Elections in Iraq

by Editor · January 26, 2005

Kidnappings feature among today’s news items. The abducting of the archbishop of Mosul was initially labelled a “terrorist act” by the Vatican. There was uncertainty about whether the abductors were targeting the Catholic Church, religion in general or the approaching Iraqi elections.

After the archbishop’s release, there was not much more clarity. However, the event illustrated once again that Iraq is in the kind of pre-election turmoil that suggests a flawed outcome.

It is significant that after the American-led invasion of Iraq, Christian property has been increasingly bombed. Only four months ago a huge explosion destroyed a church in Mosul and left 15 dead and 60 injured. Christians are living in fear. Many have taken refuge in Syria and Jordan.

The Holy See’s secretary for relations with states, Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo, has described this revolting turn of events as “Christianophobia”. Iraqis and many others in the Middle East see the Western world as determined by Christianity, or at least not separated from it.

Ironic though this may seem, considering the immense eroding of traditional Christian values in Western society, it illustrates the depth of anger felt by people who believe that they have been invaded by oil-thirsty Christians.

What has made matters worse, is that Muslim sentiment and that in Iraq in particular has been inflamed further by the recent publication of photographs depicting British troops cruelly humiliating Iraqi prisoners. Although only a few soldiers are guilty of this, it has even more vividly painted Westerners and Christians as barbaric and inhumane monsters.

It is possible too that Christian persons and property are only the first and easiest target for terrorists to strike against. Mosques have been attacked likewise, and the general unrest in the country appears to be orchestrated to scare voters away from the polling booths.

There are polarised groups in the election field. The Shiites, who appear to be in the majority, and Grand Ayotolla Ali Sistani are all for the January 30 elections to go ahead on time. Iran’s president, Mohammed Khatami is also in favour of them, saying they will calm the country in which Iran has many interests.

A random but probably unreliable poll in Iraq revealed that 60% of the population do not want a postponement of the election. Others are not so sure, and there are dark predictions of a civil war.

Obviously, free and fair elections are impossible where there are threats and killings to frighten off the voters. (The African National Congress now believes that Zimbabwe’s next election will be unfree and unfair, assuring Mr Mugabe of an unjust victory.)

Forcing voters in any direction by intimidation is immoral. It deprives individuals of the necessary freedom of choice, and is simply undemocratic.

The Church has had much experience of this in its long history. It was because the papal electors were being manipulated by political and ecclesiastical pressure groups, that in 1274 Pope Gregory X ordered the cardinal electors to meet in seclusion, in the so- called conclave, where they were to remain until they had made their choice.

The just and lasting outcome of the Iraqi elections will depend wholly on all parties and participants being spared fear, force and fraud. The leaders of the United States and Britain in particular will be holding their breath. Pope John Paul will take a special interest. The rest of us can at least pray for a peaceful result.