"If there is no election on Jan. 30, Iraq faces a civil war."
This has been the constant warning from members of interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's government.
What they do not mention is that the danger of a civil war will not necessarily be reduced by the first countrywide elections to be held in Iraq.
An unrepresentative result that leaves the Sunni minority in the central provinces around Baghdad further isolated could even lead, in a worst-case scenario, to the state breaking apart.
Iraqis are almost certain to vote in a transitional assembly dominated by Shiite Arabs, which in turn will lead to increased influence by religious scholars.
And the government put into office by this parliament is likely to outrage the Sunni insurgents and extremists just as much as Allawi's current interim government.
In Iraq, where almost all the major political movements have armed militiamen at their disposal, there is in any case a danger that the struggle for political power will be pursued with weapons once the elections are over.
The electoral system, based on proportional representation across the whole country, provides problems of its own.
It is seen as advantageous to the ethnic minorities and the Kurds, who were once subject to forcible removal by Saddam Hussein.
But it could work against the large Sunni minority, as a low turnout is expected in the provinces where they predominate.
The preparations for Iraq's elections can hardly be seen as a democratic election campaign in the normal sense.
Fear of terrorist attack prevented the candidates for the 275 seats in the new parliament from delivering campaign speeches in public.
This factor has worked in favor mainly of the members of the interim government, who in the final weeks have used their positions to ensure that they are constantly in the media spotlight, pushing their lists.
Election day will bring its own dangers for those Iraqis who intend to ignore the threats and warnings from the extremists and cast their ballots.
Most Iraqis are expected to vote for the lists representing their respective ethnic and religious background.
This should work to the advantage of the Kurdish parties and of the United Iraqi Alliance, which is dominated by Shiite religious leaders.
Among the secular parties, the communists believe they have a chance of making a good showing, as they look back on a long political tradition in Iraq and were brutally persecuted by the Saddam regime.
Voters who mistrust the religious leaders can also choose between the political groups represented respectively by interim President Ghazi al-Yawer and his rival interim Prime Minister Allawi.
But both have to battle against the image problem of having been appointed to their posts while the US held sway.
The Shiite religious leaders under Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani support the United Iraqi Alliance, claiming that the elections are the right way to end the occupation.
But the chaotic conditions in much of Iraq suggest that a victory by the main Shiite list under Abdul Aziz al-Hakim will not in fact lead to a call for the US forces to leave.
In Washington, however, there are increasing calls for an orderly withdrawal from the Iraqi quagmire.
After Saddam's weapons of mass destruction -- a central reason for last year's invasion -- turned out to be a chimera and following the scandal around torture at Abu Ghraib prison, it is unlikely that US President George W. Bush will be able simply to abandon the country to its fate.
Seasoned observers draw up a grim balance sheet for the past year. Iraq has become a magnet for Islamist terrorists of every stripe from all over the Arab world. More than 1,300 US soldiers have lost their lives.
And the number of Iraqis killed in the war itself and the subsequent terror attacks, although unknown, reaches into the tens of thousands.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS