equals denied voting, ergo
no legitimacy.
It
seems intellectually backwards to embark upon a mission
through standards set by those who are against that
mission.
The
impetus behind this boycott is that the Sunni leaders
want more than one-man, one-vote; they want their
demographic to have the political force of the Shi’ites
while not possessing the numeric force to attain
it. In Washington, D.C., there’s a greater
preponderance of African Americans than there are
Hispanics, Asians, and Whites. If any of these minorities
decided not to participate in the mayoral elections,
would their absence at the polls in any way de-legitimize
the winner?
Welcome
to representative government, my friends. Fortunately,
we’ve learned that a
functioning democracy is one in which the majority rules but only to
the extent that minority and individuals rights are protected. However,
in that representative government, the majority will naturally receive
the greatest representation through the ballot box. What should be of
comfort to them is that, according to the existing Iraqi Constitution,
the new 250-person assembly will be unable to apply mob rule when writing
the new constitution, because it requires only three of the 18 provinces
to reject it – and that includes the Sunni Triangle.
|