• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
Will Alliances Among Iraqi Sectarian Parties Lead to Non-Sectarian Outcomes?

Source: Getty

Article

Will Alliances Among Iraqi Sectarian Parties Lead to Non-Sectarian Outcomes?

Some analysts have suggested that the 2010 elections are being contested on a non-sectarian basis, or a less sectarian basis than the 2005 elections. But party alliances are organized predominately on an ethnic or confessional basis.

Link Copied
By Marina Ottaway
Published on Nov 13, 2009

Some analysts have suggested that the 2010 elections are being contested on a non-sectarian basis, or at least a less sectarian basis than the 2005 elections. Indeed, the idea that confessionalism and sectarianism are decreasing in Iraq has been gaining acceptance since the 2009 provincial elections.

The reality is more complicated. It is true that all major electoral alliances—with the exception of the Kurdish one—include parties and individuals representing a variety of ethnic or confessional groups. But the parties that enter into those alliances are organized predominately on an ethnic or confessional basis. Furthermore, the so-called non-confessional alliances usually contain a dominant party or parties clearly identified with one group, plus a number of minor organizations with a different identity.

Thus, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s Rule of Law Coalition is dominated by Dawa, an important Shi’i organization, and a number of Sunni and Kurdish organizations that are much less well established in their respective communities. For example, Kurds in the Rule of Law coalition are not represented by a major organization, but by a rather obscure one that draws support mostly from the minority of Kurds who are Shi’a. Similarly, the Iraqi National Alliance, which includes all major Shi’i parties except Dawa, is also reaching out to other groups, but remains predominantly a Shi’i alliance.

So far, no alliance has emerged that brings together major Shi’i, Sunni, and Kurdish parties.

[T]here is a widespread expectation that the alliances now being formed will not survive after the elections.

There are two notable exceptions to this pattern of lopsided non-confessional alliances. Kurds are explicitly playing the ethnic card, and appealing to Kurdish voters; and the secular Iraqi National Movement has brought together well-known figures from both the Shi’i and the Sunni spectrum, including former prime minister Iyad Allawi, Iraqi Front for National Dialogue head Saleh al-Mutlaq, parliamentary speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, and Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi. Yet this seems an alliance of convenience by people dissatisfied with previous associations, rather than a new political grouping whose members share a common and lasting agenda.

That is why there is a widespread expectation that the alliances now being formed will not survive after the elections. Even if some do, it is difficult to see how uneasy groupings of organizations and individuals playing their disparate confessional cards can result in a non-sectarian outcome.

About the Author

Marina Ottaway

Former Senior Associate, Middle East Program

Before joining the Endowment, Ottaway carried out research in Africa and in the Middle East for many years and taught at the University of Addis Ababa, the University of Zambia, the American University in Cairo, and the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Reactions to the Syrian National Initiative

      Marina Ottaway, Omar Hossino

  • Article
    Slow Return to Normal Politics in Egypt

      Marina Ottaway

Marina Ottaway
Former Senior Associate, Middle East Program
Marina Ottaway
IraqPolitical ReformDemocracy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    China’s Rising Influence in the Middle East

    Transactional relationships are stable but can be shallow.

      • +1

      Paul Haenle, Maha Yahya, Benjamin Ho, …

  • Article
    The Many “One Chinas”: Multiple Approaches to Taiwan and China

    Beijing says that over 180 countries accept its “one China principle” regarding Taiwan, but the reality is more complicated.

      Chong Ja Ian

  • Commentary
    China’s Zero COVID Policy Is a Double-Edged Sword

    Beijing must choose between preserving its pandemic narrative or facing more unrest.

      Paul Haenle

  • Commentary
    What the Russian War in Ukraine Means for the Middle East

    It’s about managing oil prices, bread prices, and strategic partnerships.

      • +8

      Amr Hamzawy, Karim Sadjadpour, Aaron David Miller, …

  • Commentary
    Why U.S.-China Relations Are Locked in a Stalemate

    Three months after the Biden-Xi summit, the two sides’ divergent framings of the bilateral relationship are hindering progress.

      Paul Haenle, Sam Bresnick

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.