Display: Sort:
Benn and the Euston Manifesto | 72 comments (72 topical)

Re: Benn and the Euston Manifesto (#37)

by Glass House on Thu May 17, 2007 at 05:26:26 PM GMT

You're completely wrong - elections didn't happen under the Iraqi Governing Council as you suggest.

Elections for the constitutional convention happened under the Iraqi Interim Government (which had FULL sovereignty recognised by the US and the UN). After the Constitutional Convention elections, sovereignty passed to the Iraqi Transitional government (which was made up of those elected to the constitutional election).

Then, once the ITG had written the constitution, elections were held to elect representatives to the new government (under the constitution written by Iraqis)

If you read around the subject, NO elections were held under US sovereignty or jurisdiction. And the most recent elections were held under the sovereignty of the ELECTED Iraqi constitutional convention delegates.


[ Parent ]

Re: Benn and the Euston Manifesto (#38)

by oratorhunt on Fri May 18, 2007 at 10:11:57 AM GMT

I didn't say the elections happened under the IGC. However that body was set up to begin the planning and orchestration of the process leading upto a situation under which elections could take place. It was spectacularly and demonstrably inept and without even a modicum of popular support, so they had to create the "Interim Government" - which also completely lacked any democratic mandate - in order to hold jurisdiction apparently 'independently' from the US occupying forces. The fact the "interim government" was recognised by the UN means nothing at all in the context of the deeply embarassed UN frantically trying to reassert any kind of influence whatsoever by dovetailing the US, which would have had its own way in any case.


[ Parent ]

Re: Benn and the Euston Manifesto (#39)

by Glass House on Fri May 18, 2007 at 12:11:07 PM GMT

But the Constitutional Convention elections were the FIRST EVER elections held in Iraq. OF COURSE they were arranged by unelected individuals. How else would you do it? The first elections of any democracy are, by definition, arranged by unelected people.

You seem unable to get your head around the fact that the latest elections (i.e. the Assembly elections) were held under the jurisdiction, rules, constitution and sovereignty of the ELECTED Iraqi Constitutional Convention. Therefore, on what basis do you question the legitimacy of those results?

I also note you've gone back to referring to the individuals elected by the Iraqi people as "elected puppets" in post #32 ""puppets of puppets, responsible for the election of yet more puppets. "). Why do you treat the legitimacy of the choices of the Iraqi people with such contempt? Do you regard Hamas (similarly elected under occupation) as "Israeli puppets"?


[ Parent ]

Re: Benn and the Euston Manifesto (#40)

by oratorhunt on Fri May 18, 2007 at 04:31:20 PM GMT

But the arrangements for the Interim government and the consitution convention (which, as you well know, was not 'elected' on the basis of the universal franchise) were not just impartial observers - they were put in place and empowered to act at the best of the occupying powers. My argument is not that representation bears no relation to the votes cast. My argument that the whole infrastructure (administration, fiscal structures, rule of - ahem -'law' etc.)upon which the elected institutions are obliged to operate are indissolubly bound up with the presence of the occupying forces. This is the very thing in dispute! The fact that the majority participated in the elections, in no way legitimises this prior attack on the right of people not to have - at any stage - a US machine gun pointed at them as they walk down their own street!


[ Parent ]

Re: Benn and the Euston Manifesto (#41)

by Glass House on Sat May 19, 2007 at 11:14:03 AM GMT

"My argument that the whole infrastructure (administration, fiscal structures, rule of - ahem -'law' etc.)upon which the elected institutions are obliged to operate are indissolubly bound up with the presence of the occupying forces."

How are they "indissolubly bound up with the presence of the occupying forces"? The Iraqi government can ask them to leave at any time. And the administration, fiscal structures, rule of law can be changed at any time by the Iraqi representatives.

Why are you having such a hard time with this? You're really grasping at straws here! The first UK elections were arranged by unelected officials. The first US elections were arranged by unelected officials. Does this make the current governments illegitimate?

I'll ask AGAIN...why do you accept the legitimacy of the Hamas government, similarly elected under occupation, but not the Iraqi government. Could it be because you can't bring yourself to accept that the Iraqis "chose wrong" by not electing a rabidly anti-American government?


[ Parent ]

Benn and the Euston Manifesto | 72 comments (72 topical)
Display: Sort: