Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Democracy in Iraq
Aired February 17, 2004 - 08:16 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: From Iraq, as U.S. casualties mount, questions linger about how power can be handed over to the Iraqis come the 1st of July. One critical issue -- how to determine who could actually vote in a countrywide election.
Anthony Shadid of the "Washington Post" has written about one innovative form of democracy already present that he has observed in Iraq.
And Anthony is live for us from our bureau there in Baghdad.
Welcome back to AMERICAN MORNING.
Good to have you here.
I want to start, however, with an article today in your paper, in the "Washington Post," suggesting that members of the Iraqi Governing Council are also -- are running away, essentially, from the caucus plan by the U.S.
Why is that the case? Why is that plan losing its footing, Anthony?
ANTHONY SHADID, REPORTER, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Well, I think there's a sense among a lot of groups here in Iraq that the caucus plan is, in fact, dead; not only on the side of the Americans, but among constituencies here inside Iraq. I think the key element there is legitimacy. And there's a question that whether caucuses can deliver that necessary legitimacy to any body that's formed to take over power from the Americans on June 30th.
I don't think a lot of people see the caucuses as really viable in that regard. And so there's a search for alternatives. Is it elections? Is it giving power to the Governing Council, which is already in place? Expanding the Governing Council, trying to move elections up? There's a lot of talk about where it's going to go.
But it does -- it's almost -- it's very clear that there is going to be some kind of pretty dramatic change in how this transfer of power takes place.
HEMMER: When you mention the word legitimacy, are you reflecting on the idea of the caucus itself? Are you reflecting on the idea of the coalition authority and whether or not they have legitimacy in Iraq in the eyes of Iraqis?
SHADID: Right. I think it, yes, it's a good question. It's the body that takes over, whether that body has legitimacy. And I think there's a fear that if the Americans, if the coalition, if the U.S. administration is too involved in that process, it will deprive that body of legitimacy. That body will be seen as being too beholden to the American authorities here.
HEMMER: Anthony, let's go to the story you reported on recently in the "Washington Post" about food rations actually being used as voting cards southeast of Baghdad.
Explain to our viewers what you observed there.
SHADID: It's a, it was an ambitious experiment going on in this province. And, again, it's a province in the heart of the Shiite Muslim south. Over the past few months, the American administration there has been organizing elections in the 20 biggest cities in this province. And they've been using ration cards as the way to register voters, as a way of qualifying voters to take part in these elections.
Each family has two votes, one for a man, one for a woman. And so far they've done elections in about 11 of these cities, with plans to do them in 16 of the 20 biggest towns by next month.
Now, what's interesting about these elections is that ration cards is the exact mechanism that the senior religious leader here, Ayatollah Sistani, has urged as a way to hold elections. The Americans have so far dismissed that as a viable alternative. But what we've seen by the Americans on a much, you know, a much more local scale is they're doing that. They're actually carrying out this plan, far less ambitious, but also very effective in bringing about what they want, and that's legitimacy for these councils that are set up in the aftermath of that.
HEMMER: Who's winning the vote there? What type of person? And what role do women have that you've seen in the results?
SHADID: Yes, there's a great fear, I think, among a lot of people here, particularly more secular or Western oriented individuals that if you do have elections, you're going to see religious extremists take, you know, win these elections.
What they've seen in this province in the south is that's not been the case so far. We've seen more technocratic oriented people winning -- lawyers, engineers, doctors, teachers. Now, there is some evidence in the most recent elections that Islamic parties are getting more mobilized. But on the whole so far it's been what you might describe as a technocratic city council that's taken power.
Women was a big question early on. I think in the, for two elections in April, a total of three women voted, and that was seen as a big concern for the U.S. officials there. What they did was they changed the voting system to give each family two votes, one for a man, one for a woman. And they had a pretty dramatic change.
In the elections that followed, I think 65 women took part out of maybe 1,200 votes. The one after that it was 150 and the one after that it was 250. So you're seeing a pretty dramatic increase in the number of women taking part.
HEMMER: The suggestion in your answer is that religious extremists are not winning that vote, at least based on the voting that you observed.
Quickly, I want to get to one more point here. Paul Bremer yesterday said he would essentially veto any constitution that would establish Islam as the law of the land that will govern a future Iraq.
I'm not sure how the others are receiving that news, but how could the U.S. prevent that from happening, number one? And how do you do it in a way to prevent a rift developing in Iraqi society?
SHADID: Well, I think you're going to see a rift develop regardless on that, because there are some very strong constituencies in this country that want to see Islam as the primary source of legislation. Now, the way some more secular people have described it is it's one of the sources of legislation. But just that change in phrasing is, has huge implications for the country.
Like you said, Bremer has signaled that he might not approve a constitution that has that, the wording of it being the primary source of legislation. But if you do see a confrontation developing between Islamic officials or Islamic authorities in Iraq, between the American administration, it probably won't go the American administration's way in the end.
HEMMER: Anthony Shadid, thanks, live in Baghdad with the "Washington Post."
Appreciate your thoughts and stay safe over there, OK?
And we shall talk again here on AMERICAN MORNING.
SHADID: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired February 17, 2004 - 08:16 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: From Iraq, as U.S. casualties mount, questions linger about how power can be handed over to the Iraqis come the 1st of July. One critical issue -- how to determine who could actually vote in a countrywide election.
Anthony Shadid of the "Washington Post" has written about one innovative form of democracy already present that he has observed in Iraq.
And Anthony is live for us from our bureau there in Baghdad.
Welcome back to AMERICAN MORNING.
Good to have you here.
I want to start, however, with an article today in your paper, in the "Washington Post," suggesting that members of the Iraqi Governing Council are also -- are running away, essentially, from the caucus plan by the U.S.
Why is that the case? Why is that plan losing its footing, Anthony?
ANTHONY SHADID, REPORTER, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Well, I think there's a sense among a lot of groups here in Iraq that the caucus plan is, in fact, dead; not only on the side of the Americans, but among constituencies here inside Iraq. I think the key element there is legitimacy. And there's a question that whether caucuses can deliver that necessary legitimacy to any body that's formed to take over power from the Americans on June 30th.
I don't think a lot of people see the caucuses as really viable in that regard. And so there's a search for alternatives. Is it elections? Is it giving power to the Governing Council, which is already in place? Expanding the Governing Council, trying to move elections up? There's a lot of talk about where it's going to go.
But it does -- it's almost -- it's very clear that there is going to be some kind of pretty dramatic change in how this transfer of power takes place.
HEMMER: When you mention the word legitimacy, are you reflecting on the idea of the caucus itself? Are you reflecting on the idea of the coalition authority and whether or not they have legitimacy in Iraq in the eyes of Iraqis?
SHADID: Right. I think it, yes, it's a good question. It's the body that takes over, whether that body has legitimacy. And I think there's a fear that if the Americans, if the coalition, if the U.S. administration is too involved in that process, it will deprive that body of legitimacy. That body will be seen as being too beholden to the American authorities here.
HEMMER: Anthony, let's go to the story you reported on recently in the "Washington Post" about food rations actually being used as voting cards southeast of Baghdad.
Explain to our viewers what you observed there.
SHADID: It's a, it was an ambitious experiment going on in this province. And, again, it's a province in the heart of the Shiite Muslim south. Over the past few months, the American administration there has been organizing elections in the 20 biggest cities in this province. And they've been using ration cards as the way to register voters, as a way of qualifying voters to take part in these elections.
Each family has two votes, one for a man, one for a woman. And so far they've done elections in about 11 of these cities, with plans to do them in 16 of the 20 biggest towns by next month.
Now, what's interesting about these elections is that ration cards is the exact mechanism that the senior religious leader here, Ayatollah Sistani, has urged as a way to hold elections. The Americans have so far dismissed that as a viable alternative. But what we've seen by the Americans on a much, you know, a much more local scale is they're doing that. They're actually carrying out this plan, far less ambitious, but also very effective in bringing about what they want, and that's legitimacy for these councils that are set up in the aftermath of that.
HEMMER: Who's winning the vote there? What type of person? And what role do women have that you've seen in the results?
SHADID: Yes, there's a great fear, I think, among a lot of people here, particularly more secular or Western oriented individuals that if you do have elections, you're going to see religious extremists take, you know, win these elections.
What they've seen in this province in the south is that's not been the case so far. We've seen more technocratic oriented people winning -- lawyers, engineers, doctors, teachers. Now, there is some evidence in the most recent elections that Islamic parties are getting more mobilized. But on the whole so far it's been what you might describe as a technocratic city council that's taken power.
Women was a big question early on. I think in the, for two elections in April, a total of three women voted, and that was seen as a big concern for the U.S. officials there. What they did was they changed the voting system to give each family two votes, one for a man, one for a woman. And they had a pretty dramatic change.
In the elections that followed, I think 65 women took part out of maybe 1,200 votes. The one after that it was 150 and the one after that it was 250. So you're seeing a pretty dramatic increase in the number of women taking part.
HEMMER: The suggestion in your answer is that religious extremists are not winning that vote, at least based on the voting that you observed.
Quickly, I want to get to one more point here. Paul Bremer yesterday said he would essentially veto any constitution that would establish Islam as the law of the land that will govern a future Iraq.
I'm not sure how the others are receiving that news, but how could the U.S. prevent that from happening, number one? And how do you do it in a way to prevent a rift developing in Iraqi society?
SHADID: Well, I think you're going to see a rift develop regardless on that, because there are some very strong constituencies in this country that want to see Islam as the primary source of legislation. Now, the way some more secular people have described it is it's one of the sources of legislation. But just that change in phrasing is, has huge implications for the country.
Like you said, Bremer has signaled that he might not approve a constitution that has that, the wording of it being the primary source of legislation. But if you do see a confrontation developing between Islamic officials or Islamic authorities in Iraq, between the American administration, it probably won't go the American administration's way in the end.
HEMMER: Anthony Shadid, thanks, live in Baghdad with the "Washington Post."
Appreciate your thoughts and stay safe over there, OK?
And we shall talk again here on AMERICAN MORNING.
SHADID: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
