• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
Iraq: Movement Without Progress

Source: Getty

Article

Iraq: Movement Without Progress

Moqtada al-Sadr’s decision to support Nouri al-Maliki’s quest for a second term as Iraqi prime minister has given new impetus to negotiations over the formation of a new government but it has not solved any of the underlying obstacles preventing the creation of a politically viable government.

Link Copied
By Marina Ottaway and Danial Anas Kaysi
Published on Oct 18, 2010

The announcement on October 1 that Moqtada al-Sadr had decided to support Nouri al-Maliki’s quest for a second term as prime minister has given rise to expectations that Iraq is about to break the impasse that has prevented the formation of a new government for over six months. In reality, the expectations are premature. Sadr’s support makes it easier for Maliki to gain the numerical majority in parliament he needs to form a government, but is not sufficient to produce a politically viable alliance. The problem today is the same that has prevented the formation of a new government all along: a politically viable government needs the backing of Shi’i, Sunni, and Kurdish parties. Securing an agreement between Prime Minister Maliki and Iraqiya leader Awad Allawi, who has come to represent the Sunni vote, remains as difficult as ever. Furthermore, all major parties and coalitions are divided internally, with different factions issuing contradictory statements.

Although Maliki and his supporters in the State of Law coalition continue to express optimism that the formation of a government is imminent, other parties are skeptical. In particular, high-ranking representatives of the Islamic Supreme Council (ISCI) and the Kurdistan Alliance, Adel Abdul Mahdi and Roz Nouri Shaweis, respectively, have expressed their belief that a functioning government was still far from reach, with negotiations possibly extending into the new year. Both ISCI and the Kurdish Alliance are working toward the formation of a government that includes all major parties.

Since Sadr’s announcement that he will back Maliki, Iraqi politics has seen greater movement, although most developments remain confusing and inconclusive. Ayad Allawi, who stands little chance of becoming prime minister even if Maliki is defeated, does not want to give up completely: On October 12, Iraqiya’s spokesman Haidar Malla announced that Iraqiya would form a 130-seat alliance with ISCI, Fadilah, and the Center Alliance (newly formed by Tawafuq and the Unity Alliance of Iraq) in order to nominate Abdul Mahdi for the prime minister seat; two days later on October 14, Hani Ashour, Iraqiya’s media adviser contended instead that Allawi’s chances of becoming prime minister were rising once more.  Nonetheless, talks between Iraqiya and ISCI are continuing, and Abdul Mahdi himself and several Iraqiya members characterize the relationship between the two parties as one aiming to further an “advance project.” Given ISCI’s insistence on an inclusive government, the “advance project” would probably entail the formation of a government of national unity.

ISCI is adding another layer of ambiguity to the situation. While openly in talks with Iraqiya, opposing a second term for Maliki, and pushing instead the candidacy of Adel Abdul Mahdi, ISCI representatives stress that they remain part of the National Alliance between State of Law and the INA. Furthermore, the leadership of ISCI does not speak with a single voice. Abdul Mahdi sees himself as the likely next prime minister, while Ammar Al-Hakim has backed him but continues to stresses that ISCI will not stand in the way of any nominee who could achieve the required number of seats. ISCI leaders are unanimous about the necessity of forming an inclusive government, however. Another member of the INA, thus of the National Alliance, Fadilah, is also sending contradictory signals. It originally opposed Maliki’s nomination, then backtracked and is now vague about its support for or opposition to Maliki’s nomination.

The Kurdish parties are not committing to either side. Instead, they are playing hard ball, stressing that they will support any nominee who accepts their nineteen demands, which aim at strengthening the autonomy of the Kurdish region and holding the referendum in Kirkuk in the hope of annexing it to the Kurdish region.

The Kurdish parties are in serious negotiations with both State of Law and Iraqiya. They have set aside their long-standing suspicion of the Sunni nationalist elements in Iraqiya who in the past expressed their opposition to Kurdish autonomy and declared that the presidency, now held by PUK leader Jalal Talabani, must in the future go to an Arab. As a result, negotiations between Iraqiya and the Kurdish parties got off to a rocky start after the elections.

At present, Iraqiya leaders are going out of their way to show that they are supportive of the Kurds’ autonomy and of their nineteen demands. But Iraqiya is less forthcoming on the issue of the presidency, which some within the bloc would like to go a Sunni leader. According to Iraqi press reports, Iraqiya has even promised that the new government will implement Article 140 of the Constitution in return for the presidency, but Kurds are demanding both.

As a result, negotiations between Iraqiya and the Kurdish parties are proceeding slowly. Neither Iraqiya nor the Kurds appear to be speaking with a single voice. A meeting on October 13, for example, was lauded by both Iraqiya and some Kurdish leaders as positive, going beyond past exploratory talks to engage in detailed negotiations. But Kurdish spokesman Mahmoud Othman claimed instead that Iraqiya did not seem prepared to discuss Kurdish demands in detail and had requested the postponement of the discussion until a later date. Despite the continuing difficulties, talks continue because Iraqiya and Kurdish parties need each other. Iraqiya needs Kurdish support if it wants to form a government. The Kurds, in turn, cannot tackle many of the difficult issues concerning Kirkuk and other disputed areas without some cooperation from Iraqiya, which has the support of Arabs and Turkmen in the mixed areas on the border of Kurdistan.

The intense domestic bargaining among the parties has been accompanied by equally intense regional diplomacy. Maliki travelled to Syria in order to rekindle relations frozen since Maliki accused Damascus of being behind the Black Friday terrorist attacks in 2009. While in Syria, Maliki also signed an oil and gas “strategic agreement” with Syria involving the building of additional pipelines. Kurdish leader Mahmoud Othman was quick to accuse Maliki, who is head of a caretaker government, of overstepping his authority in signing international agreements.

Maliki’s trip to Damascus was notable because the prime minister had previously neglected ties with Arab countries. Visits by other leaders to Arab capitals also intensified after Sadr’s announcement, but such visits were not unusual. Ammar al-Hakim visited Syria and Egypt, for example, while Iraqiya representatives fanned out to Turkey, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt.

The United States, too, also became more involved in the process of government formation. A combination of impatience with lack of progress, the presence of a new, activist ambassador, and genuine dismay at the prospect that Moqtada Sadr may become an influential player in a new Maliki government has revitalized U.S. efforts. It remains unclear whether greater involvement will translate into greater influence.

Moqtada Sadr’s defection to the Maliki camp has given new impetus to negotiations in Iraq but it has not solved any of the underlying obstacles to a successful conclusion. As a result, Iraq is experiencing much movement, but little real progress.
 

About the Authors

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.

Danial Anas Kaysi

Authors

Marina Ottaway
Former Senior Associate, Middle East Program
Marina Ottaway
Danial Anas Kaysi
Middle EastIraqGulfPolitical Reform

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 Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Who Is Responsible for the Demise of the Russian Internet?

    The Russian state has opted for complete ideological control of the internet and is prepared to bear the associated costs.

      Maria Kolomychenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Is Opposition to Online Restrictions an Inflection Point for the Russian Regime?

    After four years of war, there is no one who can stand up to the security establishment, and President Vladimir Putin is increasingly passive. 

      Tatiana Stanovaya

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Is Frustration With Armenia’s Pashinyan Enough to Bring the Pro-Russia Opposition to Power?

    It’s true that many Armenians would vote for anyone just to be rid of Pashinyan, whom they blame for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, but the pro-Russia opposition is unlikely to be able to channel that frustration into an electoral victory.

      Mikayel Zolyan

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Afghanistan–Pakistan War Poses Awkward Questions for Russia

    Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.

      Ruslan Suleymanov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?

    The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.

      Bashir Kitachaev

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