عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Iraq Officials Mull Rotation Among Sects of Top Positions

A man votes in the 2018 parliamentary elections in Baghdad. (AFP)
A man votes in the 2018 parliamentary elections in Baghdad. (AFP)
TT
20
TT

Iraq Officials Mull Rotation Among Sects of Top Positions

A man votes in the 2018 parliamentary elections in Baghdad. (AFP)
A man votes in the 2018 parliamentary elections in Baghdad. (AFP)

The withdrawal from upcoming elections by influential Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, the leader of the largest parliamentary bloc, continues to weigh heavily throughout Iraq, especially among other Shiite forces.

The capital Baghdad is divided between the Sunni Karkh district and the Shiite al-Rusafa. This divide was the most intense during the past eight years, first with the civil war when Shiites were killed in Sunni neighborhoods and Sunnis in Shiite neighborhoods.

The divisions were further widened during four rounds of elections that were held since 2005. These elections have produced a form of governance that has since proven to be a failure as Iraq plunges deeper in mismanagement at the hands of corrupt officials.

Moreover, the post-Saddam period that began in 2003 resulted in a sectarian political understanding that stipulates that the top positions of president, prime minister and parliament speaker should be divided according to sectarian lines.

As it stands, the prime minister is always a Shiite, the president a Kurd and parliament speaker a Sunni. However, parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi stirred debate recently by declaring: “Iraq is Arab and so the position of president should go to the Sunni Arabs.” He made it a point to say Arab because the Kurds too adhere to Sunni Islam.

His statement did not sit well with the Kurds, who boast their own influential blocs and are also divided among themselves over which Kurdish party should hold the position of president.

According to an understanding between the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), headed by Masoud Barzani, and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), the president of the Kurdish Region should hail from Barzani’s party, while the Iraqi president must be a member of the PUK.

Since 2003, Kurdish figures – Jalal Talbani, Fuad Masoum and Barham Salih – have served as president.

Disputes have even emerged from the PUK itself over the nomination of the next president.

On the Shiite scene, political forces have grown paranoid of a conspiracy being plotted to thwart the appointment of a Shiite to the position of premier. The constitution does not explicitly state that the prime minister should be a Shiite, Sunni or Kurd.

The signs of a Kurdish-Sadrist alliance may create further political confusion in the country. The alliance, should it come to light, would be the first since 2003.

Shortly before Sadr withdrew from the elections, he had paid a visit to Erbil to meet with KDP officials and Barzani. Observers at the time speculated that they would soon announce an alliance between the largest Shiite and Kurdish forces that would create a major shift in the political scene.

Sadr’s surprise withdrawal, however, has upended the scene and forced the KDP to rethink its future alliances.

Had the two sides forged an alliance, the division of the “sovereign positions” of president, prime minister and speaker, would have changed. The position of premier would be held by Sadr, Barzani would control the presidency instead of the PUK, and Sunni Arabs would retain the position of speaker.

The Sunni and Kurdish parties now have to wait with bated breath for Sadr to take a final decision on whether he will run in the elections or not, with all forces setting their sights on the position of prime minister.

Most Viewed

 
Features

Israel Wary of Egypt's 'Military Infrastructure' in Sinai: Peace Treaty at Risk?

Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
TT
20
TT

Israel Wary of Egypt's 'Military Infrastructure' in Sinai: Peace Treaty at Risk?

Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)

Israel has voiced growing concerns over Egypt’s military presence in the Sinai Peninsula, fearing a potential escalation between the two sides amid the ongoing Gaza war.

Israeli media reports said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has asked both Washington and Cairo to dismantle what it describes as a “military infrastructure” established by the Egyptian army in Sinai.

However, an informed Egyptian source and experts cited by Asharq Al-Awsat insisted that Egypt has not violated its peace treaty with Israel. They argued that Cairo’s military movements are a response to Israeli breaches of the agreement.

Israel’s Israel Hayom newspaper, citing a senior Israeli security official, reported that Egypt’s military buildup in Sinai constitutes a “major violation” of the security annex of the peace treaty.

The official said the issue is a top priority for Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, stressing that Israel “will not accept this situation” amid what it views as Egypt’s growing military footprint in the peninsula.

The official added that the issue goes beyond the deployment of Egyptian forces in Sinai exceeding the quotas set under the military annex of the Camp David Accords.

The real concern, he said, lies in Egypt’s continued military buildup in the peninsula, which Israel views as an irreversible step.

Moreover, he stressed that while Israel is not seeking to amend its peace treaty with Egypt or redeploy troops along the border, it believes the current situation requires urgent action to prevent a potential escalation.

Egypt-Israel relations have not seen such tensions since the outbreak of the Gaza war, particularly after Israel violated a ceasefire agreement with Hamas brokered primarily by Egypt. Israeli forces resumed airstrikes on Gaza last month and failed to fulfill their commitments to withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor and Palestinian border crossings.

A senior Egyptian source dismissed Israel’s accusations, telling Asharq Al-Awsat that “these repeated Israeli pretexts ignore the fact that Israeli forces have violated the peace treaty, seizing control of areas where Egypt objects to their presence without the necessary coordination with Cairo.”

Egypt has the right to take all necessary measures to safeguard its national security against any threats, emphasized the source.

“Nevertheless, Cairo remains fully committed to the peace treaty and has no intention of aggression against any party,” it added.

Israeli forces seized control of the Gaza-Egypt border, including the Philadelphi Corridor and the Rafah crossing, in May 2024. Israel has accused Egypt of not doing enough to stop weapons smuggling into Gaza through border tunnels—an allegation Cairo has denied.

Under the terms of the ceasefire agreement with Hamas, which Israel later broke, Israeli forces were supposed to begin withdrawing from the Philadelphi Corridor on March 1, completing the pullout within eight days. However, Israel failed to do so and instead resumed airstrikes on Gaza.

Israel also announced the creation of an administration aimed at facilitating the “voluntary departure” of Gaza residents, a move Cairo strongly rejected and formally condemned.

Egypt has insisted that Palestinians must remain in their homeland and has put forward a reconstruction plan for Gaza and called for the implementation of the two-state solution. The plan was endorsed at an emergency Arab summit three weeks ago.

Media reports have indicated that Egypt responded to Israel’s control of the Gaza border by increasing its military presence near the frontier—an act that some Israeli officials claim violates the peace treaty and threatens Israel’s security.

Former Egyptian intelligence official Gen. Mohammed Rashad told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel itself violated the peace treaty by seizing the Philadelphi Corridor, controlling border crossings, and blocking aid to Gaza while seeking to forcibly displace Palestinians into Egypt.

“Every Israeli action along Gaza’s border with Egypt constitutes hostile behavior against Egypt’s national security,” said Rashad, who previously headed the Israeli military affairs division in Egypt’s intelligence service.

“Egypt cannot sit idly by in the face of such threats and must prepare for all possible scenarios.”

The Philadelphi Corridor is a strategically sensitive buffer zone, serving as a narrow 14-kilometer passage between Egypt, Israel, and Gaza, stretching from the Mediterranean Sea in the north to the Kerem Shalom crossing in the south.

Military expert General Samir Farag insisted that Egypt has not violated the peace treaty or its security annex in over 40 years, arguing that Israel has repeatedly breached the agreement and is attempting to shift blame onto Cairo.

“Israel is doing this to distract from its internal problems, including public discontent over its ballooning defense budget,” Farag told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“It also wants to deflect attention from Egypt’s reconstruction plan for Gaza and leverage its claims to pressure the United States for more military aid by portraying Egypt as a threat.”

Farag emphasized that Egypt’s actions are solely aimed at protecting its national security, adding: “There is no clause in the peace treaty that prevents a country from defending itself.”

“The so-called ‘military infrastructure’ Israel refers to consists of roads and development projects in Sinai.”

“The US has satellite surveillance over the region—if Egypt had violated the treaty, Washington would have flagged it. Moreover, security coordination between Egypt and Israel continues daily,” he explained.

Egypt and Israel signed their landmark peace treaty on March 25, 1979, committing to resolving disputes peacefully and prohibiting the use or threat of force. The agreement also established military deployment guidelines and a joint security coordination committee.

Meanwhile, US Republican Party member Tom Harb told Asharq Al-Awsat that Washington has received intelligence from multiple sources indicating that Egypt has amassed a significant military force in Sinai.

Israel considers this a breach of the peace treaty, which designates Sinai as a demilitarized zone to prevent surprises like the 1973 war, Harb said.

While the US fully supports Israel’s concerns, it also wants to prevent further escalation, as that would destabilize the region, he added.

Ultimately, Egypt must clarify whether its troop movements are aimed at threatening Israel or preventing Palestinians from crossing into Egyptian territory, he stated.