Does the coordination framework disintegrate and the Iraq knot will be dissolved?
It seems that there are complete convictions among prominent leaders in the coordination framework in Iraq that began to crystallize to find a settlement with the leader of the Sadrist movement, Muqtada al-Sadr, and to avoid the occurrence of an extensive scene of clashes that erupted in the Green Zone at the end of last August between his supporters and elements of the Shiite factions.
Perhaps those convictions came after the failure of the coordination framework to persuade the Kurdish parties and the Alliance of Sovereignty representing the Sunni Arabs to ally with it and set a date for the election session of the President of the Republic due to fears of reactions from the Sadrist movement and its storming of Parliament again, as happened at the end of July (July) and led to the suspension of its work Until now.
It is clear that the attempts to market the coordination framework candidate, Muhammad Shiaa Al-Sudani for the position of prime minister, as well as to form a framework government, did not seem to have received regional and international support.
Although the framework announced in several statements its insistence on the nomination of Al-Sudani and not to replace him, the reality speaks of initiatives put forward by some leaders of the framework that are not consistent with this position, and it was found that there are differences in views regarding dealing with Al-Sadr and his supporters.
In this context, a clear call came from the former prime minister and leader of the victory coalition Haider al-Abadi for a national constitutional settlement that would prevent Iraq from slipping into a security breakdown if the political crisis in the country continues.
Al-Abadi said in a tweet to him on “Twitter” that “there are those who do not want to solve the crisis because they live on it. The perpetrator has no alternative for the benefit of the country and the citizens, indicating that this matter calls for it and works on it to preserve the people and the country.
Although the office of the head of the Al-Fateh Alliance and the head of the Badr Organization Hadi al-Amiri issues statements about his meetings with Iraqi politicians, the latest of which was with the leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, Bafel Talabani, it did not address the issue of Sudanese candidacy in any way.
These statements emphasized the need to resolve the political crisis as soon as possible and to find a national consensus to end the political conflict, a position that differs from the positions of prominent leaders in the coordination framework, such as the leader of the State of Law coalition Nuri al-Maliki, the leader of the Wisdom Movement Ammar al-Hakim and Amin “Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq” Qais al-Khazali, who refuse to dissolve Parliament They call for the formation of a government headed by Al-Sudani, even if Al-Sadr does not participate.
The director of the Iraq Center for Strategic Studies, Ghazi Faisal, believes that the initiative of the leader of the victory coalition, Haider al-Abadi, constitutes a rational vision for finding solutions through the constitution and not using the method of challenging others. Serious politics and not sectarian quotas to impose the opinion of a particular bloc on political life in Iraq,” he explained, explaining that there are other leaders within the framework such as Al-Amiri, who plays a role through his meetings with Kurdish leaders represented by the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union in order to keep the line open with Mr. Muqtada al-Sadr, considering That this matter gives an indication that there is an opportunity to restore relations within the coordination framework or to go into disintegration.
He continued, “The withdrawal of the Sadrist movement from Parliament shows that the coordination framework is no longer the largest bloc in the House of Representatives. Therefore, if we assume the departure of Al-Amiri and Al-Abadi from the framework, it will disintegrate,” noting that there are radical currents within the framework that may differ with the Dawa Party and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, and therefore it is on its way to disintegration.”
Faisal pointed out that the failure to open a dialogue with the Kurdistan Democratic Party and sovereignty shows that there is a deficit and an inability to attract the largest bloc to form the government, and that the absence of agreement between the two Kurdish Democratic and Union parties on the position of President of the Republic means that the main obstacle to opening the work of the House of Representatives is still present.
He stressed the existence of a deep disagreement regarding the nomination of Muhammad al-Sudani for the position of prime minister, especially with the Sadrist movement declaring its rejectionist position, pointing out that the government will face a complete rejection, in addition to the Sadrists’ previous demands regarding corruption, militias and uncontrolled weapons.
He considered that the chances of the coordinating framework to remain coherent and its ability to form a government are out of reach, especially after the absence of consensus between the Kurdish parties to nominate the President of the Republic, noting that the lifespan of any government that will be formed will be short and will fall as the government of Adel Abdul Mahdi fell after it committed massacres against young people in Tahrir Square and in Cities of southern and central Iraq.
Essam Al-Faili, professor of political science at Al-Mustansiriya University, believes that putting forward the initiatives gives the impression to everyone that there is a desire for a solution away from tension. to the threat to civil peace.” He added that “there are more than 23 civil liberals who have begun to coalesce towards what is known as future demonstrations that reject the attempt of the political approach to the coordination framework, and this is what makes the wise and wise reconsider their tense positions,” noting that these forces are fully aware that even Muhammad Shiites of Sudan can be waived because the process of his nomination was according to the vision of the owners.
Al-Faili indicated that some of the framework forces are well aware that one of the results of Al-Sudani’s candidacy is the emergence of demonstrations that led to the shedding of a lot of blood, and that the parties whose blood was shed will not accept the issue of imposing the wills of this or that party.