Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

February 1, 2005

IRAQ'S ELECTIONS:  'FINALLY, SOME GOOD NEWS'

 

KEY FINDINGS

 

**  Global media more positive about elections than any development since fall of Baghdad.

**  Dailies praise voters for their "courage and determination," term poll "auspicious."

**  Still, "a rough road" lies ahead; some fret about possible rise of "Iran-style theocracy."

**  Critics label elections "neither free nor fair," say only U.S. withdrawal can lead to peace.

 

MAJOR THEMES

 

'A ray of hope for Iraq's future'--  Global editorialists generally had a more positive view towards the Iraqi elections than any development since the fall of Baghdad.  Writers praised the "courage and enthusiasm" shown by Iraqi voters determined to make it "clear that they want the right to choose their future."  Brazil's center-right O Estado de S. Paulo termed the vote "a remarkable demonstration of courage and of faith in the superiority of the democratic regime over the authoritarian systems of government that Iraq has experienced."   Held against "a backdrop of mounting terror and violence," the high turnout was "even more astonishing," judged the independent Cyprus Mail.

   

'Bush, victorious'--  Some commentators interpreted the voting as "a major victory" for President Bush, though anti-war papers were quick to repeat the poll did not "vindicate a misguided war."  As did many leftist outlets, France's Le Monde judged that "President Bush has registered a success that will allow him to prepare an exit strategy" from an "increasingly unpopular" conflict.  The "pictures of jubilant Iraqis" will also permit the president to "use different arguments when he calls for help," said a German daily.  The U.S. is "right to hope for more contributions from their allies to stabilize the situation" even though its European allies remain "reluctant to get involved."

   

First step 'on a long trek to stability'--  Though many writers were "cautiously optimistic" about Iraq's future, they observed that its recovery will be "a long process, filled with enormous difficulties."  As Hong Kong's independent South China Morning Post put it, "It would be hard to underestimate the hurdles standing in the way of developing a stable, democratic Iraq."  "If the Shiites give in to the temptation of theocracy, the Sunnis to the fascination of suicide and the Kurds to the obsession of independence, all will be lost," declared France's right-of-center Le Monde.  Observers urged the Shia majority "to embrace the Sunnis" and the Kurds.

 

A 'masquerade' to legitimize occupation--  Critics dismissed "the weirdest of parliamentary elections in modern history" as not having "expressed the will of the Iraqis."  Britain's left-of-center Guardian termed it "difficult to be confident that this was a free or fair election, given the violence and intimidation surrounding it."  More skeptical journals referred to the elections as a "farce" with results that were "preset" by the U.S.  An Indonesian writer called the elections "only a formality" by which the U.S. would "try every...means to make their puppet figures win."  A Jordanian daily argued the elections would make a difference only if they led to "genuine initiatives towards ending the U.S. occupation."

 

Prepared by Media Reaction Branch (202) 203-7888, rmrmail@state.gov

 

EDITOR:  Steven Wangsness

 

EDITOR'S NOTE:  Media Reaction reporting conveys the spectrum of foreign press sentiment.  Posts select commentary to provide a representative picture of local editorial opinion.  Some commentary is taken directly from the Internet.  This report summarizes and interprets foreign editorial opinion and does not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government.  This analysis was based on 132 reports from 59 countries January 31- February 1, 2005.  Editorial excerpts are listed from the most recent date.

 

EUROPE

 

BRITAIN:  "Iraq Sets The Tone"

 

The conservative Daily Telegraph took this view (2/1):  "The role of the coalition forces, and the Iraqi national guardsmen and police whom they are training, remains crucial.  To talk of allied withdrawal while the outcome of the election is unknown is simply irresponsible.  Thereafter it may be possible to pull back as the indigenous security forces improve.  But that promises to be a gradual process."

 

"The Power Of Democracy"

 

The conservative Times editorialized (2/1):  "Those tired governments in the region that fear the Iraqi example or have colluded with thugs to keep themselves in power will find it hard to explain away these elections.  Those Islamists who insisted that any vote supported by the Americans would be invalid have been exposed for what they are:  bigots who can terrorize but never convince.  Those governments, including several NATO and EU members, itching to embarrass the Bush administration, have now had to voice formulaic congratulations to cover their confusion."

 

"Iraqis Vote To Set Their Own Agenda"

 

The independent Financial Times concluded (2/1):  "It is essential to bring genuine representatives of the Sunni community into the government and--more importantly--into the constitution-drafting process, if the insurgency is to be defeated.  The new Iraqi administration must be ready to deal with nationalist and ex-Ba'athist Sunni leaders, to split them from the extremist jihadis who have no interest in a democratic Iraq."

 

"Courage Of Iraq's Voters Has Opened A Path To Peace"

 

The conservative Times editorialized (1/31):  "Defying not only the violence of thugs but also the condescension of Western critics determined to undermine the election's significance, eight million Iraqis risked their lives to vote.  Their bravery is a lesson to all who take their own freedoms for granted and offer 'cultural' reasons why others may somehow not be ready for them."

 

"Iraq Confounds The Prophets Of Doom"

 

The conservative Daily Telegraph commented (1/31):  "Yesterday's high turnout, in defiance of the gunmen, should be celebrated.  Of course the Iraqi insurgency is an important story.  But this does not explain the loving attention devoted to each setback faced by the forces of order."

 

"Elections Inspire Hope For Democracy, But Cannot Vindicate A Misguided War"

 

The center-left Independent maintained (1/31):  "We are as relieved as anyone that the voting passed off as well as it did.  But the elections do not vindicate an invasion carried out on a false premise, a war fought without an international mandate or an occupation whose early stages were as disastrously mismanaged as they were."

 

"Bullets And Ballots"

 

The left-of-center Guardian took this view (1/31):  "In many respects it is difficult to be confident that this was a free or fair election, given the violence and intimidation surrounding it.  On one side, Sunnis were threatened by the likes of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to stay away from the polls, while on the other Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani issued edicts requiring his followers to vote.  The fruits of democracy have yet to be tasted in Iraq.  Yet that is not to say that something good cannot come of it, just that it is not yet obvious what the final outcome will be."

 

"A Ray Of Hope For Iraq's Future"

 

The conservative tabloid Daily Mail held  (1/31):  "It is impossible to ignore how eager many Iraqis were to nurture the tiny, flickering flames of self-determination....  Their courage offers a glimmer of hope....  What the limited success of this election does not do though, is give the American and British governments a legitimate reason to withdraw their troops from Iraq."

 

"Election Hope For Iraq"

 

The left-of-center tabloid Daily Express commented (1/31):  "There has been a great deal of dreadful news coming out of Iraq since the invasion; yesterday should herald a moment of cheer.  There is now a real chance that Iraq could establish itself as a democracy.  That is clearly the wish of the vast majority of Iraqi citizens themselves."

 

"From Tyranny To Democracy"

 

The right-of-center tabloid Sun argued (1/31):  "The miracle of Iraq, to transform tyranny to democracy in less than two years, has been achieved without--in fact, despite--the European Union and the United Nations....  As ever when tough decisions are needed, there were siren voices on the left who whinnied that it could never be done.  How wrong they were.  And how right Blair and Bush were to ignore them."

 

"People Power"

 

The center-left tabloid Daily Mirror concluded (1/31):  "There still needs to be a swift withdrawal of U.S. and British troops so that the Iraqis can run their own security.  But if peace comes to Iraq it will be because its people are desperate for it.  Not because President Bush wants it."

 

FRANCE:  "The Courage Of The Iraqis"

 

Left-of-center Le Monde held (2/1):  "The number of Iraqis who voted is in itself a major victory for which President Bush congratulated himself....  His obstinacy in resisting those who urged him to postpone the elections, a trait of character which is his strength and his weakness, has served him well this time and it would be indecent to reproach him for offering the Iraqis this chance at free elections....  Now the question arises about the ambition of certain ayatollahs to establish an Iran-style theocracy.  Something that would worry not only the Sunnis, but also Iraq's other neighbors and Washington....  In the meantime President Bush has registered a success that will allow him to prepare an exit strategy from a conflict which is increasingly unpopular in the U.S."

 

"Europe Stops Short Of Congratulating The U.S."

 

Alexandrine Bouilhet noted in right-of-center Le Figaro (2/1):  "Surprised by the success of the elections in Iraq, the Europeans are congratulating everyone, including themselves, but with the notable exception of the U.S....  In their communiqué, the five paragraphs devoted to Iraq mentions neither the Americans nor the British.  As a diplomat on the side of peace said, 'they have congratulated themselves enough as it is....'  More diplomatically, French FM Barnier reminds all that the U.S. is 'part of the UN and the international community....'  More concretely, the Europeans are still reluctant to get involved in Iraq.  For Barnier, 'the Iraqi tragedy will not be resolved with more soldiers....'  Still the Europeans must make a 'constructive' gesture before President Bush's visit to Brussels February 22 and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's visit to Paris on February 8.  This is why the EU will be offering to train Iraqi police and civil servants, 'but outside Iraq' says Paris and Berlin."

 

"From Cairo To Riyadh, Worry And Contempt"

 

Jean-Pierre Perrin wrote in left-of-center Liberation (2/1):  "Before the elections Arab states voiced numerous opinions.  After the votes are in, they are remaining noticeably quiet....  From Cairo to Riyadh and Damascus, all Arab leaders do not share the same opinion but they are all surprised by the large turnout, which they had underestimated....  They are not very talkative about two issues which are of concern to them and seem to be obsessing them:  Iraq's new multiparty politics and the question of reforms in the Arab world."

 

"Bush, Victorious"

 

Charles Lambroschini opined in right-of-center Le Figaro (1/31):  "George W. Bush is claiming first victory....  But the outcome of these elections could well turn out to be ambiguous, somewhat like the proverbial glass, either half empty or half full....  Even seen as half full, it still does not mean that the Americans have managed to win the hearts and minds.  Far from having been hailed as liberators, the GIs are unanimously proclaimed as a force of occupation.  It is their presence that feeds the cycle of violence....  Ignorant about the world and blinded by their vision, the Americans often reach the right solution only after having run out of bad ones....  After the incredible error of having disbanded Iraq's security forces, Washington did correct its mistake.  Bush's stubbornness, which led to the Iraqi quagmire, has at least had a positive outcome:  Bush did not listen to those who suggested postponing the election....  But these elections are but the beginning of a long road.  If the Shiites give in to the temptation of theocracy, the Sunnis to the fascination of suicide and the Kurds to the obsession of independence, all will be lost.  This is why France and all the allies must help America to get out of the Iraqi quagmire."

 

"Legitimacy"

 

Patrick Sabatier argued in left-of-center Liberation (1/31):  "The first elections in Iraq may not have been all that 'free and legal,' but they have nevertheless been a great victory for the Iraqis--'kamikazes of democracy' opposing 'kamikazes of terror.'  The final results will confer on the National Assembly more legitimacy than Saddam Hussein ever had or than the interim government had....  But only on the condition that it not aim to implement a Shiite monopoly or a theocracy.  And that it negotiate with the Sunni minority....  It must also be the premise for a rapid withdrawal of the occupation forces which are guaranteeing its protection.  Increasingly, these forces are becoming part of the problem rather than part of the solution."

 

"A Vote Which Pleases Americans And Iranians"

 

Jean-Claude Kiefer observed in regional Les Dernieres Nouvelles d'Alsace (1/31):  "The Sunni community...largely boycotted the ballot box. Its fate seems to be of little interest to Washington....  In order to tighten transatlantic ties, some capitals have toadied (to Washington) by proclaiming (the vote) a 'victory for democracy'.  The Americans...thereby gain the legitimacy they were unable to obtain...in 2003....  What will change in the daily lives of the Iraqi population after these elections?  No doubt nothing."

 

"Lessons From The Iraqis"

 

Dominique Gerbaud contended in Catholic La Croix (1/31):  "Finally, good news....  This lesson in democracy and this desire to resist against the pressures and threats of the terrorists give at least two ideas about the Iraqis' state of mind.  First, that the people of Iraq are more peaceful than the images we have been getting from Iraq....  The other lesson is one sent to the Americans:  by voting, the Iraqis are saying that they will not allow a foreign power to manage their country for the duration....   The Americans, who can feel relieved for not having caved in, wanted a democratic, stable and friendly Iraqi government.  They may get democratic and stable, as for friendly, that's a totally different story."

 

"A Shiite Crescent In The Center Of The Middle East?"

 

Thomas de Rochechouart noted in popular right-of-center France Soir (1/31):  "Next to the Iranians, and when it comes to the domino effect, the Americans may be only amateurs....  With the innocence of a sorcerer's apprentice, Washington has re-distributed the deck of cards in the Middle East, and by so doing it has re-enforced its two major enemies:  Syria and Iran!...  Iran will be the great winner of this new card game...which is already worrying the rest of the Sunni regimes in the region....  Jordan is accusing Tehran of creating a of 'Shiite crescent' in the Middle. East.  After Southern Iraq, the movement could spread to Bahrein, Saudi Arabia, and even Lebanon.  A sort of Shiite domino effect."

 

GERMANY:  "Test Of Iraqi Courage"

 

Wolfgang Guenter Lerch commented on the front page of center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine (2/1):  "A short time ago, many people thought that the elections could not be hold and assumed that they must be postponed due to the permanent violence.  Given the 40 people who died in terror attacks on election day, the estimated turnout of 60 percent reflects the courage of Iraqis....  That so many of them had the courage to cast their ballots also disproves the assumption that Arabs and Muslims are not interested in democracy....  The election also means a victory for Iraq's PM Allawi, who is not especially popular.  Like many other exiles he has a problematic history.  But he stood firm and withstood the temptation to give in to the pressure of terrorists and to postpone the elections....  In the coming weeks, the election winner must consider moves appropriate to create confidence among Sunnis, who have boycotted the elections for many reasons, but could still be won for cooperation.  President Yawer, a Sunni leader, will be in high demand here.  Zarqawi and his fanatics cannot be convinced, but if the administration can use the impressive momentum of the elections to establish functioning political structures, the situation could stabilize.  It is remarkable that Iraq did not break up into three parts after the war, as some had predicted it.  Americans will stay for another year and a half at least.  Most Iraqis will not like this, but there is no realistic alternative....  It is understandable that President Bush, whose war rationale dissolved in the desert, is now happy about the successful elections.  But is there anybody who wants his policy to become a universally accepted maxim and method?  The elections do not justify America's strategy to improve the world through preemptive wars."

 

"Bush's Upswing"

 

Washington correspondent Dietmar Ostermann noted in left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (2/1):  "Not all Iraqis who cast their votes automatically endorsed President Bush's policy.  On the contrary, many might have seen their votes as an attempt to overcome the unbearable status quo:  the destructive cycle of violence of a murderous and arbitrary guerrilla and the counter-violence of the foreign occupiers.  The father of this election was not so much Bush as the Shiite Great Ayatollah Sistani....  But there is no doubt that the U.S. and Bush benefit from this election.  After months of bad news, the pictures of jubilant Iraqis will not only boost the morale of the U.S.  Bush can now use different arguments when he calls for help.  And also the hope that the Shiite election winner in Baghdad will be interested that the U.S. stays in the country for the time being might not be in vain.  Washington believes it can cope and find agreements with every new Iraqi government--as long as that leadership is able to fill the power vacuum."

 

"Help From Allies"

 

Right-of-center Schwaebische Zeitung of Leutkirch editorialized (2/1):  "Americans are right to hope for more contributions from their allies to stabilize the situation in Iraq.  If former war opponents, such as Germany and France, now support them, they no longer run the risk of approving the invasion in retrospect.  On the contrary, there are many reasons for Europe to bear more responsibility in front of its doorstep.  The better training of troops outside Iraq could be a feasible policy.   The elections in Iraq have given Bush the opportunity to do things right the second time around.  If he takes it, January 30 could mark a turning point."

 

"Slave No More"

 

Clemens Wergin noted in an editorial in centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin (1/31):  "In view of the [terrorists] threat it is surprising to see how many Iraqis insisted on going to the polls....  With this massive turnout, a majority of Iraqis made clear by whom they do not want to be governed:  by fascists of Islamic or Baathist color whose terror is mainly directed against the Iraqi population.  What the election meant for the Iraqis could be best seen in region where people did not have to fear terrorist attacks:  in the Kurdish North and Shiite South where people celebrated in front of the polling stations....  It is regrettable that Europeans in particular do not really understand the grandeur of this day when a people, who were enslaved by a dictator are about to decide on their own future.  As if we do not want to accept that a false war can also have some positive implications--even in the midst of a post-war disaster, which Iraq still represents....  A people who demonstrate their will for democracy in such an impressive way deserve our support.  We cannot blame the Iraqis that they were freed by a war whose justification was wrong."

 

"Failure"

 

Karl Grobe opined in an editorial in left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (1/31):  "In one respect the Iraqi experiment succeeded:  it took place, but the election was neither fair, nor free, nor democratic.  They were not free because they took place under the state of emergency and the threat to use force; they were not fair because the candidates, who hand-picked by the occupying power, had a monopoly on reporting on TV; they were not democratic because the voters did not know the names of the candidates.  That is why the Iraqi elections did not meet with the minimum requirements, which international observers set up for new democracies....  The ethnic divisions were confirmed...and this development is now preparing the bitter conflict between Baghdad and Shiite centralism against Kurdish decentralized federalism.  In view of these facts, there can be no delight at the vote of the many courageous Iraqis."

 

"Victory Of Politics"

 

Business daily Financial Times Deutschland of Hamburg (1/31) argued:  "Measured against the disastrous circumstances of the vote...this is a highly respectable, even a historic outcome.  The majority of Iraqis gave those a brush-off who like to claim that democracy is incompatible with the cultural traditions of the region.  Many voters cast their votes, even though they risked their lives for it.  Of course this election has the flaw that some in the Sunni region in the center of the country did not vote...and this is why the integration of the Sunni minority...will now be a central task for Iraq's domestic policy.  It is the great hope after these elections that a domestic policy is now set in motion, a policy that will be increasingly independent from the U.S. occupation power....  At the political level, even the Shiite and Kurdish leaders have realized that they must be careful when using the power they will now get through this democratic vote, since a peaceful and prospering Iraq is not possible against the Sunni minority.  The international community, and the Europeans in particular, should now support the beginning political process as much as possible.  The question in Iraq is no longer whether President Bush will get what comes of such a bloody war.  The question is which future the Iraqis have who risked their lives on Sunday to go to the polls."

 

"Extremely Dangerous Steps To Democracy"

 

Peter Münch had this to say in an editorial in center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (1/31):  "The elections in Iraq are over and it turned out to be an event between dances for joy and dances of death.  In an admirable way, people thronged to the polling stations...and the terrorists failed with their efforts to make the vote impossible.  We owe this good news to every Iraqi who voted by risking his/her life.  But the hope that it is a vote for a better future is seriously subdued.  Under such circumstances, such an election cannot mean a 'turning point' in the history of the country, as President Bush said by quickly analyzing the vote....  This election will not fill the Iraqis' stomachs nor will it make Iraq safer.  The fact that, despite these facts, so many people took part in the election certainly documents the will of the people to turn from a suppressed subject to a citizen.  But this vote also showed where are the breaking lines and the limits of such an Iraqi democracy.  It will now be decisive to see whether the ethnic tribes in Iraq will merge to form one nation or whether the election deepened existing trenches....  After these elections, Iraq will have a democratically legitimized government, but it does not have a government that represents all tribes. This offers a new point of attack for the extremists."

 

ITALY:  "From The Polling Stations A No To Kamikazes"

 

Marco Guidi judged in Rome's center-left daily Il Messaggero (2/1):  "The Iraqis voted not only to give themselves a democratic government...but also to say no to the bloodthirsty insurgents that continue to undermine the very essence of the country....  In the meantime, the terrorists were taught a lesson.  They will continue to kill, but support will begin to diminish, until they are completely isolated.  But a lesson was given to the Americans as well:  Iraq is perhaps better than what they assumed.  And it's time to treat the Iraqis like a people that can become democratic."

 

"Elections Are Not Enough To Export Democracy To Arab World"

 

Ugo Tramballi wrote in leading business daily Il Sole-24 Ore (2/1):  "To denounce the imperfection of Sunday's elections in Iraq means to insult those who participated by putting their lives at risk. Will an exponential growth of elections...lead to the establishment of a civil society in a region that two years ago was defined the most depressed in the world by a UN study?  What kind of reaction will the Iraqis' electoral courage have on the surrounding areas?  It's best not to have high expectations."

 

"The Strength of A People"

 

Angelo Panebianco wrote in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (1/31):  "'Naturally, with these elections...'democracy' was not born in Iraq.  Elections are a necessary, but insufficient, condition of democracy.  It will be a long process, filled with enormous difficulties....  These elections have brought about something very important for Iraq, for the entire Islamic world, and particularly for the Arab world....  The first free elections in Iraq could bear fruit in the coming years in other countries as well, spurring many Arabs (and many Iranians) to ask their governing autocrats for free elections."

 

"The American Game"

 

Vittorio Zucconi opined in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (1/31):  "George W. Bush, 'the fortunate son', won his second election in three months and in 'congratulating the Iraqis' he was in fact congratulating himself....  He won.  Although far away, we can see a dim light at the end of the tunnel....  The equation between Islam and terrorism...was a false one. Wherever yesterday's elections...may lead...Bush is correct, there's no turning back from this 'historical turning point.'...  The 43rd U.S. president will not be remembered for his tax cuts or social security reforms....  Bush is Iraq.  Baghdad will be his Gettysburg or [his Waterloo]....  While it is only right that the 'fortunate son' boasts about the 'taste of democracy' he has given millions of Iraqis, it would be tragically ironic if Washington's hawks should win, and if they were to read the Iraqis' desperate need for peace, which they expressed by putting their lives at risk, as a green light for other wars."

 

"The Defeat of Al Zarqawi"

 

Lucia Annunziata observed in centrist, influential La Stampa (1/31):  "The picture which emerges from these elections is of a socially divided Iraq, in which Shiites and Kurds celebrate their rise to power while the Sunnis confirm their will to stay out.  There are two sides to the situation.  We can rejoice for the courage and enthusiasm shown by millions of people who yesterday celebrated their freedom from Saddam.  But we cannot deny that without the Sunnis, or rather with them in arms, these elections are not decisive.  The result is shaky.  It is now up to the international community to decide how to address this duality:  if pure triumphalism wins, as Washington seems determined upon, or if the skepticism of the Europeans, who appear not to want to ascribe importance to these elections, prevails, then the process that began yesterday will come to a halt.  But if world governments work together with diplomacy and mutual candor to finish an incomplete process, which will include the Sunnis, then Iraq may have some chance of coming out of the war.  The alternative would be a confirmation of the electoral split, which would lead to civil war."

 

RUSSIA:  "A Turning Point"

 

Aleksandr Danil'chuk and Anton Ivanitskiy judged in reformist Gazeta (2/1):  "Given the election results, Iraq may have started changing its political structure.  The Shiites are likely to get a majority in parliament, and the Sunnis, who formed the country's political elite in Saddam Hussein's Iraq while accounting for only 30% of the population, for the most part, ignored the poll, thereby losing meaningful representation at the 'top.'  This can only mean that the Sunnis, the backbone of the resistance to the coalition forces, will continue fighting the 'occupiers and their supporters,' the proclaimed goals of the elections, peace and stability, still a long way off."

 

"The Farce"

 

The following in nationalist opposition Sovetskaya Rossiya was attributed to A. Safarin (2/1):  "Are fair elections possible in a country occupied by foreign powers?  When Putin went to Kiev shortly before presidential elections there, the West raised hoopla, clamoring about inadmissible interference in that country's internal affairs.  But it does not think so of the presence of almost 200,000 foreign troops in Iraq.  The election farce is so obvious, recognizing its results would be tantamount to being part of that show....  Why did they stage that bloody masquerade at all?  The answer is that up to now U.S. presence in Iraq has been absolutely unlawful.  After the elections, the new parliament and government will doubtless beg the Americans to stay on."

 

"Wishful Thinking"

 

Oleg Komotskiy said in reformist Novyye Izvestiya (1/31):  "Clearly, this poll has added to the White House's problems.  Bush needs to convince his fellow countrymen that the war was justified and that democracy is gaining the upper hand in what used to be a bulwark of tyranny.  This is uppermost, as Iraq occupation increasingly irritates Americans.  The president's credibility is on the line--a fiasco in the Middle East would raise doubts about costly welfare reform and George Bush's other initiatives.  That explains his wishful thinking.  Apart from trying to get the nation to see things his way, the president will have to deal with a divided Iraq.  The vote outcome is clear even before it is made official and will hardly please the Sunnis, who account for 40% of the population.  That makes you wonder about the future of the Iraqi parliament."

 

"Weird Vote"

 

Andrey Zlobin and Yelena Suponina wrote on the front page of reformist Vremya Novostey (1/31):  "Those were the weirdest of parliamentary elections in modern history, held in beleaguered Iraq, with a 25-million strong population and 170,000 foreign troops on its territory.  Locals call the foreigners nothing other than occupiers.  Amidst violence, the focus was on the turnout, the chief yardstick of the poll's success.  Even before the polling stations were closed, a spokesman for the Iraqi electoral commission said that 72% of voters had cast their ballots, and 90% had voted in predominantly Shia areas.  But for lack of international observers, those could not be verified."

 

ALBANIA:  "Lesson From Iraq"

 

Mass-circulation, left-of-center Korrieri commented (2/1):  "Iraq demonstrated on Sunday a good start for the civilized world in 2005.  Over 8 million Iraqis challenged the fear, the threats and undoubtedly, the doubts that exist with every people voting for the first time about the unknown that will ensue....  Iraqis proved that...they are more than certain about their own future.  Yesterday, Iraq joined the club of nations who believe in the free vote...in spite of victims and hundreds of ballots with blood marks on them, right there, at the doors of polling stations."

 

AUSTRIA:  "Oh, For The Precious Moment To Linger"

 

Foreign affairs editor Gudrun Harrer opined in independent Der Standard (1/31):  "What remains is the question of how things will go on if the strategy of de-escalating the tensions between Israel and the Palestinians should prove a lasting one.  It is difficult to shake off a certain uncomfortable feeling that--just as it happened during the Oslo peace process--once again both sides harbor incompatible expectations with regard to the question of what constitutes an historic breakthrough.  Is it realistic that Likud boss and former settler protector Ariel Sharon will give the Palestinians what Labor Prime Minister Ehud Barak could not or would not give them, and this as the result of the second intifada?  Or that Mahmud Abbas, who, in the name of the Palestinians, will renounce what Yasser Arafat could not or would not renounce?  This is no less unrealistic than to wish for the wonderful moment to linger."

 

BELGIUM:   "A Thrill Of Freedom After Terrible Setbacks"

 

Diplomatic correspondent Mia Doornaert concluded in independent Christian-Democrat De Standaard (1/31):  "By going to the ballot box despite all the threats and violence the Iraqis showed yesterday that there are no people who prefer dictatorship over democracy.  Despite this success, everything can still go wrong in Iraq.  The Sunni minority remains resentful because it has lost its supremacy and the subsequent wealth.  A means must be found to involve the Sunni in the government.  The Kurds will continue to struggle for more...and the Shiite majority will have to accept that its cannot take revenge for decades of bloody suppression....  Nevertheless, yesterday's elections send a ray of hope.  There is an elected Parliament now.  If violence can be eliminated and if the agenda is maintained, the new government will draft a Constitution and organize elections in December to form a legitimate Iraqi government.  Those who care about the Iraqis' fate must hope for a successful outcome and offer all their help.  A successful system of freedom in an Arab country can be a beacon for the rest of the region.  That may frighten the regimes in the neighboring countries, but their populations have the right that their voices are finally heard."

 

BULGARIA:  "The Victory Of The Election Ballot Boxes"

 

Center- right Dnevnik opined (2/1):  "And, so, the genie of democracy has been let out of the bottle in Iraq.  Millions of Iraqis in the country and around the world voted and celebrated, some lost their lives in the dozens of suicide attacks, perpetrated by fanatics, who tried to prove that democracy is 'un-Islamic.'  But at least for a day--but what a day!--the ballot boxes defeated the coffins despite....  Now the hard part begins--the announcement of the elections results, their recognition by the majority of Iraqis and foreign governments and the forming of a government....  The elections in Iraq are the first big battle of this war--a war, which is to be won not by the numerous foreign troops, but by election turnout."

 

"Elections And Blood"

 

The largest-circulation daily Trud commented (1/31):  "The elections in Iraq aim not to elect members of parliament, but to create an impression of legality of power....  It's quite clear that the elections are not being held in a free and democratic environment and it's also clear that they would not result in a true popular representation....  After the vote Iraq will ostensibly regain its independence.  The presumably democratic regime in Baghdad will have a 'lawful' basis to ask the American and other military forces of the multinational coalition to stay in the country and protect the achievements of the democracy."

 

CYPRUS:  "Iraqi Poll A Victory Over Terror"

 

The Independent, English-language Cyprus Mail editorialized (2/1):  "It is difficult to disagree with President Bush's assertion that the Iraqi elections were a 'resounding success' and a 'great and historical achievement.'  According to initial estimates, 60% of registered voters--eight million Iraqis--defied the violence and terror to vote in Sunday's polls, the first multi-party elections in nearly 50 years.  Any turnout over 50% would have been hailed as a success as it would be interpreted, quite rightly, as support for the establishments of a democratic Iraq by the majority of people.  It is no wonder the opponents of the invasion conceded that the elections was good for the Iraqi people....  These elections were held against a backdrop of mounting terror and violence, which made the high turnout even more astonishing....  The violence by insurgents is set to continue.  But Sunday's election turnout showed that Iraqis are determined to follow the path of democratization regardless of the violence.  As interim PM Iyad Allawi said, Sunday's election was a 'victory over terror.'  

 

CZECH REPUBLIC:  "Optimism Of Post-Election Iraq"

 

Frantisek Sulc commented in the center right Lidove noviny  (2/1):  "Practically all the debates about present day Iraq fall along a left vs. right dividing line, and are fundamentally influenced by the position of the debater toward how the war was started.  Herein lies the basic problem.  To judge the current engagement and events in Iraq through the prism of the legitimacy of the war or a pro-American or anti-American (respectively pro- and anti-Bush) standpoint is nonsense....  For the Iraqis the elections are connected to great expectations.  And if these are not at least partially fulfilled in the next few months, dangerous disillusionment will follow....  And finally, even after the elections, open political questions will remain.  Especially where the Sunnis are concerned, many of whom boycotted these elections.  It will be necessary to convince them that the new government will not exist at their expense.  It is important for them to understand that only by participating in the political life of post Sadaam Iraq can they gain.  Boycotts and armed attacks will not help them.  This is connected with confidence building in the new Iraq and the suppression of traditional enmities....  Sunday's elections sent an important signal, but the second half-time will not last forever.  Therefore it is necessary to act quickly.

 

DENMARK:  "Impressive Start For Democratic Process"

 

Center-right Jyllands-Posten editorialized (2/1):  "The positive result of the election indisputably legitimizes the action taken to oust Saddam Hussein, one of the worst dictators in the history of the world, from power.  The left-wing has yet again been forced to eat humble pie.  As long as anyone can remember, the left wing has got it wrong regarding the major issues.  America's impressive vision of the future of Iraq has made a promising start."

 

"Denmark Must Consider Its Role In U.S.-Controlled Coalition"

 

Left-wing Information commented (2/1):  "Danish soldiers were a part of the political process that was started with Sunday's election in Iraq.  Hopefully, the election represents the first step on the road to the democratic development of Iraq.  But, the situation could also worsen and as the result of this, the country could be thrust into civil war.   We must remember that we are a part of the Coalition that is controlled totally by the U.S.  As a small country, we have absolutely no say in the decision-making process, including how long the foreign occupation will last.  This reality is what should influence our discussions about Danish presence in Iraq.  The issue of Iraq should not become intermingled with the Danish election."

 

"Iraq Election Could Help Bridge Transatlantic Divide"

 

Independent Børsen commented (2/1):  "A possible side-effect of the Iraqi election could also be that a window of opportunity is opened for reconciliation between the U.S. and Europe."

 

FINLAND:  "Participation In Iraqi Elections Sufficient Despite Terrorism"

 

Leading national daily, centrist Helsingin Sanomat editorialized (2/1):  "U.S. President George W. Bush immediately greeted the results of the elections as 'a voice of freedom' and as received by the Iraqi people as 'an enormous success.'  He certainly was not completely wrong.  Even the sharpest critics of the president ought to avoid the temptation of belittling the achievement only because it is also a political victory for the White House.  Yet Iraq's course toward peace and a democratic system is anything but free from difficulties....  All the Shiites and Kurds who voted are most likely not convinced democrats.  Not all of them are friends of the United States.  A high turnout does not guarantee a conciliatory attitude of either group....  Not all the Sunni Arabs opposing the election deserve to be regarded as 'fascists' as the American media has quite too easily started to call them.  The occupying power is tempted to divide the Iraqis sharply into foes and friends, which in terms of the future months is a very short-sighted approach.  Unless a majority of them can be made supporters of the constitutional reform, the country will hardly be appeased....  Even then it will not be enough that the parties agree on the text of the law.  They will also have to respect the agreements in concrete policies.  Only then can a coalition government be formed with the power to attack violent movements and erode the silent support such movements enjoy."

 

GREECE:  "They Defied The Terrorists"

 

Foreign news editor Amalia Negreponti wrote in top-circulation center-left pro-opposition Ta Nea (1/31):  "Millions of Iraqis rushed to the ballots, thus pushing the terrorists of al-Qaida's deputy commander Al Zarqawi to the margin."

 

"Armed Elections"

 

Leftist pro-opposition Eleftherotypia editorialized (1/31):  "As soon as the ballots closed, the American president rushed to state that the elections in Iraq were extremely successful, as Iraqis 'rejected the anti-democratic ideology of the terrorists.'  The success, as well as the climate of freedom became obvious from the photos published by Eleftherotypia in its front page.  A masked armed guard votes, casting an open ballot into the box.  Even the most malicious will be convinced that the secrecy of the vote is secured by the mask....  Iraq comes out of the elections divided and bleeding, with its future uncertain, since Iraqis were not allowed to decide by themselves, without the presence of the foreign forces that pushed their country to hell."

 

HUNGARY:  "A Small Success"

 

Liberal-leaning Magyar Hirlap editorialized (1/31):  "One cannot undo the war in Iraq.  And if Iraq has an imperfect but elected government, carrying on work on the constitution, that is progress....  In this situation, there is only one obligation for the world:  to help.  That is what those must do who are still there, as well as those who have already pulled out of Iraq.  If possible, under UN colors (that would be a real strong message); if that is not possible, as NATO forces, training police and soldiers.  Personnel will have to guard the next election, the one after the next, and perhaps even the one after that.  Maybe, as time passes, there will be no need for them."

 

"Victory"

 

Columnist Endre Aczel wrote in top-circulation, center-left Nepszabadsag (1/31):  "Yes, the victory belongs to the Americans.  To President Bush, if you please....  Of this test of strength, the Americans and their allies came out victorious, and it will have its influence on European politics as well....  The Sunni elite will probably be replaced by an amorphous creation that is going to have a difficult task.  This Sunni elite operated a fundamentally secular system that the Americans, deep down, would like to keep.  For Bush, there is no worse future prospect than an Iranian-type Shia theocracy taking over in Iraq.  Although Ayatollah al-Sistani 's views are pre-Khomeini, i.e., he would keep priests away from politics, they have become so deeply involved in the election game that I have my doubts about the possibility of keeping them under control.  That is what is going to be at stake in the next war."

 

IRELAND:  "Time To Engage With Iraq"

 

The center-left Irish Times remarked (2/1):  "Politics has therefore been reasserted by these elections, however flawed they were by severe security constraints and deep-seated administrative failings by the interim government and the occupation authorities.  This will raise popular expectations for an improvement in political and socio-economic conditions and everyday security, as well as fueling demands for much greater Iraqi control over immediate events and a perspective for full sovereignty over Iraq's future.  Disillusionment will surely follow if progress is not made on meeting these objectives over coming months.  Most of those who voted were clear about one thing:  the desire to regain control over their own political destiny.... Iraqis must now decide on the political shape of their state, whether Islamist or secular, federal or centralized.  They must find ways to hold open participation in government and constitutionalisation to their Sunni compatriots. And they must be satisfied that progress in both these major domestic tasks is reciprocated by the readiness of the United States and its coalition partners to agree a calendar for withdrawal and the restoration of full Iraqi sovereignty. These are gargantuan tasks for such a young and inexperienced polity. Their achievement requires reserves of wisdom and goodwill which have been sorely missing over the last 22 months. But there are some grounds to believe they could be marshaled now, if only to avoid a much more dangerous civil conflict."

 

"Courage Of The Voters"

 

The center-right Irish Independent editorialized (1/31):  "For all the flaws, the violence that surrounded it, the troubles that still lie ahead, the Iraqi election had its noble and inspiring aspects....  The insurgency of which the bombers formed part had escalated the violence for months, hoping to prevent the election from taking place.  Its failure is a victory for the Shia majority....  But Shia domination, if that is brought about by the election result and the subsequent political horse-trading, will not guarantee human rights and stability.  The Sunnis cannot be excluded, and if it proves the case that most of them boycotted the poll a great cloud will hang over the legitimacy of the election as a whole....  At the time of writing the exact turnout in the Sunni heartland is uncertain, but it is sadly clear that it was very low, perhaps disastrously low.  There will be a strong temptation to cast the blame on the U.S. government....  Yet even opponents of the war and doubters of American strategy must concede U.S. sincerity on a fundamental issue. The Bush administration promised an election, and delivered an election.  Moreover, it overcame its initial misgivings about the likelihood of a Shia majority taking power.  The poll might have been rigged; it was not.  Now the question will not be U.S. good faith but U.S.political skill.  Once the results are known, the Americans will have to help Ali al-Sistani and the other leaders to devise a just and equal constitution and a form of administration that will offer fairness to all the people of Iraq....  For the moment, Mr. Bush has every right to savor a success.  Yesterday was a good day for him, and for those brave Iraqis who voted.."

 

LUXEMBOURG:  "Beating The Terrorists On Points"

 

Staff writer Jakub Adamowicz wrote in socialist Tageblatt (1/31):  "[The high election turnout] is proof that fanatical terrorists were not capable of inciting the population to revolt against U.S. troops.  Despite the commotion involving torture and crude occupation, Iraqis made it clear that they share the objective set by the U.S. occupying forces, which is democratizing the country in the medium term."

 

NETHERLANDS:  "The New Iraq"

 

Left-of-center Trouw editorialized (1/31):  "The Saddam regime is now definitely over.  The Sunni absence does not affect the legitimacy of the outcome; the terrorists of Al-Zarqawi are not legitimate.  Now that the Netherlands will withdraw its troops, we should consider other ways of fully supporting the new Iraq."

 

"First Step"

 

Conservative De Telegraaf noted (1/31):  "We can be cautiously optimistic about the process of democratization.  Still, a new Constitution needs to be written and a further split up between Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites needs to be prevented.  But these first free elections were a big step towards an autonomous, democratic society."

 

NORWAY:  "Bloody Election"

 

The independent newspaper VG commented (1/31):  "Even though rebel forces threatened to kill anybody participating in the election and encouraged the voters to boycott and sabotage, the majority of Iraqis chose to defy the threats.  They entered the polling stations risking their lives....  This is a huge victory for the democratic forces in Iraq.  The voters demonstrated clearly that they now want a free, democratic Iraq, and that they want an end to the violence and the destructive rebel groups who ravage the country.  The election might not change the situation overnight, but we can hope that the first free election in more than 50 years is a first step toward a new Iraq....  No matter what, it will be a hard and long-lasting job, but yesterday's election provided hope that the Iraqis now will take advantage of this chance to give the country a new future."

 

"A Kind Of Progress For Iraq?"

 

The newspaper of record Aftenposten stated (1/31):  "In the best case scenario yesterday's election in Iraq and in the Iraqi exile societies is a first step of a very long and painful process in the direction of a democratic administration.  In the worst case scenario it will contribute to highly unwanted consequences, which we may already glimpse the tendencies of:  instead of weakening the appeal of terrorism, the presence and actions of the Western forces in Iraq may actually have contributed to strengthening it.  It is conceivable that the occupation, and not least the reports of torture and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners, may be exploited to recruit new warriors from societies that would normally have remained calm.  There is also a certain risk that Iraq, which was never a naturally formed state, will be divided into three regions:  the Shia Muslims, where the majority voted yesterday, the Sunni Muslims, who to a much larger degree stayed out of the polling stations, and the Kurds in the north, who have fought in vain for their independence for at least three generations.  After the election the picture of Iraq is maybe not quite as negative as the pessimists predicted.  But the road ahead is dangerous and unclear, and it is long."

 

POLAND:  "Iraq Closer To Democracy"

 

Jerzy Haszczynski observed in centrist Rzeczpospolita (1/31):  "Everything indicates that Iraq has taken the first step toward normalcy.  The Iraqis have now begun to assume responsibility for their own state.  Which does not mean that peace will come to reign there overnight, or that troops from other countries will not be needed....  The most important question now is what will result from the elections, which were conducted in a fledgling democracy, in the presence of Americans troops on one hand; and under the threat of terrorist attacks on the other."

 

"The Elections Are Over, We No Longer Need Americans"

 

Robert Stefanicki opined in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (1/31):  "Contrary to what Bush predicted, the 'great moment in Iraq's history' did not happen on Sunday.  Only the Shiites and Kurds voted.  There was almost no election campaign, or foreign observers.   The legitimacy of a parliament and government chosen in such elections will be questioned....  A way for the government to legitimize itself might be to demand that the Americans leave Iraq."

 

PORTUGAL:  "A Lesson For The World"

 

Influential moderate-left Público editorialized (1/31):  "Millions of Iraqis voted because they felt that they could choose and they couldn't lose this opportunity....  And that is the power of democracy..