Pakistan Christian TV

Breaking news and world news from Pakisthan Christian TV on Business, Sports, Culture. Video news. News from the US, Europe, Asia Pacific, Africa, Middle East, America.

Is it useful for parliamentary elections in the Arab world?

Is it useful for parliamentary elections in the Arab world?

Parliamentary elections in the countries of the Arab world do not play the role for which the general elections were adopted or the people chose their representatives in parliament as the culmination of democracy in any of the countries. These representatives choose the government or the executive authority that will manage the life of the people and their country, provided that Parliament performs the function of monitoring, legislating and enacting laws that are in the interest of the people.

Democratic and consensual

Choosing representative democracy, whether by the majority or according to proportional representation, has become of great importance around the world, given that the state works to serve the interests of its people, after it was agreed in political science around the world that the definition of the state, or rather how to achieve the conditions for the existence of states, is not without The existence of three conditions together, and the absence of one of them leads to the state losing the reason for its existence, which is the people, the land and the authority. The people is the most important element in this equation. A state without a people can be considered non-existent, while it can be said that it is a failed state in the absence of authority, or considered occupied, for example, if it does not impose its authority on its entire territory because of an external enemy, and it can be considered a failure if it is It is not in control of the entire land because of a group of the people that demands secession or that has financial and military capabilities stronger than the state itself, or it has failed because its rulers seized power by force, or seized the state’s financial and political capabilities by force despite their access to power through elections.

In the Arab world and before the “uprisings” of what the Arabs disagreed on calling it the “Arab Spring” or the “Arab Autumn” that started in 2011, the parliamentary elections did not have basic effects, either because of the control of the one party and its only leader, the dictator, or because of the so-called “ Consensus, or consensual democracy.

Before the Arab revolutions and in most Arab countries, the Supreme Leader used to limit his powers to the entire parliament, and even chose who would run for elections so that the parliament, in form and content, would be under his command.

After the Arab popular uprisings that were supposed to have erupted in order to overthrow dictatorial regimes and establish representative democratic regimes that would secure a decent life and freedom of expression for their citizens, the results of the elections were often overturned, which everyone agreed that they took place transparently and without fraud.

See also  Why does outer space appear dark despite the presence of the sun and bright stars | Arabia weather

This always applies to Egypt, Libya and Algeria, and to Iraq, Lebanon, Tunisia and Sudan now, which are countries in which revolutions have been repeated above previous revolutions in order to restore the people’s power from their monopolists even after the “revolutions”, but despite that, these regimes still suffer a lot. To conduct the parliamentary elections or to abide by their results if they were held.

Lebanon and passive infection

Let us take Lebanon as an example of the so-called “Lebanonization,” or consensual democracy, which despite its name connotations that it is based on compatibility between the types, sections and groups of the Lebanese peoples, is always and often the reason for disrupting the normal political life in this small country.

read more

This section contains related articles, placed in the Related Nodes field.

Despite this, some Arab countries are “Lebanonizing” their situation, as is the case in Iraq, ie resorting to consensual democracy instead of the actual election results. The parties reject the results of the elections and the formation of governments on their basis, on the grounds that failure to represent a group of political parties will lead to an imbalance in the national “consensus” balance. As if the elections are just a formality with no value, or that they are democratic folklore, while the results are known in advance, regardless of the winning team or the losing team.

In Lebanon, after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005, the parliamentary elections took place in a clear conflict between those seeking to hold the killers accountable in an international court and those close to the Syrian regime, the guardian of Lebanon at the time, and the direct accused of the assassination of Rafik Hariri. These elections produced a parliamentary majority for the March 14 party, which represented the Lebanese in their uprising against the killers of Prime Minister Hariri and in the face of the Syrian army that is in Lebanon and its allies.

However, this majority did not prevent the formation of a government at that historical moment in Lebanon’s life that includes all the Lebanese parties, even those who did not obtain a majority in the votes.

When Prime Minister Fouad Siniora decided to approve the international tribunal to try the killers of Rafik Hariri and his companions through the government due to the Parliament’s abstention from meeting, the losing team in the elections, consisting of “Hezbollah” and the “Free Patriotic Movement” occupied downtown Beirut for a year and a half in rejection of this decision. .

And when the next prime minister, Saad Hariri, refused to abdicate the government contract after the resignation of the Shiite representatives from it, the government was considered non-existent because it was not a “charter,” meaning that it did not include all the Lebanese parties in it. Saad Hariri was on a visit to the White House, so he entered to meet former President Barack Obama as prime minister. And then he left him as the resigned head of a “non-charter” government, according to what the Lebanese parties like to call their incompatibility.

See also  Nora Al Matroushi and Mohammed Al Mulla in their first appearance in front of the media tomorrow - Emirates - news and reports

But this matter did not stop at this point in the Lebanese participatory or consensual democracy, and even after the Lebanese movement launched on October 17, 2019, this movement or all the political parties objecting to Hezbollah’s absolute control of Lebanese sovereignty and its authorities, awaiting the upcoming parliamentary elections It is scheduled to take place on May 15, 2022, in order to restore the formation of the system on its basis, until the Deputy Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sheikh Naim Qassem, came out to tell all the Lebanese who believe that elections are the last democratic means for change, that they should not wait for the results of the elections from now, Because whatever the results are, this will not change the status quo even an iota. Rather, Qassem accuses these of being agents of the embassies and receiving funding from them in order to lift Hezbollah’s absolute control over the joints of the state.

In Iraq, the situation is completely similar to the Lebanese situation, firstly because the team that rejects the election results is the ally of the Lebanese Hezbollah, and it is the team that openly boasts of receiving financial and political support from Iran.

And the Iraqi parliamentary elections took place after a great popular movement that claimed hundreds of deaths, and the Iraqis were declaring their overwhelming desire for change and building an Iraqi Arab state that was close to the Arabs and did not stand in the Arab-Iranian conflict towards Iran, as is the case in Lebanon.

And when the Iraqi people expressed these many desires in the elections and chose those who announce positions that meet the aspirations of the Iraqis, the losers rejected the results, so the votes were recounted, and the results remained the same. Therefore, this team followed the other means to impose its political participation, which is acceptance of the results, but it demanded participation in the government on the basis of That the Iraqi government should be a consensual government that includes all the Iraqi political spectrum, as is the situation in Lebanon, and this means that the results of the parliamentary elections have no realistic and practical value.

Tunisia, Sudan and Libya

In Tunisia, the situation is completely different. The president elected directly by the people suspended the work of the parliament elected in turn by the people, and matters are still stuck at this point after he contributed to the disruption of Tunisian democracy and the positions of the Tunisian political parties.

See also  New crew docks at China's first permanent space station - Mashreq News

The decisions of the Tunisian president divided between supporters and opponents, and there are those who support in advance, that is, those who stand against the “Ennahda Party” and there are those who oppose the “Ennahda Party”, but there are also those who stand with President Kais Saied’s demands but are concerned about Tunisian democracy, and there are those who oppose the president Said although they do not prefer the authority of the Ennahda party. Since Qais Saeed’s emergency decisions, it does not seem that there is a horizon on which this issue will end.

This is what is being restored in Sudan, in which the Sudanese succeeded in overthrowing the dictatorial and military regime of Omar al-Bashir, which did not stop supporting the internal civil wars in southern Sudan before its independence, as well as in Darfur.

But the ruling military for more than 20 years did not leave matters to the choices of the rebellious people. Rather, they wanted to run the country after the revolution and not just participate in the administration, and this led to small, renewed revolutions to reject the rule of the Military Council, and things are still so far in the fold of complexity and suffocation as if the people Al-Sudani is destined to live under the leadership of those who believe that peoples are deficient and need someone to guide them in the right path.

There is no need to raise the Libyan situation in this case, because since the overthrow of the late former President Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan people have been in the crosshairs of a clan, regional and political division between eastern and western Libya, and the conflict is still pending between the international sharing of Libya’s great oil wealth.

On the other hand, it seems that the initial and initial conditions for the establishment of the state as a land, people and authority cannot be achieved in the Arab world, whether through elections or without them. The developed world made its people the top priority and interests, with the exception of the Arab Gulf states from this generalization.

As if the so-called “consensus” and “participation” in the management of powers is an inevitable reality, despite the fact that it restores clan, tribal, and pre-state systems to administer the states themselves, and stifle the aspirations of the peoples.