Progress Waits... Again

With all the talk of withdrawal and whether the surge worked, maybe somebody could take a look at the political progress that neocons claim the Iraqis are making?

Iraq's parliament passed legislation Tuesday setting new rules for provincial elections, a step widely viewed here as critical to the country's process of political reconciliation.

But Kurdish lawmakers boycotted the vote over the status of Kirkuk, an oil-rich, ethnically mixed city that Kurdish leaders believe should come under the control of their autonomous regional government in northern Iraq. The move could undermine the legislation and delay the provincial elections, which had been expected this fall.

The Kurds vowed they'd boycott the vote if it was done by secret ballot, which the Sunni Speaker of the House proceeded to do, leading to a Kurdish walkout and an expected veto by Jalal Talabani, the President of Iraq (who happens to be Kurdish).

Given all this, there is no way provincial elections carry off in October, meaning that Sunnis will still have weakened representation in the Parliament through the rest of the year. They keep delaying and delaying the status of Kirkuk because everyone knows a solution will lead to bloodshed. To consign the Kurds in Kirkuk to essentially the same forces who repressed them under Saddam will be unacceptable. And Arabs who want to limit Kurdish influence want Kirkuk in their hands, largely due to the oil resources. It's untenable.

The point is that this vaunted political progress never actually gets to a point of conclusion, and Iraq muddles through, relying on US military to keep the tense situation under control. I would argue that an end date for removal of forces would actually force them to confront these difficult issues instead of the constant delay.

UPDATE: Ugh, from Marc Lynch:

Keep an eye on the special meeting of the Kurdish Parliament called for today over Kurdish outrage over the Kirkuk provisions in the just-passed provincial elections law, which Kurdish leadership is calling a "coup against the Constitution." The Kurdish bloc is calling for a re-vote, which might make sense but would be of dubious legality. Some (overly excitable?) Arab and Iraqi reports suggest that in addition to Talabani vetoing the provincial election law (over which the Kurds walked out of Parliament) the Kurds could pull out of Maliki's government and potentially even bring it down. Wouldn't it be wild if the estimably pro-US Kurds, the biggest fans of a long-term American military presence, bring down Maliki at the height of his perceived power immediately after he expressed support for the removal of US troops by 2010... over a seemingly entirely unrelated issue?

Yikes.