IRAQI CONSTITUTION AGREED

[Walt Starr]

IRAQI CONSTITUTION AGREED

A final version of the Iraqi constitution has been completed and is set to be approved, an Iraqi Government spokesman has said.


Political leaders had until tonight to agree a new constitution.

The spokesman said parliament did not need to formally meet to approve the charter because it had effectively been passed on on Monday.

<snip>

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-13420138,00.html

[mattclearing]

1. All hell breaking loose. Oh wait, that's the next headline. n/t

[jonnyblitz]

2. can't wait to see what is in it. nt

[Walt Starr]

6. The report says the Parliment determined it was effectively passed

on Monday, so it's the version where women have fewer rights than an armchair and Islam is tha basis of all law.

[jonnyblitz]

8. figures. and this is what our military and all those Iraqi civilians

died for. :eyes:

[Pirate Smile]

12. and the Sunni's hate it.

[RebelOne]

29. Go to the BBC Web site.

It is there in PDF format.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4182370.stm

[grytpype]

3. Read Dear Leader's daily thought about the new constitution...

... here.

http://dearleadersdailythought.blogspot.com/

[wtmusic]

4. Let freedom reign!

:sarcasm:

[Briar]

5. No parliamentary approval?

What, they didn't trust them to vote the way the US appointed government demanded?

[Adams Wulff]

7. What? A recess approval?

These guys learn quick!

[Supersedeas]

27. A Bushist style constitutional process

[asjr]

9. Did the Sunni's have any sayso in it, or were they ignored?

[Walt Starr]

10. Sounds like they were ignored

Too bad. Looks like Civil War for sure now.

[H5N1]

13. civil war in Iraq will give bush a reason to start drafting

bush will say the civil war proves he was right all along!

[StrafingMoose]

17. Am I way off or...

the USA would have prefered a strong Sunni central govt in Iraq? I mean Saudis are hardcore Sunnis, Pakistan too and they are "allies"... Sunni without Saddam, that is. I wonder why they would 'like' a majorly Shiite govt that will most likely try to defuse the Iran-USA crisis.

[al bupp]

32. Way off? I think not, sir

However, neither do I don't think it's a matter of "liking" a majority Shiite government. Rather it seems to me to be a situation where the Administration has decided this is the best they can expect from the situation. The goal being to declare victory and get the hell out of there asap.

I would also guess that behind the scenes there's considerable effort being made to ensure that the Iraqi government will be run by "our" Shiites, such as al-Jaffiri, as opposed to al-Sadr type Shiites. Chalabi appears to have been originally penciled in for this role, but in the end his long-standing connections to Iran (not to mention rampant unpopularity inside Iraq) made this untenable.

Perhaps the Saudis (as well as, at least in this context, the much less influential Pakistanis) would have preferred a Sunni run government, but in any event I'm sure they read the writing on the wall and realized this was never going to happen. Perhaps they even prefer a nominally Shiite government as a way to co-opt the non-Sunni opposition.

I think the thing which few but the Kurds (and maybe Iranians) want is for the country to break up. If they're going to prevent this they need to at least play lip-service to a type of Federalism under majority rule, which basically means accepting a largely Shiite run government, but hoping to mollify the large constituencies by granting a type of statehood to regions with populations in minority nationwide, but locally in the majority.

The problem here, according Micheal Scanlon(sp?) as interviewed on AAR today, the last draft of the Iraqi constitution has the oil profits from future oil development going to the regional governments. He said a big reason for the Sunnis to oppose the constitution currently is that because most of the oil in the country lies outside of Sunni-majority regions, this will relegate those regions to second-class status.

[StrafingMoose]

36. Good points...

"However, neither do I don't think it's a matter of "liking" a majority Shiite government. Rather it seems to me to be a situation where the Administration has decided this is the best they can expect from the situation. The goal being to declare victory and get the hell out of there asap."

Considering what Iraq represents for the global economy (11% of know oil resources) I think the Super-Coalition might be back covertly with these guys they used in Afghanistan.

"the last draft of the Iraqi constitution has the oil profits from future oil development going to the regional governments."

So would that mean that the Iraqi oil has been "nationalized" ? Remember, when Saddam did this, he was branded "Evil dictator" right away. If the Iraqi govt really did nationalize the oil, I think they might be in trouble in the future. But it's understandable. The new govt might be using the official coalition propaganda in it's litteral meaning; "You want democracy in Iraq? Well, democracy says oil is nationalized in Iraq. Thanks you goodbye".

[H5N1]

11. Looks like the Sunnis were left out of the process

this feels bad to me

[daleo]

14. So they agreed today on something they passed Monday?

"The spokesman said parliament did not need to formally meet to approve the charter because it had effectively been passed on on Monday."

The Bushco plan seems to be to partition Iraq into:
- Oil-raq, a client state comprised of an area with the most oil and least people, which is meant to be defended by a large U.S. garrison.
- Sand-raq, where most of the population can live in poverty.
- Kurd-raq, a small client state mostly of Kurds that can be used as a bargaining chip and threat in dealings with Turkey, etc.

The people of the putative Sand-raq won't take kindly to this. Bush will continue to divide Sunni and Shiites, so it may take a while for them to realize he intends to screw everybody except a lucky few million in Oil-raq.

[Igel]

33. They didn't pass it. They passed on it.

Kick the can to play for consensus. It wasn't finished, they have a few more days before they actually should present it to the legislature for a vote.

That's the plain reading of the article.

[progressivebydesign]

15. That doesn't seem possible... they were refusing to meet today.

Is sky.com a reliable source?

[Walt Starr]

18. They have been in the past on many things

:shrug:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

16. And let me guess...

the Iraqi women are fucked over. :mad:

[Kagemusha]

19. He said submitting the draft was enough, NO VOTE NEEDED

From:

Ap - Headlines
Iraq Lawmakers Won't Meet on Constitution
By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA

Shiite representative Khaled al-Attiyah said there was no need for an assembly vote because the constitutional committee met its legal obligations by handing in a draft by the Aug. 22 deadline. Another Shiite, Nadim al-Jabiri, said there would be no vote Thursday because the draft will be approved or rejected in a popular referendum Oct. 15.

---

So in other words, the submission of a draft means the constitution is effectively passed... no reason for the interim parliament to actually get down and dirty and VOTE on it!

[NNN0LHI]

20. It was rubber stamped n/t

[Theduckno2]

21. Let me get this straight, the Iraqi Parliament, on Monday, passed

the new constitution with passages deliberately left blank only to be filled in later? I learned in my consumers-ed class that you shouldn't sign a contract until all the 'blanks' are filled in.

How do they expect the Iraqi government to gain the confidence of the Iraqi people if this is how they treat the important issue of a constitution?

I'm still looking for confirmation from major news outlets.

[Kagemusha]

23. No, the parliament didn't even vote on it. The vote was delayed

This spokesman here is saying that even though parliament didn't vote on it, a constitution was submitted before the deadline so the legal obligations of the constitutional committee have been finished and there's no NEED for a vote. Not a new vote, but ANY vote.

Very weasely thing to say. And I assume this is not some mistranslation but a spokesman speaking in deliberate, seasoned English.

[Theduckno2]

28. Thanks for setting me straight.

These events will do even less to gain the confidence of the Iraqi people. I worry that militias will actively work to keep Sunni opposition away from the Oct.15th polls and thereby force adoption of the constitution, against the wishes of the Sunnis.

[maxrandb]

22. Ok! First I would like to know how reliable Sky News is?

I've never heard of them.

Is this one of those "news" organizations like Newsmax, Drudge, Fox, or World Net Daily? Earlier in another thread, I recommended we make a "Late Breaking Wind" forum for items from reich-wing whacko news sites?

[Kagemusha]

25. Like Fox.

But I'm drawing my bit in this thread from an AP article that Atrios is linking to so, it's not just Murdoch operations here.

[Spazito]

24. Okay, let me get this straight, there was no vote yet it was passed?

There was no vote because a DRAFT was approved based on further consultations on 20 OUTSTANDING issues? Wow, democracy in action I see!

[Kagemusha]

26. That's what this Iraqi "Shiite spokesman" is saying, yeah.

I've sprinkled this thread with enough posts. Hopefully we'll find out if what he *said* is what he *means* or if circumstances change or well.. whatever. But yes, that's what he said. Crazy as it sounds.

[maxrandb]

30. Diebold

[RebelOne]

31. No, it has not yet passed.

They are going to vote on it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4182370.stm

Iraq charter amendments 'agreed'

Sunni Arabs have taken to the streets to oppose the draft

Iraqi political leaders have agreed amendments to the draft constitution as they try to reach consensus on the document, a government spokesman said.

Laith Kubba said amendments had now been made to three disputed articles, and he expected the draft to be completed by the end of the day.

It is not clear whether parliament will vote on the charter on Thursday night.

On Monday, parliament gave Shia, Kurdish and Sunni negotiators three more days to secure consensus.

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. my local paper had a beauty last night

Iraq new Constitution takes rights away, Iraqis Claim

I went, well DUH! Shariah law anybody has any bloody questions

[Jersey Devil]

35. Story probably bogus - as of 2:45 pm EDT, CNN says no deal

Thursday, August 25, 2005; Posted: 2:45 p.m. EDT (18:45 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- With hours to go before the latest deadline to approve Iraq's new constitution, Shiite Arab and Kurdish lawmakers had not reached a compromise with their Sunni Arab counterparts, negotiators close to the talks said Thursday.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/25/iraq.main/index.html

There is also absolutely nothing on the wires about a deal being reached.