« Black Globalization and Small Wars | Main | Discussion: Media, Communications and Technology in the Age of the Blogger »

October 14, 2005

Live-blogging the Iraqi Constitutional Referendum

10:47am: Well, thus endeth the live-blogging. I'll be checking news throughout the rest of the day, especially looking for regional reaction or analytical follow-up. But for now, I'm ungluing myself from this screen. Thanks to all who stopped by! Here's two final links, via RealClearPolitics: Toward a new Iraq from the Washington Times, and Consensus and Iraq's constitution from the LA Times.

10:42am: Iraq vote holds interest for Iran

10:30am: What's Next for Iraq After Referendum: this is a pretty good piece:

IF CONSTITUTION IS APPROVED: Iraqis will choose new parliament in national elections to be held by Dec. 15. Parliament will then select new government, which must take office by Dec. 31. New administration will be first permanent, fully constitutional government in Iraq since collapse of Saddam Hussein's rule in 2003. Sunni Arabs have been promised they can propose constitutional amendments in first four months of new parliament. Amendments would need two-thirds approval in parliament and gain voter support in referendum.

---

IF THE CONSTITUTION IS DEFEATED: Parliament dissolves, but the mid-December elections go ahead as planned. New parliament must draft another constitution within a year and present it to voters in second referendum. Interim constitution approved in March 2004 would continue as legal foundation for governing Iraq.

10:17am: One thing I'm looking for now: regional reaction.

10:08am: US captures Al Qaeda disguise expert in Iraq. Looks like we not only killed Abu Azzam a few weeks back, but we also got enough intel from the op to find his chief disguise-maker. This is the whole article:

United States forces say they have captured two senior Al Qaeda members in Iraq, including a man known as "The Barber", who helped top extremists evade detention by transforming their appearances.

Walid Muhammad Farhan Juwar al Zubaydi, also known as Firas, Abu Ziyad, and "The Barber" was seized in a Baghdad raid on September 24 by US-led multinational forces acting on a tip, the statement said.

Also captured was Ibrahim Muhammad Subhi Khayri al-Rihawi, commonly known as "Abu Khalil".

The former performed duties including "altering senior Al Qaeda in Iraq members' appearances by dying hair colour, altering hairstyles and changing facial hair in their efforts to evade capture".

Abu Khalil was described as "a close associate of Abu Azzam, [who] served as an executive assistant for the terrorist emir.

"He also acted as a banker for Azzam and stored the terrorist organisations funds so they would not be confiscated should Abu Azzam be killed or captured."

Azzam, considered second in command to Al Qaeda's frontman in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was killed in a raid in September.

Interesting that this would be released today, after the polls close, according to Google News. I wonder if the captured bad guys are foreigners? Two senior foreign terrorists captured, right while the Iraqis are digesting their experiences of the day. I don't know that they are foreigners, so hard to tell. But here's something I wrote back in September,when I thought the vote-counting would take longer than is expected:

In the meantime, while the votes are counted, coalition offensives will continue in Anbar and along the Syrian border. The Sunni electorate will ponder the outcome of their enfranchisement while the sounds of battle are echoing outside their doors. The chiaroscuro-like choice of blood or compromise will cleave their very souls.

Perhaps a similar effect is meant to be induced by the release of this news about the terrorists today.

9:56am: More photos: Terrorism Unveiled. Intrade still have a value of 90 on their constitution contract, but I'm not sure the exchange has been open since I did my first post yesterday afternoon [scroll to the bottom]. I know they're in Ireland, but I don't know their hours.

9:53am: Both IRAQ THE MODEL and Sooni have photos of the polling. If anyone sees more on other blogs, let me know. Photos are fun.

9:43am: Iraq Elections newswire is a blog that aggregates news about the vote in one place. Worth a visit. Looks like some follow-up/what-does-it-all-mean stories are starting to roll in around the world. Here's the take form a Bangkhok newspaper.

9:41am:, US Central: So there I was, sleeping like a baby, when with a start, I awoke, for some inexplicable reason. I couldn't put my finger on it, but knew something was up. Now I discover what it is . . .

Welcome Instapundit readers!

3:59am: I'm going to end my coverage for now and catch some z's. I'll do a follow-up in the morning. Here's a really cool presentation from the January vote, for a good flashback:

http://adamkeiper.blogs.com/comparevideo/files/Iraq_Election_HiRes.wmv

3:50am: USAToday has a decent article up now: Historic vote on referendum begins in Iraq:

Militants attacked three of the capital's 1,200 polling stations, wounding two policemen and a civilian, but Iraq was mostly peaceful . . .

In the south, the heartland of Iraq's Shiite majority, lines formed at polling stations in Basra, Hillah and other major cities as people poured in to vote on a constitution Shiite leaders have strongly supported . . .

But turnout appeared low in the early hours in Sunni Arab towns in the center and west.

Ramadi, the capital of overwhelmingly Sunni Arab Anbar province, looked like a ghost town. At the hour polls opened, insurgents clashed with U.S. troops in the downtown streets.

Only about 20 people had voted in the Sunni town of Haditha, northwest of Baghdad, after three hours . . .

The situation at polling stations across Iraq varied widely.

In the central Baghdad area of Khulani, where Sunnis and Shiites both live, a steady stream of voters entered a large polling station. All voters were searched three times before entering the building, including old men and women who could barely walk with canes, and young mothers wearing chadors and carrying infants.

"I am an Iraqi citizen. Of course, I voted 'yes,'" said Abid Ali Hussein, an elderly man with a white beard, as he left the area. "God willing, there will be no terrorism."

In the mostly Shiite city of Hillah, about 60 miles south of Baghdad, lines quickly formed. Some voters carried Iraqi flags and banners saying, "Yes to the constitution." Iraqi police guarding the streets and imams at local mosques both used loudspeakers to urge Hillah residents to cast ballots.

But Haditha — a mostly Sunni Arab city 140 miles northwest of Baghdad, where a large U.S. offensive was just fought against insurgents — showed much less enthusiasm.

Other than soldiers and polling station workers, no one showed up to vote in the first 90 minutes of voting. One reason was that residents had only be told of the polling site locations minutes beforehand.

Just after dawn U.S. Humvees roamed the streets, blaring the location of two polling sites in the city. The locations were kept hidden until the last minute to prevent insurgent attacks.

"I voted 'no' because the new government says if there is trouble in the future, Iraq could be split. I say there should be one nation," said voter Obeidi Amir Nasser, 30 . . .

In Fallujah, the mostly Sunni city west of Baghdad that was heavily damaged by a U.S. offensive against insurgents in 2004, hundreds of Iraqis gathered in front of many polling centers chanting: "No, no for the constitution. Yes, yes for Iraq."

3:07am: Here's a great article on General Petraeus and the Iraqi Security Forces: A Soldier's Story: "The Iraqis are in the fight," says Gen. David Patraeus.

3:00am: BBC is about to have something . . . constitution is "crucial" to the future of Iraq . . . three attacks in Baghdad injuring three people . . . polling stations protected with blast shields and rolls of barbed wire . . . electricity has now been restored to many areas after yesterday's power cut. The anchor mentioned three attacks in Baghdad, but the guy on the ground there only mentioned one in the city.

2:57am: The BBC is not doing anything on the voting. Right now there's an in-depth interview with a Nigerian folk singer. I kid you not. Perhaps the top of the hour will bring something. Polls have been open for four hours now. Certainly a blurb or two.

2:52am: An Alert Reader points to this article: Constitution Is Put Before a Divided Iraq.

"I expect good things for the people for this constitution," said Zahra Khnif after voting in a Shiite district of the capital. "It will bring peace and stability."

In the northern city of Kirkuk, Hamid Abdul Jabbar, a 35-year-old Sunni, said he voted against the charter. "It does not represent the Iraqi Sunnis," he said. "It will lead to the division of Iraq."

President Jalal Talabani and Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari were among the first to vote in Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone, headquarters of a government elected in January and led by a coalition of Shiites and Kurds. Both had urged a "yes" vote.

Many of those casting early ballots voiced enthusiasm over Iraq's second nationwide vote since the ouster of President Saddam Hussein 2 1/2 years ago. Amar Sadhel Kifajy, a Shiite voter in Baghdad, called it a festive occasion, "like a wedding celebration."

"I made sure my whole family came with me, even though they are fasting for Ramadan," Nassera Abaas, a 60-year-old housewife, said amid a heavy turnout in Baghdad's heavily Shiite district of Sadr City. "It's important to taste the freedom we were deprived of for so long."

Sunnis were divided on the charter but turned out in significant numbers in Samarra, Fallouja and other cities that heavily boycotted the January election.

Ahmed Mohammad Mahmoud, a 30-year-old electronics engineer in Samarra, said Shiite leaders who helped shape the document were intent on creating an autonomous pro-Iranian Shiite mini-state in southern Iraq that would "hand Iraq to the Iranians on a gold platter."

"This constitution is for the people who wrote it, not for us," Mohammed Kadhim, a 50-year-old high school teacher, said after voting in Fallouja.

But Mohammed Aboudi, a 38-year-old Sunni in Baghdad, voted for the charter, saying it would lead the country to a more stable democracy, undermine the insurgency and "build a clear future, free of occupation" by U.S. troops.

Sounds like the reporter did a fair job there of getting some differing views. We'll see what happens!

2:48am: I just muted the TV, which has had zip about the voting, and turned on the local NPR affiliate, which carries BBC news at this hour of the night. So perhaps something will come over the transom there.

2:46am: I just used the new Google Blog Search feature to search for some other blogs covering the constitution and this is what I got: Google Blog Search: Iraqi Constitution. Check 'em out!

2:39am: Strategypage also has a blurb on the material aspects of the negotiations among the various factions in Iraq. They aren't exactly the sprited debates about the natural rights of man, or the nature of sovereignty, that one might expect:

Many Iraqi Sunni Arabs are willing to accept democracy, as long as they have a fair shot at government jobs, and a share of the oil. The current negotiations with various Sunni Arab groups (some of them actively supporting violence against the government) have come down to how many Sunni Arabs get prosecuted for their Saddam era crimes (murder and torture, for the most part, but all massive theft of private and public assets), how many former Baath Party members are banned from government jobs for life, and how the oil revenue is shared.

When many of the parties to the negotiation are the criminal henchman of a ruthless dictator, I suppose this is what it all comes down to.

2:34am: Little more than a headline, but worth mentioning anyway: Iraqi Sunni Cabinet minister says he expects constitution to be defeated:

4 October 2005 (AP Worldstream) -- Iraq's industry minister, one of his country's top Sunni Arabs, predicted Friday that voters at this weekend's historic referendum will reject the draft constitution despite amendments designed to win Sunni Arab support.

That's the whole article. Note that it's from yesterday.

2:31am: Strategypage reports on Arresting Dirty Politicians in Iraq.

While nailing bureaucrats for stealing money may be common in the United States, it is very, very rare in the Middle East. And that’s one of the main reasons al Qaeda came to be. This Islamic terrorist organization first tried to clean up it’s own back yard. Failing at that, they decided to blame it on the West and go after this new enemy. But now, al Qaeda fans (the few that are left after so many Arab civilians have been killed by suicide bombers) are faced with the fact that the Americans have also brought with them the concept of honest government, and accountability for those who run the government. A really radical development this is, at least for the Middle East.

2:26am: Here's an opinion piece in the Egyptian newsmagazine Al-Ahram. No significant new insights there that I can see.

1:52am: An Alert Reader pointed out these stories in the comments, but here's the first link I've found: Insurgents launch several attacks in Iraq:

A roadside bomb exploded near a polling station in western Baghdad on Saturday morning as it opened for voting in Iraq's constitutional referendum, and one policeman was wounded, police said. No citizens were injured.

The explosion occurred just as the heavily guarded center was opening at 7 a.m., and no voters were there yet, said police Lt. Mohammed Kheyon.

Violence also was reported in Ramadi, 70 miles west of Baghdad, and near the southern city of Basra city, police said.

In Ramadi, fighting erupted at about 7 a.m. between a small group of insurgents and U.S. troops patrolling the mostly empty streets of the city, said police 1st. Lt. Mohammed Al-Obaidi. It was not immediately clear if anyone was wounded in the fighting.

South of Basra, three armed men attacked an empty polling station at 3 a.m. and were caught and arrested, said police Capt. Mushtaq Kadim.

Sunni-led insurgents had vowed to wreck the referendum taking place Saturday at about 6,000 polling stations across Iraq. In the 19 days before the voting began, nearly 450 people were killed by insurgents using suicide car bombs, roadside bombs and drive-by shootings.

Doesn't seem very impressive from a terrorism standpoint. One bomb in Baghdad, a firefight in Ramadi, three guys storm an empty polling station in Basra. The last one has a comical aspect, no? Are the terrorists so dense that they thought voters might be there at 3am? As always, the devil is in the details, and we just don't have any, so it's hard to say, but man, that has Animal House written all over it.

1:42am: Opinionjournal has a new piece up: The New Politics of Iraq: Progress in Baghdad belies pessimism in Washington. Here's a takeaway:

Millions of Iraqis will risk their lives today to endorse their new constitution, but it's a measure of American defeatism that the vote is already being dismissed in many quarters as a mirage on the road to inevitable civil war. On the contrary, we'd say the vote is further evidence that the Iraq mission still has every chance of succeeding.

1:09am: Curious to know what the Left is writing about the referendum, I just moseyed over to Daily Kos: The Divide on the Iraq Constitution. Sigh. As always, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Here's some National Review articles:
Founding Freedoms: The promise and perils of Iraq’s constitution:

Still, those of us who work to defend religious freedom internationally are deeply troubled by the soon-to-be adopted constitution. We are concerned that it may be the first step in creating what is called an “illiberal democracy,” or even in undermining democracy altogether. We fear the powerful role given to Islam in the constitution — a role that is likely to negate the positive language on religious freedom and other individual human rights.

The new constitution fails to guarantee the fundamental human rights and freedoms contained in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and that are consistent with America’s core values and President Bush’s articulated foreign-policy goals.

Political Progress
Constitutional flexibility is a good sign for democracy in Iraq. This one is written by Roman Martinez, who recently served as a political adviser to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad, and as director for Iraq at the National Security Council.

With only a majority vote needed to revise the charter, the Sunnis have a real vehicle for making changes to the document.

In this sense, the agreement gives the Sunni community a chance at redemption for its boycott mistake last January. Having long argued that federalism is unpopular among ordinary Iraqis, they can now take their case directly to the people.

This raises the significance of the upcoming December parliamentary elections. In order to take advantage of the constitution's flexibility, the Sunnis will need to garner as many seats as possible. Political organization, campaigning, and a high voter turnout on election day are now at the core of the Sunni community's political self-interest. This is a sea change from last January — and a breakthrough with great potential to undermine the insurgency, which rightly sees widespread Sunni political participation as a vital threat to its own existence.

To help their chances in December, Sunnis will need to organize parties and build strong coalitions that cut across sectarian divisions. Ideally, these alliances will reach out to Shia leaders who share Sunni concerns on key issues such as federalism. Over time, such cross-sectarian partnerships will foster the emergence of an Iraqi political system based more on issues and ideas, and less on identity.

Not everyone agrees that constitutional flexibility is a good thing. Ever since the initial draft was made public, critics have argued that by deferring difficult questions to the future, the charter fails to fully meet Iraq's political needs. No doubt these complaints will intensify with this week's deal, which leaves the constitution even more open to amendment than before.

In fact, Iraq's status as a fragile, emerging democracy makes a flexible approach especially worthwhile. The new charter can promote stability and order, yet without setting every decision permanently into stone. Constitutional flexibility will actually strengthen democracy, by allowing internal debate to ripen and reflect the broadest diversity of views. Most importantly, of course, it will speed along the Sunni community's gradual integration into Iraq's new democratic order.

For all its historic significance, then, Saturday's referendum will not mark the last word in Iraq's political evolution. Once the new constitution passes, the Iraqi political debate will only just be starting to heat up.

Democracy Spreads
Is the world on the cusp of a fourth wave of democratization?

While the number of electoral democracies worldwide has been stalled at about 120, there are reasons to think that a fourth wave of democratization is coming.

The third wave was characterized by the collapse of authoritarian regimes in Latin America, the breakdown of totalitarian states in Europe, and the insistence on democratic reforms in many parts of the world. There are now more democracies on earth than ever before. Freedom is an everyday reality for 2.8 billion people (44 percent of the world's population). An additional 1.2 billion people are considered only partly free because their rights are undermined by conflict, authoritarianism, and/or corruption. Since the publication of Huntington's classic work in 1991, not fewer than 40 governments have undertaken the transition to democracy.

When the third wave began 30 years ago, it was not immediately clear that the Portuguese revolution would mark democracy's rise. However, in 1974, it was not possible to consider Portugal transitioning to democracy, because the outcome was uncertain. Civil protests were critical to the transition. Are we seeing the beginnings of this in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Lebanon, Iran, Kuwait, Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan?

This begs the question of whether or not we can ever know if a country is in transition until the smoke has cleared. Will the Kuwaiti women that earned voting rights this year result in a cultural and political revolution in the Gulf countries? Will the contested election in Egypt last month give rise to multiparty democracies in North Africa? While it isn't possible to answer yes to these questions yet, there are reasons to be optimistic. Afghans just went to the polls to affirm their human rights by selecting a parliament. Iraqis are determining their constitutional principles today. Afghans and Iraqis are riding this fourth wave of democratization.

12:55am: What will happen? Will the Sunni's be upset that they voted and didn't get their way? Will there be more violence? Will the Iraqis ever straighten things out? Can't the US just come home? I think now is a good time to read again some words of Tony Blair, speaking to the US Congress in July of 2003:

We are fighting for the inalienable right of humankind--black or white, Christian or not, left, right or a million different--to be free, free to raise a family in love and hope, free to earn a living and be rewarded by your efforts, free not to bend your knee to any man in fear, free to be you so long as being you does not impair the freedom of others.

That's what we're fighting for. And it's a battle worth fighting.

And I know it's hard on America, and in some small corner of this vast country, out in Nevada or Idaho or these places I've never been to, but always wanted to go...

I know out there there's a guy getting on with his life, perfectly happily, minding his own business, saying to you, the political leaders of this country, "Why me? And why us? And why America?"

And the only answer is, "Because destiny put you in this place in history, in this moment in time, and the task is yours to do."

And our job, my nation that watched you grow, that you fought alongside and now fights alongside you, that takes enormous pride in our alliance and great affection in our common bond, our job is to be there with you.

You are not going to be alone. We will be with you in this fight for liberty.

We will be with you in this fight for liberty. And if our spirit is right and our courage firm, the world will be with us.

12:48am: Another interesting point in the Gerecht article below (this one) is that all of the proceedings of the Iraqi National Assembly should be broadcast in a CSPAN-like forum in the region. I think that's a great idea. No idea if anything like it is already happening.

12:40am: Took a short break. Back now. Here are some others who are live-blogging:
Bareknucklepolitics.com
The Indepundit

11:40pm: The Iraq Index of the Brookings Institution [pdf] shows that US combat deaths in the month of October as of the 10th stood at 21. Last year it was at 56 for the whole month, if I read the chart right (on page 4). So it looks like not a significant drop, compared to July, August, and September, which did see drops.

11:25pm: The blood is the life, Mr Rumsfeld! is an article in the Asia Times which I've just skimmed. It discusses the death-cult like aspects of Shia Islam and comes to this conclusion:

Iraq's proposed federal constitution will be defeated in the October 15 referendum, not only because the Sunni minority rejects an arrangement that encourages rule by the Shi'ite majority, but because Shi'ite radicals led by Muqtada al-Sadr repudiate the pro-constitution Shi'ite establishment headed by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. Intra-confessional strife among Shi'ites represents a nastier obstacle to constitutional democracy than the Sunni insurgency.

I like to check the Asia Times every now and then because it seems to have sort of one-off opinions like this that really can't be pinned down to the normal left-right divide in the US. Not sure what to make of this, but it is certainly interesting. On a similar note, Steven Vincent, the late American writer who traveled to Iraq on his own dime, has a chapter in his book, "In the Red Zone" [see the link in the sidebar] discussing his own impressions of Shi'ism during the Ashura festival, and he also comes to the death-cult conclusion.

11:17pm: An Alert Reader points out Iraqis practice art of deception, an article which is pretty interesting.

11:06pm: Here's an article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer discussing some of the details of the vote. Excerpt:

RESULTS: Full returns are not expected by Saturday night, although some partial and unofficial figures may be released. Final results are expected within two to four days, depending on appeals or security problems preventing paperwork from reaching Baghdad.

Well that's certainly an improvement from January, if memory serves . . .

UPDATE: An Alert Reader asks in a comment if exiles are allowed to vote this time around. The article above says no, but doesn't say why.

11:03pm: Tallyho! The polls are open!

Fox just had a blurb from an Army colonel it noted as a "Coalition Operations Chief" who said that attacks were down 1/3 from the January election. Not sure if he meant in general, or just related to polling.

10:57pm: Aaron is talking to Christiane again on CNN. She says it is a simple ballot with a yes or no on it. As she shoots the bull with Aaron, the cameras show what I think is Jalal Talabani voting in Baghdad. Now they are talking again and saying little that is new to blog readers. Amanpour is discounting the vote per se, and playing up the necessity of "legitimacy" being the outcome of this poll.

Fox now has a headline piece, which is just that, no big insight.

If the ballot is as simple as Christiane says, then it seems that it shouldn't take too long to count them. Actually, thinking a bit more, the real thing that took so long for the results of the last election wasn't counting the ballots, though that took some time, but forming the government, which seemed to take forever. Perhaps we'll have the results much faster this time around.

10:52pm: I just returned to the article Birth of a Democracy by Reuel Marc Gerecht in the Weekly Standard in February. He always has an interesting perspective and this caught me this time:

* First, contrary to the rising chorus of Democratic commentary on the Iraqi elections, Iran was the biggest loser last Sunday. The United Iraqi Alliance, which seems certain to capture the lion's share of the vote, is not at all "pro-Iranian." Neither is it any less "pro-American" than Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's al-Iraqiyya list . . . A better way to describe the United Iraqi Alliance, if it lasts, is as Iran's worst nightmare. It surely will cause the clerical regime enormous pain as the Iraqis within it, especially those who were once dependent on Iranian aid, continue to distance themselves ever further from Tehran. Primary point to remember: Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who is now certainly the most senior Shiite cleric in both Iraq and Iran, who is of Iranian birth and early education, has embraced a democratic political creed that is anathema to the ruling mullahs of Tehran. Ali Khamenei, Iran's senior political cleric, is in a real pickle since he cannot openly challenge Sistani and his embrace of democracy. Iran's relations with the new Iraq would cease to exist. Also, the repercussions inside the Iranian clerical system would not be healthy. Sistani is the last of the truly great transnational Shiite clerics, and his following inside Iran, particularly since he has so publicly backed a democratic franchise, which if it were applied in Iran would shatter clerical power, should not be underestimated. Sistani and his men know very well that the political game they play in Iraq will have repercussions throughout the Arab world and Iran. He and his men are not rash, but there will be no tears shed on their side if Iraq's political advancement convulses those clerics in Iran who believe in theocracy.

10:40pm: An Alert Reader notes this article: Bomb-scarred people of Hilla wary before Iraq vote. Excerpt:

HILLA, Iraq (Reuters) - Residents of Hilla, where a suicide car bomber demolished a mosque last week killing 25 people, are afraid but determined to vote in Iraq's constitutional referendum, their mayor said on Friday.

"Everybody knows that freedom has a very expensive cost and sometimes that cost is blood," Imad Lefta told Reuters on the eve of a ballot that that has exposed deep divisions between Iraq's Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurdish communities.

"It was just the same in the United States when they had a civil war and they had their own problems and conflicts until they were able to set up a democratic country."

I've been to Hilla and it is quite a bustling little city. Adjacent to the Euphrates, it has rather more vegetation than lots of the other cities around, but this green is overshadowed by the ruins of ancient Babylon nearby, where Alexander died, and one of Saddam's palaces, which protrudes from a very high point of ground outside the city. Hilla has seen a lot of history and today is no exception. Polls open in 15 minutes.

10:23pm: Finally, CNN has a story. Aaron Brown is intoning right now. Christiane Amanpour (hooray! just kidding) is in Baghdad. UPDATE: Brown said he'd return to her later in the hour and asked her to think about how the country has changed since she covered the January election.

10:18pm: Perhaps this explains why we aren't hearing as much voting news as in January.

10:11pm: I received a report from StratFor earlier this week about Iraq. Here's an excerpt:

Some Sunni leaders have opposed any agreement or participation in the constitutional referendum; others have supported participation with a "no" vote. What appears to have been crafted between the Shia and negotiating Sunni groups is this:

If the constitution is approved, it will be a temporary, not permanent, constitution.

After a general election on Dec. 15 that would be based on this constitution, a committee of the National Assembly would review the document once again.

The new parliament would have four months to complete changes to the document.

A new vote would be held to ratify that final constitution.

In other words, the agreement that has been reached here between the Sunnis, Shia and Kurds is simply that all sides will focus on the constitutional negotiations.

9:43pm: I've learned that polls open at approximately 11pm US Central time.

8:57pm: An Alert Reader sends a link to Multi-National Force-Iraq: Democracy in Action, noting that it may have some news. I'll keep an eye on it.

The same reader asks if I'll be up all night. I'll be up as long as there's new news coming in. Right now, things look a bit thin on that front.

Well, off to plumb the depths of the Early Bird for some new stuff.

8:36pm: Here's another description of the Iraqi Army that you should check out.

8:32pm: Retired Major General Robert Scales, has a piece in the Washington Times describing the emerging Iraqi Army:

soldiers know that the effectiveness of a fighting force is better measured by intangibles such as courage, will to win, skill at arms, leadership, cohesion and allegiance to a higher cause. These are factors that media amateurs and Washington insiders have difficulty comprehending.
We visited the Iraqi 9th Mechanized Division located in Taji a few miles north of Baghdad in one of the hottest and most contested regions of Iraq. The unit was activated last October and has yet to form completely. It is commanded by Gen. Bashar, a thirty-year veteran and, like many patriotic, innovative and self-reliant officers, a victim of Saddam Hussein's brutality. The general created the division by calling up many of his old regular-army comrades. Three quarters are veterans who have been recruited from every province and ethnicity in Iraq. The division's motto is, appropriately, "Iraq first." Gen. Bashar built his division from a junkyard. In less than a year his soldiers picked through acres of destroyed Soviet tanks and armored personnel carriers to patch together a fleet of over 200 operational fighting vehicles.

8:13pm: As always, Iraq the Model has interesting stuff:

People on the street, TV and radio are all talking about the coming historic event while papers went on hiatus since yesterday but many of them published the document on Wednesday to ensure that more people get to read it. Although the distribution didn’t go perfectly, I doubt there are many who didn’t get the chance to take a look as the document was published many times on different outlets including websites and there were many discussions on TV where articles were discusses thoroughly. Add to this the thousands of workshops and lectures organized by NGOs. So I think it’s fair to say that only those who weren’t interested in the subject would say that they didn’t have the chance to read the document . . .

I am so excited but a flashback from Saddam’s referendum three years ago still hurts; he wanted a 100% as the 99.96% of the previous one shocked the dictator. I was depressed that way and I decided not to go to the voting office and so did the rest of the family but my father was afraid that not going could be dangerous.
He said that maybe one member of the family could go alone and cast votes for the rest of us. We looked at each other thinking who’s going to volunteer to do this ugly job to protect the family. At that moment my father said “it was my generation that caused the misery we’re living in so I’m the one who should do this”.

I couldn’t stop him and I couldn’t utter a word but I felt sad for him; his sacrifice was big and I had teary eyes when I watched him taking our papers and heading out.

It is different this time father, no more 100% and a ‘no’ would make me happy just like a ’yes’ would do and no one ever will force us to do something against our will anymore.

8:07pm: The cable news coverage of the referendum seems underwhelming. in fact, it seems non-existent. If my math is right, then the polls should be opening in 4 or 5 hours, but Hannity and Colmes are screaming about Scott McClellan right now. O'Reilly just did a piece with Geraldo about Aruba. I guess I'll switch to some other channels and check them out. I was afraid of this. Not enough bodies in January's vote means fewer reporters around for this one.

7:55pm: Here's another Jazeera piece, Iraq's charter: A divisive framework? which says the opposite: that the constitution will actually split the country, and predictably, that this has been the agenda of the US the entire time. Seems like there'd be easier ways to do it, if that's what we wanted, but hey, that's just me.

7:49pm: Iraq's federalism ensures justice is an opinion piece on Al Jazeera advocating federalism, but not explicitly endorsing the constitution. It also carries the disclaimer that the author doesn't necessarily speak for Al Jazeera, which seems strange for an opinion piece. Here's an excerpt:

Federalism represents a guarantee against the return of authoritarian regimes and suppression by centralised government. This could be achieved through establishing a stable democratic government.

Federalism should not be the victim of the fear that it is somehow breaking up the country. That would be legitimate if there was the will for division but that would not be imposed under a democratic system which believes in multi-party rule and peaceful rotation of power.

We could turn the tables and say that centralised rule is what will eventually break Iraq up?

The call for federalism in southern Iraq is not sectarian. We believe in seeking the opportunity to achieve justice in wealth distribution and fairness in all aspects of life.

The constitution must stipulate that federalism is an adopted system in Iraq. We are against the view that says only Kurds should enjoy a federal province just because they are a special case.

Federalism must be secured for all Iraq. Even if it is not applied on the ground right now, the constitution must say clearly that federalism is to be adopted for the sake of Iraq’s future.

7:44pm: Fred Kaplan at Slate, who recommended that the Iraqis not approve the constitution not long ago, now says, Perhaps the Iraqi Constitution has a chance of success, after all, because of the last-minute deal announced this week.

7:30 pm: Here's an AP-translation of the constitution: TEXT OF THE DRAFT IRAQI CONSTITUTION.

7:08 pm: Well that was a slightly longer station break than I would have preferred. Back now.

1:26pm, US Central: Folks, I'll be kicking the coverage tonight as the Iraqis go to the polls.

All week, I've kept an eye on the futures market:

Intrade [Go to the homepage and click "Markets" then do a search for Iraq] has this contract:

The ratification of the Iraq Constitution by October 31st 2005.

The price has fluctuated a bit this week to say the least. These contracts are priced between 0 and 100. A lower price means people think the event will have a negative outcome (the constitution doesn't pass). A higher price means people think the event will have a positive outcome (it passes). Earlier this week, the price was around 70, but then it surged up to the low nineties after the deal with the Sunnis on amendments was announced. Now it's settled a bit, and the last trade was at 90 even as I type. So there is extremely high sentiment from a prediction market standpoint, that the constitution will pass.

I'll be writing more throughout the afternoon and evening!

Posted by Chester at October 14, 2005 1:21 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theadventuresofchester.com/MT/mt-tb.cgi/765

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Live-blogging the Iraqi Constitutional Referendum:

» Good Luck, Iraq from Purple States
  Good Luck and Godspeed, Iraq!  Just wanted to wish Iraq a safe and successful vote on their Constitution, which will be beginning in a few minutes.  This may very well be one of those grand moments in history that... [Read More]

Tracked on October 14, 2005 11:00 PM

» Iraqi Constitutional Referendum voting begins from In the Bullpen
History in the making as the polls for the Iraqi Constitutional Referendum open… ... [Read More]

Tracked on October 14, 2005 11:23 PM

» Iraq Votes. . . from JasonColeman.com
BareKnucklePolitics and TheAdventuresofChester are live-blogging the Iraq Constitution Voting today. --Jason... [Read More]

Tracked on October 15, 2005 12:39 AM

» Blackout, Attacks Before Iraq Vote from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
Insurgents sabotaged power lines, plunging the Iraqi capital into darkness, and Sunni insurgents lau [Read More]

Tracked on October 15, 2005 5:13 AM

» Iraqi Voting On Constitution Today from Iowa Voice
Today begins an historic day for Iraqi citizens: the vote on a permanent Constitution. Omar at Iraq The Model is photoblogging and doing some updates here. Chester is liveblogging the election. BareKnucklePolitics is also liveblogging. Inde [Read More]

Tracked on October 15, 2005 8:10 AM

» Voting on the new Constitution from Cao's Blog
Iraqis are voting on their Constitution. Mohammed at Iraq the Model: It’s only a beginning since there will be more steps to go but it’s the right beginning because it’s a transition from temporary laws to a permanent-though amendable-const... [Read More]

Tracked on October 15, 2005 10:18 AM

» Conference Report #2 from The Adventures of Chester
[I'm going to write a little at a time about the recent Media, Communications & Technology in the Age of the Blogger conference. So, a post here and there about it over the next few days -- with two caveats:... [Read More]

Tracked on October 27, 2005 11:37 PM

» nightmare before christmas from nightmare before christmas
nightmare before christmas [Read More]

Tracked on November 4, 2005 4:21 AM

» artificial christmas tree from artificial christmas tree
artificial christmas tree [Read More]

Tracked on November 6, 2005 8:02 AM

Comments

Posted by: chthus at October 14, 2005 10:13 PM

Posted by: chthus at October 14, 2005 10:47 PM

Posted by: Taylor Gilbert at October 14, 2005 10:56 PM

Posted by: chthus at October 14, 2005 11:12 PM

Posted by: Taylor Gilbert at October 14, 2005 11:20 PM

Posted by: Taylor Gilbert at October 14, 2005 11:26 PM

Posted by: Taylor Gilbert at October 14, 2005 11:49 PM

Posted by: Tom Villars at October 15, 2005 12:02 AM

Posted by: Nicholas at October 15, 2005 12:21 AM

Posted by: Chester at October 15, 2005 12:40 AM

Posted by: chthus at October 15, 2005 1:29 AM

Posted by: Nicholas at October 15, 2005 1:55 AM

Posted by: chthus at October 15, 2005 2:40 AM

Posted by: chthus at October 15, 2005 2:46 AM

Posted by: chthus at October 15, 2005 3:01 AM

Posted by: chthus at October 15, 2005 3:18 AM

Posted by: chthus at October 15, 2005 3:25 AM

Posted by: chthus at October 15, 2005 3:58 AM

Posted by: Taylor Gilbert at October 15, 2005 10:53 AM

Posted by: Dave Dilegge at October 15, 2005 7:28 PM

Posted by: Ledger at October 16, 2005 12:04 AM