Home
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
WHY IS IT TIME TO CHANGE OR RESTRUCTURE THE POLITICAL SYSTEM?
Sunday, 31 July 2022 11:48 AM
Dr.. Basil Hussein
It has become clear that Iraq, as a country, is going through an exceptional stage, which has created expectations that it has begun to move towards an unknown future, and
this is due to the following factors:
1. Every political system is born with tools that enable it to confront challenges and threats,
but the 2005 system could not but be a crisis system and not a solution system.
The main mechanisms such as the constitution and the institutions that were supposed to be a basic reference for the solution, became part of the crisis system.
2. The countries whose totalitarian regimes were overthrown have gone through a stage of democratic transition, but
what is recorded of this system is that it has become stuck at this stage and only made partial and faltering steps towards strengthening democracy, as
it placed it in a gray area between dictatorship and democracy.
Temporary democratization has become out of the question, as we are facing a kind of settlement for this transitional phase.
3. In the midst of this anxious stage, the model of “facade democracy” was born in Iraq, which practices the democratic form without democratic content or democracy without democrats, which led to a kind of competitive authoritarianism or electoral authoritarianism as one of the products of facade democracy.
4. It follows that the legitimacy of democracy
It is in constant decline and erosion, and thus a crisis of real representation was born, and the electoral fund is no longer sufficient to prove this representation due to the lack of confidence in its integrity or in the political environment that is its vital field.
5. The failure of the political system to build its legitimacy by bypassing the legal and official frameworks that were registered on political practices
6. The political system was based on a basic idea, which is consensual democracy, which is based on two basic ideas, the
first is power sharing, and the
second is autonomy for groups.
Power-sharing means that all ethnic or religious elements participate in the decision-making process through the formation of coalition governments, and
this denominator comes down to other public institutions.
While autonomy gives groups the right to manage their internal affairs, and
the theorist of this model Liephart sees that federalism is the best expression for this autonomy.
7. The supposed goal of this model is to maintain the cohesion of the state in a pluralistic society,
but the distorted application of this system led the country to further disintegration, which gave rise to doubts about the efficacy of this model in solving Iraqi problems.
8. The Iraqi experience proved that the inclusion of religion in democratic practices and issues related to the problems of state building is an inclusion that harmed both religion and the state and re-questioned Islam and democracy and the extent of the conflict between them, based on the idea of a deep-rooted contradiction between Islamic values and democracy,
or as Samuel Huntington sees in his book (The Wave). The third) that Islam and Confucianism are among the most severe cultural challenges to the global spread of democracy
9. Any system of government, as Philippe Schmitter sees it, is a
set of principles that determine the methods of assuming public office, the
qualities of the various representatives required to hold these positions, and the
rules followed in making binding decisions through the institutionalization process
This is what the 2005 system failed to do.
10. There is no doubt that institutionalization and stability are closely related, and
one of the most important causes of instability is the failure to build institutions in Iraq, as we are faced with institutional structures without solid institutional bases,
which created the illusion of the existence of institutions, and
in a pluralistic society institutionalization contributes to building citizenship and to the submission of individuals and groups
It also helps to build a neutral state in a way that guarantees the confidence of the actors of society and reduces the processes of conflict and conflict.
11. There is a great conviction among the political actors that this system is a political product and not the product of a political process that was formulated by an external will, and
therefore there is a desire on all sides to change the form and content of this political product due to lack of conviction or to achieve more gains
That stems from a feeling that this product or its rules are unreliable, and the fragility of its structure, with an underlying lack of respect for it.
12. The entry of the forces of political arms into the cycle of political and economic life, and the attempts of the actors in it to impose their will on the group against their will,
which contradicts the simplest rules of democracy in that arms and democracy are opposites that do not combine and do not rise together.
13. The transformation of corruption from a phenomenon to a structure into an institution.
Indeed, it is the institution of corruption that has led the country in public and in secret, and
it is one of the most important factors that threaten the country and the future of generations.
It is best to say that the 2005 regime failed in the equation of challenge and response,
which created a kind of crippled political system,
whose crisis was exacerbated by the nature and content of its main actors, as well as the impact of negative external factors that put increasing pressure on it and deepened the crisis of its failure.
Therefore, changing it or restructuring it is an imposition and duty within a national project that responds to all the challenges and threats facing the state and society.
Without this project, the fate of the country and the people will go toward choices.
Not least the disintegration, struggles and constant failures.
WHY IS IT TIME TO CHANGE OR RESTRUCTURE THE POLITICAL SYSTEM?
Sunday, 31 July 2022 11:48 AM
Dr.. Basil Hussein
It has become clear that Iraq, as a country, is going through an exceptional stage, which has created expectations that it has begun to move towards an unknown future, and
this is due to the following factors:
1. Every political system is born with tools that enable it to confront challenges and threats,
but the 2005 system could not but be a crisis system and not a solution system.
The main mechanisms such as the constitution and the institutions that were supposed to be a basic reference for the solution, became part of the crisis system.
2. The countries whose totalitarian regimes were overthrown have gone through a stage of democratic transition, but
what is recorded of this system is that it has become stuck at this stage and only made partial and faltering steps towards strengthening democracy, as
it placed it in a gray area between dictatorship and democracy.
Temporary democratization has become out of the question, as we are facing a kind of settlement for this transitional phase.
3. In the midst of this anxious stage, the model of “facade democracy” was born in Iraq, which practices the democratic form without democratic content or democracy without democrats, which led to a kind of competitive authoritarianism or electoral authoritarianism as one of the products of facade democracy.
4. It follows that the legitimacy of democracy
It is in constant decline and erosion, and thus a crisis of real representation was born, and the electoral fund is no longer sufficient to prove this representation due to the lack of confidence in its integrity or in the political environment that is its vital field.
5. The failure of the political system to build its legitimacy by bypassing the legal and official frameworks that were registered on political practices
6. The political system was based on a basic idea, which is consensual democracy, which is based on two basic ideas, the
first is power sharing, and the
second is autonomy for groups.
Power-sharing means that all ethnic or religious elements participate in the decision-making process through the formation of coalition governments, and
this denominator comes down to other public institutions.
While autonomy gives groups the right to manage their internal affairs, and
the theorist of this model Liephart sees that federalism is the best expression for this autonomy.
7. The supposed goal of this model is to maintain the cohesion of the state in a pluralistic society,
but the distorted application of this system led the country to further disintegration, which gave rise to doubts about the efficacy of this model in solving Iraqi problems.
8. The Iraqi experience proved that the inclusion of religion in democratic practices and issues related to the problems of state building is an inclusion that harmed both religion and the state and re-questioned Islam and democracy and the extent of the conflict between them, based on the idea of a deep-rooted contradiction between Islamic values and democracy,
or as Samuel Huntington sees in his book (The Wave). The third) that Islam and Confucianism are among the most severe cultural challenges to the global spread of democracy
9. Any system of government, as Philippe Schmitter sees it, is a
set of principles that determine the methods of assuming public office, the
qualities of the various representatives required to hold these positions, and the
rules followed in making binding decisions through the institutionalization process
This is what the 2005 system failed to do.
10. There is no doubt that institutionalization and stability are closely related, and
one of the most important causes of instability is the failure to build institutions in Iraq, as we are faced with institutional structures without solid institutional bases,
which created the illusion of the existence of institutions, and
in a pluralistic society institutionalization contributes to building citizenship and to the submission of individuals and groups
It also helps to build a neutral state in a way that guarantees the confidence of the actors of society and reduces the processes of conflict and conflict.
11. There is a great conviction among the political actors that this system is a political product and not the product of a political process that was formulated by an external will, and
therefore there is a desire on all sides to change the form and content of this political product due to lack of conviction or to achieve more gains
That stems from a feeling that this product or its rules are unreliable, and the fragility of its structure, with an underlying lack of respect for it.
12. The entry of the forces of political arms into the cycle of political and economic life, and the attempts of the actors in it to impose their will on the group against their will,
which contradicts the simplest rules of democracy in that arms and democracy are opposites that do not combine and do not rise together.
13. The transformation of corruption from a phenomenon to a structure into an institution.
Indeed, it is the institution of corruption that has led the country in public and in secret, and
it is one of the most important factors that threaten the country and the future of generations.
It is best to say that the 2005 regime failed in the equation of challenge and response,
which created a kind of crippled political system,
whose crisis was exacerbated by the nature and content of its main actors, as well as the impact of negative external factors that put increasing pressure on it and deepened the crisis of its failure.
Therefore, changing it or restructuring it is an imposition and duty within a national project that responds to all the challenges and threats facing the state and society.
Without this project, the fate of the country and the people will go toward choices.
Not least the disintegration, struggles and constant failures.
