U.S. Fears Election Strife in Iraq Could Affect Pullout

Image by The U.S. Army via Flickr

By HELENE COOPER and MARK LANDLER

WASHINGTON — The deadly suicide bombings in Iraq on Wednesday highlight the central quandary facing President Obama as he tries to fulfill his campaign pledge to end the war there: Will parliamentary elections, scheduled for Sunday, throw the country back into the sectarian strife that flared in 2004 and delay the planned American withdrawal?

Senior Obama administration officials maintained in interviews this week that Mr. Obama’s plan to withdraw all American combat troops by Sept. 1 would remain on track regardless of who cobbles together a governing coalition after the election. Under the plan, no more than 50,000 American forces would stay behind, mostly in advisory roles. (Now there are slightly more than 90,000 troops in the country, down from 124,000 in September.)

But administration officials also acknowledged that the bigger worry for the United States was not who would win the elections, but the possibility that the elections — and their almost certainly messy aftermath — could ignite violence that would, at the least, complicate the planned withdrawal.

In part for that reason, “we’re not leaving behind cooks and quartermasters,” Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said Wednesday in a telephone interview. The bulk of the remaining American troops, he said, “will still be guys who can shoot straight and go get bad guys.”

Gen. Ray Odierno, the top American military commander in Iraq, has drawn up a contingency plan that would keep a combat brigade in northern Iraq beyond the Sept. 1 deadline, should conditions warrant, administration officials said. Kirkuk and the restive Kurdish area in the north remain major concerns for American military planners.

Beyond that, military and administration officials say they are prepared to use the remaining American noncombat troops for combat missions, if things heat up.

For Mr. Obama, however, such a sleight of hand could have huge political repercussions back in Washington. The centerpiece of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy platform when he ran for president — and indeed, the reason many political experts say he was able to wrest a primary victory from Hillary Rodham Clinton — was his opposition to the Iraq war from the start.

At a time when Mr. Obama has already angered his liberal base by ramping up the number of American troops in Afghanistan and missing his own deadline to shut down the military prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, even the appearance that he has fudged the troop drawdown in Iraq could set off a rebellion as Democrats face difficult midterm elections.

There is also concern that the administration has been so preoccupied by Afghanistan and Pakistan that Iraq has gotten less attention from top policy-makers in the State Department or the National Security Council, according to administration officials and outside experts.

Ten months ago, Mr. Obama effectively handed Mr. Biden the administration’s Iraq portfolio, and the vice president has been to Iraq several times since then to cajole, prod and push Iraqi political leaders to compromise — often using the looming American troop pullout as a warning to the politicians that they will not have an American security blanket forever.

Mr. Biden has led monthly meetings in the White House Situation Room and recruited other agencies, like the Treasury and Agriculture Departments to help with Iraqi reconstruction.

But below Mr. Biden, the main Iraq working group consists of five relatively junior officials from the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon, one administration official said. Other officials counter that senior policymakers, including Antony Blinken, the vice president’s chief foreign policy adviser and Puneet Talwar, a senior director in the National Security Council, are both heavily involved in Iraq.

Still, with Mr. Biden also juggling other duties, some experts contend that the administration could use more senior-level officials whose primary focus is developing Iraq policy.

For his part, Mr. Biden said that while the administration was worried about trouble spots, particularly in the north, he was confident that Iraqi violence would not reach the levels it did during the last election in 2005. He said that was in part because Iraq’s quarreling sects had realized that they could achieve more working within the political process than by lobbing grenades from the outside.

“Politics has broken out in Iraq,” Mr. Biden said.

For the Obama administration, the best strategy could be to remind the Iraqis that they must conduct a responsible election if they want a long-term relationship with the United States, experts said.

“You can effectively say to any Iraqi, ‘Barack Obama was not elected to keep the United States in Iraq; if you guys are going to do something that does not serve American interests there, his incentive will be to cut his losses,’ ” said Kenneth M. Pollack, the director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.

The American ambassador to Baghdad, Christopher R. Hill, has been meeting with party leaders to deliver the message that the United States wants a clean election. While he said the administration recognized the danger of uncertainty after the vote, he said Iraq had shown it could navigate such periods peacefully.

“We can draw comfort from the fact that Iraq politicians have always pulled back from the brink,” he said in a telephone interview. “We believe they fully understand the risks of a protracted government formation period.”

With no party expected to get a majority, or even a strong plurality, analysts foresee intense horse trading, with factions like the Kurds trying to play kingmaker as diverse groups attempt to cobble together coalitions.

Mr. Hill emphasized that the United States did not want to get drawn into postelection wrangling among Kurdish, Shiite or Sunni parties. He and General Odierno have already been criticized in some quarters in Iraq for speaking about Iran’s influence in the election process.

“Assuming that everything is going to go off fine, we will execute our withdrawal as we advertised,” Gen. James L. Jones, the national security adviser, said Tuesday in an interview. It would take a “proactive national decision” by Mr. Obama to divert from the withdrawal plan, he said, adding, “The military always thinks through different options in how we might react.”

Thom Shanker and Steven Lee Myers contributed reporting.

Murky Candidacy Stokes Iraq’s Sectarian Fears

Image via Wikipedia

By MARC SANTORA and MICHAEL R. GORDON

BAGHDAD — A politician widely accused of running death squads might not be expected to have an easy time running for public office.

But this is Iraq. In a nation sadly inured to years of sectarian bloodletting, Hakim al-Zamili not only has a place on a prominent Shiite election slate, but stands poised to win a place in the Parliament, as early voting began Thursday morning for the infirm, people with special needs and members of the military and the police.

It is an astonishing turnabout that shows the limits of political reconciliation. While some Sunni candidates have been barred from running in the election for their alleged support of the Baath Party, Mr. Zamili’s candidacy has provoked nary a protest from the nation’s leading Shiite politicians. That runs the risk that Shiite leaders will be seen as taking steps against only those who persecuted Shiites, not Sunnis.

Mr. Zamili’s new political role has heightened concerns that for all the talk of cross-sectarian alliances among some Shiite and Sunni factions, Iraq may be unable to firmly break with its troubled past.

The embrace of his candidacy “sends the worst possible message to loyal Iraqis,” said one American official who was involved in a fruitless effort to convict Mr. Zamili at a high-profile trialin 2008. He spoke on the condition that he not be identified because he was not authorized to comment on Iraqi political developments.

Sitting inside his ramshackle campaign headquarters in Sadr City, Mr. Zamili insisted that the charges against him were no more than politically motivated fabrications. But he was unapologetic about the attacks that Shiite militias like Moktada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army carried out in past years against the Americans and Sunni insurgents.

“Many people in politics understand that resistance was our right because we were occupied,” he said. “We had a duty to protect the people from the U.S. forces and the attacks of terrorists.”

Now that American troops are withdrawing, Mr. Zamili, the dark circles under his eyes giving him a worn look even when he smiles, said it was time to abandon armed struggle. As candidate No. 15 on the Iraqi National Alliance slate, he is part of a coalition that includes Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the former prime minister, and Ahmed Chalabi, the longtime political survivor who led the effort to disbar Sunni candidates and who draws support, American officials charge, from Iran.

“They thought they would end the Sadrist movement, but we persevered,” Mr. Zamili said.

Several years ago Mr. Zamili was a protagonist in a very different drama. The Ministry of Health and the hospitals that it oversaw were some of the first institutions that Mr. Sadr’s supporters controlled after the ouster of Saddam Hussein. Mr. Zamili, American officials say, was appointed to his ministry post with Mr. Sadr’s backing.

According to the inquiry that led to Mr. Zamili’s trial, the ministry’s protection service was used as a private militia to kidnap and kill hundreds of Sunnis from 2005 to early 2007. A deputy health minister, Ammar al-Saffar, who was gathering data on abuses at the ministry, disappeared before he could turn over his findings to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. He vanished after telling associates that Mr. Zamili had threatened him.

Mr. Zamili was arrested in early 2007 after Mr. Maliki had a falling out with Mr. Sadr. American officials worked closely with Iraqi officials to build a case that Mr. Zamili was involved in murder, kidnapping and corruption. His trial was to be the first of a high-ranking Shiite official for sectarian crimes — an event, one American official asserted, that would be as important in establishing the rule of law in Iraq as the trial of Saddam Hussein.

After a two-day trial, marred by accusations of witness intimidation, the charges were dropped and Mr. Zamili was freed after spending more than a year in American custody.

Mr. Zamili denied in the interview that he had ever orchestrated the kidnappings and killings. “They accused me of fueling the violence,” he said. “Each and every person resisting and opposed to the occupation is a terrorist, a thief, a criminal,” he said dismissively.

As it turns out, he said, his arrest actually was a political boon. He has trumpeted his position at the Health Ministry in his campaign. Quoting Gandhi, he has portrayed himself as a political martyr. “It was a benefit to me because people related to me,” he said. “They saw me suffering. And suffering is good for the soul.”

The families of those he stood accused of ordering murdered say they are aghast. Ali al-Saffar, Mr. Saffar’s son, said in a telephone interview from London that Mr. Jaafari had been a family friend and that when he met with the former prime minister three years ago Mr. Jaafari acknowledged receiving information linking Mr. Zamili to his father’s disappearance.

“Despite their emphasis on personal morality, they have sadly shown they are willing to forfeit their ideals in the pursuit of power, including by welcoming into their ranks people like Hakim al-Zamili,” Mr. Saffar said, referring to the Iraqi National Alliance slate.

Manal Finjan, a candidate in the election and a spokeswoman for Mr. Jaafari’s list, said the courts had exonerated Mr. Zamili, and he should therefore be treated like any other candidate.

“We actually deal with people on the basis of evidence and documents,” she said. “He was acquitted by the court, and anybody who has evidence against him could go to the proper authorities.”

While Mr. Zamili is now a player in the political game, he did not rule out the possibility that the militias might be once again called on to defend the people. “If there were a bad situation, an increase in attacks, the continuation of unjust arrests, they will force us to defend ourselves and our leaders,” he said.

This may be a bit of bravado. Support for the Sadrists drained as Iraqis tired of violence and sectarian killings. But judging by the mood of the dozens of young men in the muddied track suits that were once the unofficial uniform of the Mahdi Army, some seem willing to return to the fight.

Before Mr. Zamili arrived, they had just received news — later denied by aides to Mr. Maliki — that a court had reissued an arrest warrant for Mr. Sadr, who is believed to be in Iran, should he return to Iraq. As angry denunciations rang in the smoke-filled room, one burly young man made it clear that Sadrists would not stand for any such action.

“We had Maliki surrounded in Basra when he visited and could not get him,” he said. “But this time, if this report is true, we will go to the Green Zone and pull him out by his head and roll him in the street.”

Tajik opposition disputes election of President Rakhmon

The opposition in Tajikistan has said it will mount a legal challenge to the results of parliamentary elections.

The election commission said President Imomali Rakhmon's party won almost all the seats in the lower house of parliament in the election.

It said the opposition Islamic Revival Party won two seats, and five went to minority parties including the communists.

Voting was marred by widespread fraud, international monitors have said.

The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) said the polls had "failed on many basic democratic standards".

Challenge

"The election results, though preliminary, are unfair. There was massive falsification. We find it hard to explain this to our constituents," opposition party chief Muhiddin Kabiri told reporters.

"We will take action within the laws of Tajikistan. The Islamic Revival Party is the party of the people. We will express our protest following the legal path in court."

Mr Kabiri said that his party won around 30% of the vote, and not 7.7% as claimed by the Central Elections Commission.

"We will decide whether to take part in the incoming parliament, or whether to declare a hunger strike or organise a rally," he said.

President Rakhmon's People's Democratic Party was said by the election commission to have won 45 of the parliament's 63 seats. An additional nine nominally independent seats went to local leaders seen as loyal to the president.

Election officials claimed a 87.1% turnout, a massive amount in a country where at least one million men are estimated to have fled the country in search of work.

The ruling party earlier said there had been minor violations to the poll which would not affect the will of the Tajik people.

The observers from OSCE and the European Parliament said there had been "serious irregularities" on polling day, including a high prevalence of family and proxy voting and cases of ballot box stuffing.

Ahmed Chalabi's renewed influence in Iraq concerns U.S.

By Ernesto Londoño and Leila Fadel
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, February 27, 2010; A01

BAGHDAD -- Ahmed Chalabi, the onetime U.S. ally, is in the limelight again, and his actions are proving no less controversial than they did years ago.

On the eve of Iraq's parliamentary elections, Chalabi is driving an effort aimed at weeding out candidates tied to Saddam Hussein's Baath Party. Chalabi is reprising a role he played after the U.S.-led invasion -- which many critics believe he helped facilitate with faulty intelligence -- and, in the process, is infuriating American officials and some Iraqis, who suspect his motive is to bolster his own political bloc.

Chalabi, a Shiite, has defended the work of the commission he is leading as legal and crucial during a period of transition to Iraq's first sovereign government. But his reemergence on the political scene has rankled U.S. officials and fueled concerns that Sunnis and other secular Iraqis will be marginalized.

Some Iraqi and U.S. officials think Chalabi might have his eyes on the ultimate prize, however unlikely he can attain it.

"Even if it kills him, he's going to stay in Iraq to try to become prime minister," said Ezzat Shahbandar, a Shiite lawmaker from a competing slate who has known Chalabi for more than 20 years. "This issue is the only tool he has, because he has nothing else going for him."

Chalabi fell out of favor with the Americans in 2004, after they accused him of spying for Iran. The year before, though, he had been appointed to head a U.S.-formed commission to rid the government of officials tied to Hussein's regime.

The hasty, wholesale purge that the commission conducted is now widely seen as a catalyst of the insurgency and Iraq's sectarian war. Today, however, Chalabi remains at the helm of a similar "de-Baathification" panel, the Justice and Accountability Commission, because parliament has not appointed new members.

When the commission recently announced the disqualification of nearly 500 candidates from the March 7 parliamentary elections, critics noted that candidates from Sunni-led and mixed secular coalitions were disproportionately targeted. Many of those ousted were rivals of Chalabi's bloc.

A court impaneled to review the cases carried out a cursory review behind closed doors. Candidates were allowed to submit written appeals but were never told the specific nature of the allegations against them. The court disqualified 145 candidates; most others dropped out or their parties replaced them.

Now the disqualifications are widening sectarian and religious divides in Iraq, even as it continues to reel from decades of authoritarian rule, occupation and bloodshed. This week, in an apparent attempt to allay some of the bitterness, the government said it would reinstate 20,000 former army officers ousted because of their ties to Hussein.

But the political disqualifications threaten to undermine the elections, overshadowing campaign issues such as security, unemployment and basic services.

At the center of it all is Chalabi.

In campaign posters, Chalabi, a onetime Iraqi exile, bills himself as "the Destroyer of the symbols of the Baath." Placards for other candidates on his political slate, the Iraqi National Alliance, are graced with the words "No space for the Baath," written in crimson letters that suggest blood.

The alliance is a Shiite coalition of parties whose most prominent figures are former Iraqi exiles in the current government. Those parties did poorly in provincial elections in January 2009.

"The provincial elections showed the limits of the appeal of sectarianism," a senior Western diplomat said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to offer candid analysis. By fanning fears of the return of the Baathists, the official added, "they may be hoping that Baathism will help them get past that limit."

Chalabi, 65, comes from an elite Baghdad family. He formed the Iraqi National Congress, an opposition group, in the early 1990s with U.S. backing.

He has long had a strong relationship with Iran. But he became close to the CIA and the Pentagon in the run-up to the invasion, as U.S. officials used his group to muster opposition against Hussein. The U.S. government funneled millions to his group, which provided it with intelligence reports that later proved to be erroneous. In 2004, Chalabi was a guest of President George W. Bush at the State of the Union address.

Many Iraqi Shiite politicians have little regard for Chalabi because he left in the late 1950s, avoiding authoritarian rule. Many of his peers were imprisoned, tortured and forced into exile.

Despite his lack of popular support, Chalabi has remained relevant. Even his rivals allow that he has keen political instincts, a sharp mind and a knack for influencing powerful people. He also does not shy from controversy.

This week, his deputy on the commission, Ali Faisal al-Lami, said hundreds of officials in Iraq's intelligence, army and police agencies are subject to dismissal for links to the Baath Party.

"We believe there are thousands of others who will be found," he said in an interview. "These measures will seriously enhance security in Iraq by dismissing any bad elements that carry the Baath ideology."

If that effort gains traction in the weeks ahead, U.S. officials say, political violence could very well follow. U.S. commanders could also suddenly lose key Iraqi officers who they have trained and mentored over the years.

"They will try to get rid of pro-U.S. generals, but more importantly, they are stacking the deck with pro-Iranian officers, which will damage U.S. long-term interests in the long run," a senior U.S. military official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he is not allowed to talk to reporters. "This is why many neighboring Arab countries aren't so happy about us modernizing the Iraqi military with some of the latest equipment."

Chalabi did not respond to calls, e-mails and text messages seeking an interview. In a recent statement, he said his commission was "carrying out its legal, moral and nationalistic duty to protect the political process against infiltration by the Saddamist Baathists."

Ryan C. Crocker, who served as U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 2007 until last year, said Chalabi is no one's "agent."

"He's an opportunist and he's a nationalist," Crocker said, "and he will use whatever vehicle or platform that presents itself to further his own agenda."

Special correspondent K.I. Ibrahim contributed to this report.

Iraqi Sunnis Pin Their Hopes on Elections

By MARC SANTORA

BAQUBA, Iraq — Here in Diyala, a quarter of provincial council members, all Sunnis, have warrants against them. Most don’t show up for votes, fearing they will be jailed. The leading Sunni candidate was arrested this month on what supporters call trumped-up terrorism charges. Crushing poverty is the norm. So is mistrust of a central government and the Shiite-dominated security forces.

Yet Sunnis here say they are determined to participate in the March 7 national parliamentary elections. Even after a call last week by a national Sunni political party to boycott — a call it later rescinded — Sunnis continued to hang banners of their preferred candidates, including those barred from running.

In some ways, it is an inspiring measure of progress in Iraq that Sunni Muslims, the minority that long ran Iraq under Saddam Hussein, are trusting in the ballot box to improve their fortunes.

But the hope they place in politics also reflects weakness: how sharply Sunnis’ choices have narrowed after nearly seven years of war. Past boycotts denied them electoral positions they might have won and deprived them of the spoils of power. Violence drew deadly retribution, from both American soldiers and Shiite death squads. Now elections seem the only way to forge a more formal and enduring political role.

Interviews in this once restive area make clear that Sunni expectations from these elections are high, and that renewed violence may not be far behind electoral disappointment.

“If the government does not change, there will be a problem between the Sunni and the Shia, and it will not be good,” said Sami Dawoud Salman, a local leader of a branch of the Sunni militia that allied with the Americans to do battle with Al Qaeda.

Without a change, he said, “I think the government will hunt down every Sunni person, and the Sunnis will have no choice but to hold their own weapons and defend themselves.”

He plans to vote in any case.

Across Diyala Province, about 17,000 square miles stretching from Baghdad to the Iranian border, the conditions that existed as the fighting subsided have hardened in place. Once mixed villages have either been razed or remain in the control of one sect. Few of those displaced from their homes have returned. Lingering blood feuds bring daily reports of violence.

Shiite towns, like Khalis, bustle with commerce. In Sunni neighborhoods, the shops are fewer, the tension is higher and the uncertainty palpable.

Shiites dominate both the local police and the Iraqi Army in the region, making up about 90 percent of the forces, American officials say, although the population is more than 50 percent Sunni. Sunnis see reminders of Shiite ascendancy and intimidation all around. For instance, during a recent Shiite holiday, nearly every police checkpoint was decorated with portraits of Imam Hussein and Ali, two revered Shiite martyrs.

The mistrust has deepened in recent months as government security forces have staged a series of arrests.

Over three days in December, 101 people were arrested, predominantly Sunni, according to an American intelligence briefing paper.

“Continued, pervasive, and biased targeting by the Iraqi Security Force” raised the possibility militants might have more success in recruiting fighters, according to the report. In recent weeks, there has been evidence that those networks have stepped up their recruitment efforts, American military commanders say.

In the provincial elections last year, Sunnis took control of the local government, which helped ease tensions. However, 7 of the 29 provincial council members have arrest warrants against them. The arrest in early February of Najim al-Harbi, the Diyala leader of the important Sunni political bloc that won six seats, was considered the most recent provocation.

Mr. Harbi, who gained widespread support for his role battling Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, has been the frequent target of assassination attempts, and 23 members of his family have been killed by militants. Six months ago, his 6-year-old son was kidnapped by Al Qaeda and killed. His arrest on terrorism charges, with no evidence made public, stirred anger and was viewed as politically motivated, because his slate of candidates poses a serious challenge to both Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s alliance and the candidates of other Shiite parties.

“Of course the sectarian nature of the politics will be reflected on the street,” said Rasam Esmael Hamud, a member of Mr. Harbi’s party. “If we fail to control the politics, then we will fail to control the street.”

There has been hope that the elections would be a step toward reconciliation. But as the campaign has heated up, so has the oratory, with distinct sectarian overtones. The fiery campaign speeches have been coupled with actions by the government security forces and political leaders that are viewed by Sunnis as an attempt to diminish their standing.

For months, Mr. Maliki, who once hoped to court a substantial alliance with powerful Sunni political blocs but was largely rebuffed, has repeatedly raised the specter of the Baath Party to justify a crackdown on Sunni and secular leaders.

Mr. Maliki’s rival, former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a secular Shiite who has been joined by powerful Sunni blocs to pose a serious electoral challenge, has accused the Shiite dominated blocs and the prime minister of being beholden to Iran.

When the Iraqi government pressed ahead with its anti-Baath campaign by seeking to bar more than 500 candidates from running in the election, Mr. Allawi suggested that such heavy-handed tactics could lead to civil war.

With only a little more than a week until the election, though, Sunnis still view the voting booth as the best place to secure influence in Iraq, according to American and Iraqi officials and dozens of interviews with residents.

“We are always facing pressures by the security forces, which are dominated by the Shiite parties,” said Baqir Jalalaldin al-Khashali, a 24-year-old employee of the Education Department in Baquba. “I think that the pressures will be useless, because there is a great desire of Sunnis to participate in the election.”

How they will react once the votes are counted, especially if there is a perception of fraud, is uncertain.

“We have spent a lot of time studying the question: What is the Sunni breaking point?” said Col. David Funk, commander of the Third Stryker Brigade, Second Infantry Division, which has responsibility for Diyala Province. “It won’t likely be a single event. It will be the slow erosion over time of the belief that they have a role in this country.”

An Iraqi employee of The New York Times contributed reporting from Diyala Province.

Sri Lanka’s President Declared Victor by Wide Margin

Image via Wikipedia

By LYDIA POLGREEN

COLOMBO, Sri Lanka — Mahinda Rajapaksa, Sri Lanka’s president, was re-elected by a wide margin, election officials here said Wednesday, defeating the newly retired army general who had tried to lay claim to Mr. Rajapaksa’s biggest political victory, the defeat of the Tamil Tiger insurgency.

Official results gave Mr. Rajapaksa an 18-point advantage over his nearest opponent, Sarath Fonseka, the general who carried out the successful military operation against the Tigers. Mr. Fonseka rejected the result, saying that campaign had been marred by violence and irregularities in the vote counting.

“The enthusiasm of the people we noticed in the campaign is not reflected in the result,” Mr. Fonseka said at a news conference.

Independent Sri Lankan election monitors said that there was no evidence of major fraud in the voting, but left open the possibility of problems in the counting.

More broadly, election observers and advocacy groups have questioned the fundamental fairness of the campaign, accusing Mr. Rajapaksa of using state resources to run his campaign. State-owned news media all but shut out opposition candidates.

The election results illustrate the still-yawning ethnic and religious divides that plunged Sri Lanka into civil war in the first place, and underscore the difficulties Mr. Rajapaksa will face in trying to reconcile the country after 26 years of conflict.

Mr. Fonseka spent the day secluded in a five-star hotel, which the government surrounded with commandos, saying they had been placed there for security reasons. He said that he feared for his safety.

“They are trying to make me a prisoner,” Mr. Fonseka said, addressing a conference room packed with journalists. “They have made things very clear today.”

Lucien Rajakarunanyake, a government spokesman, rejected the suggestion that Mr. Fonseka was in danger, saying that the troops outside the hotel were merely for safety. “He is free to leave at any time,” the spokesman said.

The Tamil Tiger insurgency fought to create a Tamil homeland in the north and east of Sri Lanka, separate from the Sinhalese majority. But over the years the group became little more than a criminal enterprise famous for its cruel tactics, human rights groups say, like holding civilians as human shields as well as using child soldiers and female suicide bombers.

While Mr. Rajapaksa won a large majority, Tamil and Muslim voters largely rejected him.

Mr. Rajapaksa pledged to be a president for all Sri Lankans, not just those who voted for him, an apparent effort to reach out to Tamil voters who shunned him in large numbers.

“Six million people voted for me,” Mr. Rajapaksa said at a news conference at his office late Wednesday evening. “Even the people who voted for other candidates, I have to look after their interests.”

It had been an ugly and sometimes violent campaign between two men who had once been close allies. The evidently exasperated elections commissioner, Dayananda Dissanayake, described numerous transgressions by the government during the campaign, concluding that “state institutions operated in a manner not befitting state organizations.”

Guidelines for the state media to behave fairly toward both candidates were ignored, he said, adding that the stress of overseeing the election had taken a toll on his health.

A long night of counting ballots confirmed that turnout in northern Tamil areas was very low, in the single digits in some war-hit areas, while voters had flocked to the polls in Mr. Rajapaksa’s southern stronghold.

Dayan Jayatilleka, a political analyst who was Sri Lanka’s representative to the United Nations in Geneva until the government fired him last year, said that the Tamil political parties had lost touch with the electorate during the long years of war.

“They have been engaging in the politics of exile,” Mr. Jayatilleka said. “They have not done the hard yards of rebuilding their political network.”

But election observers said that explosions and other disturbances, along with the heavy militarization of the northern and eastern Tamil areas, also suppressed the vote.

The other political parties in Mr. Fonseka’s coalition also struggled to bring in voters. The center-right United National Party failed to deliver the capital, Colombo — its stronghold — for Mr. Fonseka. And the Marxist party known as the J.V.P., the Sinhalese acronym for People’s Freedom Party, seemed to make little headway against the president in its southern Sinhalese bastions.

Mr. Fonseka, who ran on his record of winning the war against the Tamil Tigers, had counted on support from Tamil voters, who he hoped would choose him over Mr. Rajapaksa as the more palatable of the two options. Though Mr. Fonseka led the military campaign that may have killed thousands of Tamil civilians, he portrayed himself as committed to healing ethnic divisions and allowing communities a greater measure of self-rule.

He also sought to capitalize on dissatisfaction with Mr. Rajapaksa in some quarters of the Sinhalese majority. Voters expressed concern about the concentration of state power within Mr. Rajapaksa’s family. One of his brothers is the powerful secretary of defense, another is a senior adviser and many members of his extended family work in senior government positions.

But Mr. Rajapaksa emerges from the election in many ways stronger than ever. He ran on his war record, arguing that if he delivered on his pledge to win the war he could also bring a peace dividend and heal the nation’s ethnic rifts.

“The president keeps his promises,” said Gamage Banduwathie, a voter who left the United National Party to support Mr. Rajapaksa in the election. “I hope that he will be a savior for Sri Lanka.”

Sunni Iraqis fear disenfranchisement after hundreds of candidates banned

Image via Wikipedia

By Leila Fadel and Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, January 19, 2010; A07

BAGHDAD -- By barring hundreds of candidates from an upcoming parliamentary election, a controversial commission whose members have close ties to Iran is threatening to disenfranchise members of Iraq's Sunni minority and weaken its fledgling democracy.

The commission, led by Ahmed Chalabi, an Iraqi politician who supplied faulty intelligence to the United States in the run-up to the war, and Ali Faisal al-Lami, a former U.S. detainee, was established to help cleanse the Iraqi government of officials who adhered to the ideals of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party.

But the panel sent shockwaves through Iraq's political establishment when it recently announced the disbarment of 511 candidates for their alleged allegiance to the party. The move has led to recriminations that Iran, through proxies, is trying to rig the vote to ensure that Iraq is solidly in the hands of politicians loyal to Tehran.

U.S. officials, who were caught off guard by the decision, now fear that it could reignite sectarian violence and dash their hopes of political reconciliation in Iraq -- the end goal of the U.S. military strategy known as the "surge."

"If there is no balance, there will be violence," said Mustafa Kamal Shibeeb, a Sunni who was among those banned.

Outside a cemetery in the Sunni Baghdad district of Adhamiyah, Ibrahim Hamid, 22, glanced over a railing at about 6,500 graves of Sunnis buried during Iraq's sectarian war.

"This is Iraq," he said. "Always the men with dignity are banned. I'm sure there is going to be a lot of violence."

Many Sunnis boycotted a national election in 2005 to protest the U.S. occupation. Their disenfranchisement contributed to the rise of an insurgency and a civil war fought along sectarian lines. This time, there is little talk of boycotting, but there is widespread fear that Sunnis will once again believe they got a raw deal.

On Friday, at a Sunni mosque in Adhamiyah, the Iraqi army stopped a demonstration over the disbarments, residents said. Sunnis in Baghdad complain that in recent months the Iraqi army has sharply restricted movement in their districts, stifling commerce and imposing de facto martial law.

"People will keep their mouths shut," said Zaki Alaa Zaki, 38, a member of the local Sunni paramilitary force established by the U.S. military and now controlled by the Iraqi government. "We are the living dead now."

The committee that announced the disbarments is known as the Supreme National Commission for Accountability and Justice. Its chairman, Chalabi, is an erstwhile Pentagon and CIA ally who played a crucial role in the run-up to the invasion. He's fallen out of favor, and most U.S. officials now call him an Iranian agent. Chalabi's deputy on the commission, Lami, spent nearly a year in U.S. custody after being implicated in the bombing of a Sadr City government building that killed two American soldiers and two U.S. Embassy employees. He has denied involvement in the attack and claims that U.S. interrogators tortured him.

An aide to Chalabi said he was unavailable for comment. In an interview, however, Lami said he wasn't to blame that candidates failed to qualify for elections. He also disputed allegations, from U.S. officials and others, that he and Chalabi were acting at the behest of Tehran or in the interest of their own coalition vying for seats in the next parliament.

The list of barred candidates, which was endorsed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, provides vague justification for the banishments. It includes Sunni and Shiite politicians, but it seems to disproportionately target prominent Sunnis and secular leaders. There were 6,592 candidates who were screened for Baathist ties.

Being labeled a Baathist in today's Iraq, which is led by exiles driven out by Hussein, is tantamount to being called a communist during the McCarthy era. The disbarment would be likely to benefit Maliki's coalition and the predominantly Shiite bloc that includes Chalabi and Lami.

Barred candidates have three days to appeal to a newly empaneled body of three judges. Sunni politicians and U.S. officials worry that the appeals process could inflame tensions and potentially derail the election, scheduled for March 7.

U.S. Ambassador Christopher R. Hill said he worries that the process could overwhelm the democratic system.

"It's a tough issue. It involves deep emotions," Hill said in an interview. "Frankly, the weight of these emotions sometimes exceeds the capacity of the institutional framework to handle them."

Vice President Biden called the Iraqi speaker of parliament Sunday to push back the disbarment of politicians until after the vote, according to the speaker's spokesman. But the call and other, similar efforts by the U.N. envoy to Iraq and Western diplomats appear to have gone unheeded.

Some Sunni leaders and analysts said more aggressive American intervention is the only way to avert a bigger crisis.

"We need to hear from you Americans. Please don't just watch this from the outside," said Mithal al-Alusi, a former member of the now-disbanded commission on de-Baathification. "The White House needs to move and move quickly."

Special correspondent Aziz Alwan contributed to this report.

Iraq bars 15 political parties with Baathist ties from upcoming elections

Image via Wikipedia

By Leila Fadel and Qais Mizher
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, January 8, 2010; A10

BAGHDAD -- At least 15 parties will be banned from upcoming parliamentary elections because they have been linked to Saddam Hussein's Baath Party or have promoted Baathist ideals, Iraqi officials said Thursday.

The decision by the Justice and Accountability Commission, in charge of cleansing high-level Baathists from the ranks of the government and security forces, seemed to be an attempt to purge candidates with links to the old political order, many of whom are popular among secular nationalist voters. The move is a blow to hopes of bringing opposition figures -- who turned to violent resistance over the past seven years -- into the political fold, part of the U.S. strategy to bolster the government.

Saleh al-Mutlak, a popular Sunni lawmaker who joined forces with Ayad Allawi, a secular Shiite and former Baathist with links to the CIA, called the move "foolish" and warned that it may lead to a popular uprising in the streets. Mutlak, an agriculturist, has long been a defender of former Baathists and grew popular among Sunnis, most notably in the western Sunni province of Anbar, during provincial elections last year.

"The reaction from the street will be very strong," said Mutlak, whose party, the Iraqi National Dialogue Front, was barred from fielding candidates in the parliamentary elections, scheduled for March 7. "The list we are in now is very strong, and it might get the biggest bloc in the parliament. . . . They are afraid, and they will try to weaken us."

Mutlak accused Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of attempting to sideline him politically. On Thursday, he confined himself to his hotel in the heavily fortified Green Zone after rumors of an assassination attempt. He said he plans to appeal the decision by the Justice and Accountability Commission in court.

Ali Faisal al-Lami, the general director of the Justice and Accountability Commission, said the panel decided to ban Mutlak's party from the elections because he had made statements in support of the Baathists.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Anger Over Move to Bar Sunni From Iraq Elections (nytimes.com)
• Iraq Sunni leader to be kept from election (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Letter From Khartoum

Image via Wikipedia

Sudan’s Empty Election

Rebecca Hamilton

REBECCA HAMILTON is a Fellow at the Open Society Institute, a Visiting Fellow at the National Security Archive, and the author of a forthcoming book on the impact of advocacy on Darfur policy.

At a clandestine meeting in a nondescript Khartoum suburb, a man started reading a list of numbers to me. "Between the census conducted in 1983 and the one conducted in 1993, the nomadic population in South Darfur decreased by just over 5.5 percent," my informant summarized. "This was largely due to the drought, which led to a loss of livestock and forced many nomads into the towns." He resumed his list of numbers. "If we are to believe the recent census, this same nomadic population has increased by 322 percent."

Last year's census was conducted to determine how many parliamentary seats would be allocated to each geographical area in Sudan's April 2010 election. Sudan's ruling party refused to release its raw census data, but anomalies like this one are widespread. With numbers unexpectedly high among populations that support the current regime and lower than anticipated in opposition-dominated regions, many Sudanese believe that the census has been manipulated for political purposes. Distorted census figures like these are just one of many tactics being used to ensure that next year's election will come out in favor of the ruling National Congress Party (NCP), led by Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, an indicted war criminal.

Over the past few years, international engagement with Sudan has focused on the western region of Darfur, where more than 200,000 civilians died and 2.7 million remain displaced as a result of a conflict that the U.S. government characterized as genocide. The catastrophic events in Darfur certainly warranted international attention, but this attention came at the cost of monitoring other important domestic developments. While the global spotlight has focused on Darfur, Bashir has been quietly consolidating power, emulating such despots as Hugo Chávez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who have adopted the trappings of democracy while working to subvert it.

Bashir belongs to the Jaali -- one of the northern riverine Arab tribes that, despite being a minority, have maintained control of Sudanese political life for as long as anyone can remember. In 1989, Bashir and his allies launched a military coup that overthrew the democratically elected prime minister, Sadiq al-Mahdi. Once in power, Bashir banned political parties, dissolved trade unions, and prohibited demonstrations. He was reelected after running unopposed in 1996 and again, with 86.5 percent of the vote, in 2000 -- the second rigged election of his tenure.

Sudanese politics are best understood as a struggle for control by an elite center over a vast and marginalized periphery -- a long-standing dynamic that was entrenched under British rule, from 1899 to 1956. During Bashir's reign, the most visible manifestation of this center-periphery tension has been the civil war between his NCP government and the main opposition group in the country's south, the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) -- a conflict that led to the deaths of two million people over the course of two decades. And it was just as this war was coming to an end that rebel groups in Darfur took up arms to fight for representation in their marginalized area of the country.

The idea of a democratic election was put on the Sudanese agenda largely at the behest of the United States during negotiations to bring the north-south war to an end. The concluding document of those negotiations, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), was signed in January 2005. It set out an ambitious program for a multistage transition period to democratic rule and promised southerners a referendum on secession from Sudan in 2011.

At the time, neither the NCP nor the SPLM was particularly keen to hold an election that risked diminishing the seat allocations assigned to them for the pre-election period. But the U.S. government insisted there could be no democratic transformation of Sudan unless citizens went to the polls. Steeped in U.S. President George W. Bush's foreign policy agenda of democracy promotion, the architects of this grand vision focused not only on representation for the marginalized south but envisaged citizens in all of Sudan's peripheral areas voting for representatives who would serve their interests.

Back in 2005, there was a compelling logic to this. The six-year interim period between the signing of the CPA and the 2011 referendum was designed to sell southerners on the benefits of remaining part of a unified Sudan. They would see development in their region, the theory went, and get a taste of a new Sudan -- where repressive laws would be revoked and human rights would be respected. A national election held halfway through the period would reinforce these changes, and southerners would have over two years between the election and the referendum to experience life under democratic rule.

But nearly five years later, progress toward democratization has, if anything, gone into reverse. It is already clear that if the election takes place in April 2010, it will be under conditions that make a mockery of democratic principles. And since the elections have been delayed on multiple occasions, they are now scheduled to take place a mere eight months before the referendum in which southerners are almost certain to vote for independence. The international community is pouring millions of dollars into the formation of a government that will likely be dissolved just months after taking office.

Driving into town from Khartoum's international airport, visitors are greeted by a slew of pro-NCP billboards featuring heavily airbrushed images of Bashir in military or religious attire. "Bashir is our dignity!" they proclaim. Even Bashir's indictment by the International Criminal Court has been spun by the NCP. As the state-run media tell it, Bashir's indictment was an attack on the Sudanese people; voting for him, therefore, is an act of patriotism.

Image via Wikipedia

Meanwhile, for Sudan's opposition parties, making even the most basic political statement entails extreme risk. In mid-August, I met with Hassan al-Turabi, a key Islamist involved in orchestrating the 1989 military coup that brought Bashir to power. (They later had a falling out after Bashir suspected Turabi of plotting to overthrow him.) Midway through our interview, one of his several attendants insisted he take an urgent call. The leader of the Sudan Congress Party, a minor opposition group, was being detained by Sudan's omnipresent security services for trying to hold a public meeting. "How can we hold an election if we can't even hold a meeting?" Turabi asked. "We are living under an absolute dictatorship."

As a former host to Osama bin Laden, Turabi is not the most trustworthy of characters, but when it comes to the topic of repression, he is not exaggerating. Sudan's National Security Act has long enabled security forces to detain anyone without any justification for renewable periods of up to 90 days. Parliament has "reformed" the law to reduce the time detainees can be held, but the NCP-controlled intelligence service retains the power to detain its opponents. This means that the "ghost houses," where intelligence agents torture detainees, are unlikely to disappear.

The government may not be willing to reform repressive laws, but it is prepared to use its largesse to attempt to reform potential dissidents. The first thing I noticed at the Khartoum residence of the former Darfur rebel Minni Minawi was the Sudanese government license plate on his brand-new black Mercedes. Appointed a presidential adviser after being the only rebel leader to sign the ill-fated 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement, Minawi has been living comfortably in Khartoum, doing nothing for those he once claimed to represent.

Most dispiriting of all my meetings was the one with Ghazi Suleiman -- the man once referred to as "the godfather of human rights in Sudan." Responding to allegations of rape in Darfur, Suleiman now parrots Bashir's line, "They are all false. . . . I have been to Darfur and met a woman who had claimed she was raped," he said. "I asked her what does this word 'rape' mean? She had no answer." It seemed fruitless to point out that a woman who had been raped might not want to tell her traumatic story to a skeptical male stranger. According to Suleiman, "Now is the best time in the history of Sudan."

For those who cannot be co-opted, intimidation seems to be the NCP's preferred tactic. While I was in Khartoum, the government threatened to lift the parliamentary immunity of Yasir Arman, the head of the SPLM's northern delegation, for speaking out against public order laws. These vaguely worded morality laws serve as ideal vehicles for harassing anyone who has fallen out of favor with the government. "Yasir Arman is an MP, a prominent figure -- and they manage to bully him," said Salih Mahmoud Osman, a globally acclaimed human rights activist and a member of the Sudanese parliament. "Imagine what it is like for ordinary people. How can they possibly vote freely? "We've been hearing the U.S. government has agreed to donate $21 million for elections. We know the Carter Center has been holding workshops. But elections are supposed to be about the will of the people. To hold an election in this climate . . ." Osman's voice trailed off in despair.

Sudanese citizens are being asked to go to the polls for their first "democratic" election in over two decades under decidedly undemocratic circumstances. Even in the semi-autonomous south of the country, where repression is less overt, potential voters face significant hurdles. In an area where the UN reports a literacy rate of 24 percent (only 12 percent for women), voters are being asked to complete 12 separate ballots. Members of the international community -- which has signed up to fund a significant portion of the election (the UN has just announced a $91 million donation to the Bashir-appointed National Elections Commission) -- must ask whether they should be supporting this election at all. As one Sudanese academic who requested anonymity put it: "Elections with what objective? Legitimating an illegitimate regime?"

Bashir and the NCP have maneuvered themselves into something of a win-win situation. If the election goes forward, they are assured of a victory; if the election does not take place, they stay in power. As the NCP sees it, the key difference is that if the election happens, the indicted war criminal Bashir will become the democratically elected Bashir, granting the ruling regime a veneer of legitimacy. For Sudanese citizens and their outside supporters, this will undermine any push for a true democratic transformation.

While the world's attention has been on Darfur, the ruling regime in Khartoum has not lost focus on their primary goal: survival. An election was forced upon them, and they have risen to the challenge. Always a step ahead, they have put the pieces in place to ensure that they will be the ostensibly democratic choice of the Sudanese people on election day. In the NCP's best-case scenario, Sudanese citizens will simply accept this fraud.

But public dissent, a rarity in Sudan, is brewing. Following the CPA, civil society activists had hoped that constitutionally mandated legal reforms would prohibit NCP security agents from arresting and detaining citizens and that other laws used to suppress dissent would be repealed. Nearly five years on, cosmetic reform notwithstanding, little has changed. In the past two weeks, anti-NCP demonstrations have erupted both in Khartoum and in the south, suggesting that even if the international community does not take a stand against the failure to establish the conditions for a free and fair election, it is conceivable that the Sudanese people will.

To date, the NCP has responded to the protesters with tear gas, arrests, and an announcement that such demonstrations are illegal. But this may not be enough to suppress dissent among a population with long-standing and legitimate grievances in a country awash with arms.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Sudan: Stealing an Election in Slow Motion (starting-points.blogspot.com)
• Bashir opponents gather in Sudan (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Will Obama Finally Pay Attention to Sudan? (online.wsj.com)
• Tapper: White House Revamps Sudan Policy (blogs.abcnews.com)
• More than 40,000 Americans and 40 Groups Call on President Obama to Make Sudan a Priority This Week (prweb.com)
• White House Replies to Cheney Criticism (time.com)

U.S. aids Sudanese in independence bid

Image by daveblume via Flickr

Eli Lake

The United States is helping South Sudan prepare for independence after a 2011 referendum, according to a representative of the region in Washington.

Ezekiel Lol Gatkuoth, head of South Sudan's mission to the United States, told reporters and editors of The Washington Times on Thursday that a good chunk of the nearly $1 billion in annual U.S. aid to Sudan is going to build roads, train police and professionalize a separate army in the south.

"The United States government, one of their goals now, is to make sure southern Sudan in 2011 is a viable state," he said.

Under the terms of a 2005 agreement that ended a decades-long civil war between the mostly Muslim north and the Christian and animist south, southern Sudanese are to be allowed to vote on Jan. 9, 2011, whether to set up an independent state.

The vote is to be preceded by presidential and parliamentary elections in all of Sudan next year.

Mr. Gatkuoth accused the government of Sudanese President Omar Bashir of trying to prevent free and fair voting by arresting southern Sudanese leaders and interfering with legislation governing the elections.

Image via Wikipedia

Mr. Gatkuoth said the coming 12 months would be crucial to determining the fate of the country.

"In 2010, we either make it or break it," he said. "An election can lead to war if you feel cheated."

On Monday, Sudan's parliament in Khartoum is scheduled to vote on a referendum law. The parliament voted earlier this week on the legislation, but removed compromise language between the Sudan People's Liberation Movement and the Bashir government that required voters to prove their southern Sudanese origin. The new vote was scheduled for Monday after U.S. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly urged Lt. Gen. Bashir's government to "restore the agreed-upon language."

An administration official declined specific comment Thursday on Mr. Gatkuoth's remarks, apart from saying that "the United States continues to call on all parties to work together to ensure the upcoming elections and referenda are conducted in a credible manner."

The 2011 referendum could simultaneously divide Sudan into two countries and reignite a civil war.

Mr. Gatkuoth said that Gen. Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for his purported role in authorizing genocide in the western Sudanese region of Darfur, is determined to prevent the south from gaining independence.

Most of Sudan's oil is located in the south, as are the headwaters of the Nile River. The northern part of the country, however, includes the city of Port Sudan, from which the oil is exported, largely to China.

Mr. Gatkuoth said the U.S. was helping to prepare the south for independence and that the region's most critical needs involve agriculture and policing.

The International Crisis Group, a Belgium- and Washington-based organization that seeks to prevent conflict, criticized the southern Sudanese government in a report Wednesday for failing to provide security in the state of Jonglei.

"The South Sudan police service ... is of abysmal quality," the report said.

Mr. Gatkuoth conceded that the police are weak in South Sudan, but also accused the Khartoum government of exploiting tribal conflicts to provide an excuse to postpone the referendum.

He said Sudan's most important trading partner, China, had recognized the likelihood of southern Sudanese independence by establishing a consulate in Juba, the capital of the southern region. He said that there had already been discussions between the southern government and China's national oil company about arrangements after 2011.

The envoy said he was particularly worried that a national security law gives Sudan's intelligence service the authority to arrest the political opponents of Gen. Bashir and detain them for nine months without trial.

"If there is a free election, Bashir will not win," Mr. Gatkuoth said.

He also warned that demarcating the border between north and south and a border district known as Abyei would be contentious.

Mr. Gatkuoth said he was most worried that Khartoum would try to postpone the 2011 referendum.

"Even if you postpone that for one day, the people of southern Sudan will not accept it," he sa

Related articles by Zemanta

• New war in Sudan's Nuba mountains? (telegraph.co.uk)
• Guerrillas return (news.bbc.co.uk)
• The next Darfur? (news.bbc.co.uk)
• South Sudan referendum law back to parliament (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Terms for Sudan referendum agreed (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Sudan rejects oil revenue report (news.bbc.co.uk)

Iraqi election workers targets for insurgents

Image via Wikipedia

By Michael Hastings
Monday, December 21, 2009; A10

BAGHDAD -- Insurgents have begun targeting Iraqi election workers in an apparent attempt to derail the March parliamentary vote, Iraqi officials said, prompting electoral authorities to restrict the movement of their employees and shelter some at a hotel in the Green Zone.

An election worker was killed in front of his Baghdad home last week, and a worker and the wife and son of another were kidnapped in the past 10 days, according to Faraj al-Haidari, head of the Independent High Electoral Commission.

"It is not a coincidence to have three attacks against our employees," Haidari said. "Our situation is a tragedy. You can see the worry and mental anxiety on the faces of my employees."

Iraqi officials described the attacks as the latest attempt by the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq to destabilize the government ahead of the elections, scheduled for March 7. U.S. officials hope the elections, which were delayed by nearly two months as a result of political wrangling, will lead to a smooth transition of power and that they will be able to sharply accelerate the withdrawal of troops.

The targeted violence has forced the electoral commission to increase security measures for staff members, of which there are about 500 in Baghdad alone, including limiting their movement during the day and advising their families to relocate until after the elections.

Image via Wikipedia

The commission has requested that the Iraqi government allow it to house workers at Saddam Hussein's old Republican Palace, formerly home to the U.S. Embassy but now vacant. Rooms for higher-ranking officials have been secured at the Rasheed Hotel, a well-protected building in the fortified Green Zone where many Iraqi parliament members and foreign visitors stay.

Haidari said he has discussed the security issue with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and President Jalal Talabani. "We have asked for more security guards," he said. "We are trying to give our employees better protection. We insist to continue our work."

The run-up to the election has been punctuated by bombings that have shaken the confidence of the Iraqi government and have killed more than 400.

Though it is unclear exactly who is responsible for the killing and kidnappings, Iraqi officials say they think al-Qaeda in Iraq and insurgent groups affiliated with the former Baath Party are behind the violence.

The Islamic State of Iraq, an extremist umbrella group, has asserted responsibility for the deadly bombings of government buildings in August, October and, most recently, Dec. 8.

The violence against election workers fits into the insurgents' larger strategy to undermine and destabilize the Iraqi government.

"The electoral process is an important target to the insurgents, because if they break it they will break all the political process in Iraq," Haidari said. "I think all the enemies of democracy in Iraq are behind the bombings, including al-Qaeda."

The details of the election worker's killing indicate a well-coordinated assassination.

Ali Mahmoud, 30, who had worked with the commission for five years, returned home from a friend's wedding last Thursday evening around 7:30 pm. He parked his car in front of his house in Jadriya, considered one of the safest neighborhoods in Baghdad.

An unknown assailant or assailants approached the car and fired two bullets from a gun with a silencer, according to friends of Mahmoud and other election officials. One bullet struck above his nose, another on the left side of his forehead.

The killing, along with the kidnapping of an election worker in Kirkuk 10 days ago and the kidnapping of another election worker's wife and son last week in Baghdad, has had a chilling effect on the commission's work, according to interviews with several people on the commission.

"We are all under threat of assassination," an election official said, requesting anonymity for fear of retribution. "We have a job to do and it will get worse as the election gets closer." Added another worker: "We are worried more than you can imagine."

Hastings is a freelance journalist based in Baghdad. Special correspondent Qais Mizher contributed to this report.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Al Qaeda in Iraq ally claims bombings (cnn.com)
• Iraqis question safety after bombings kill 155 (cbc.ca)
• Bombers Paid £6,000 Bribe To Blast Baghdad (news.sky.com)
• Iraq to Syria: Hand over bombing suspects (cnn.com)
• Baghdad bomb fatalities pass 150 (news.bbc.co.uk)