A Soviet-style election ?

With Fallujah being pounded to bits, jihadi and insurgent attacks everywhere and a state of emergency, this may seem like a bad time to discuss the Iraqi elections, but there’s no reason to suppose that there’s going to be a better one.

In the Washington Post, Marina Ottaway develops concerns I’ve expressed previously about the possibility that the Iraqi election will degenerate into a Yes-No vote on a unified slate of candidates with a predetermined sharing of the spoils (thanks to Jack Strocchi for the link). Apparently the US Embassy/shadow government is backing this idea. It seems unbelievable that anyone on the US side could see this as a good idea (of course, it makes great sense for Allawi who would be wiped out in a competitive election), but this kind of thing has been the pattern at every previous stage of the occupation

Monday Message Board

It’s time for the Monday message board, where you are invited to post your thoughts on any topic. Civilised discussion and no coarse language please.

Reader Mark Upcher has suggested that this item be moved to the weekend, when readers might have a bit more free time. In the spirit of free competition, I plan to run both for a while. The weekend board might be a better one for longish, more reflective, pieces.

A tiny bit of good news

Putin has signed the Kyoto protocol, which brings it into force. For the foreseeable future, constructive international action of this kind is going to have to be undertaken without the support of the United States, and therefore of US client states like Australia. However, a designed system of emission credits and taxes may put pressure on non-ratifying countries to cut their emissions – Howard has promised that Australia will do this anyway, which doesn’t make much sense as far as I can see.

New on the website

I’ve been working on the website, putting up most of my journal articles from 2004. I’d appreciate any info on broken links, comments on possible improvements and, of course, substantive comments on the papers themselves.

I’ve also added the following newspaper articles from the leadup to the Australian election

* Time to recast health roles Australian Financial Review,23 September 2004.

* Demonising the greens Australian Financial Review,9 September 2004.

* Labor must stand firm Australian Financial Review,26 August 2004.

* Doubters warm to detail Australian Financial Review,12 August 2004.

* Don’t fear a greens senate Australian Financial Review,29 July 2004.

My Fin column on the US election is up at Australian Policy Online

Keeping track of stuff

In the aftermath of the elections, it doesn’t look as if anyone in government will be calling on me for frank and fearless advice[1] any time soon. So this seems like a good time to get my records in order. My piece on time management elicited some follow-up discussion along these lines, notably here, with followup here . For those who are looking for moderately constructive routine activities in the wake of recent catastrophes, here are some (not very organised) thoughts.
Read More »

Arafat

According to numerous reports, Yasser Arafat is near death. I don’t wish him ill, but I hope that, should he recover, he will not return as Palestinian President or in any other active political role. With the break between Sharon and the expansionist settlers over the Gaza withdrawal approaching the critical point, a new Palestinian leadership that can distance itself from the failures and crimes of the past, is exactly what is needed if there is to be a chance of a successful resolution. Of course, there’s no guarantee that this is what will happen – chaos or Hamas could easily emerge to replace Arafat.

Would Gephardt have won ?

Most of the post-election discussion I’ve seen has focused on the impact of religion, and quite a few commentators have suggested that the Democrats need to shift their policies to appeal more to religiously-motivated voters. This approach would entail some fairly substantial compromises in the search for marginal votes.

If we’re the mood for pragmatic populism, there’s a policy option that might well have delivered the Democrats the election, without the risk of fracturing the Democratic base as an appeal to the religious right would have done. That option is protectionism, of the kind espoused during the campaign by Gephardt[1]. Gephardt had his electoral problems, but I think he could have carried Ohio and his home state of Missouri, as well as having a good chance in West Virginia and even Indiana. He might have lost some coastal states but overall he would have had a better chance of a majority in both the popular vote and the electoral college.
Read More »

The next four years: realistic version

While I’ve tried to be open to more optimistic possibilities, it’s far more likely that the second Bush Administration will be more of the same, and worse. The problem for the winners is that the consequences of the Administration’s policies, still debatable in 2004, will be grimly evident by 2008, and there will be no one but Republicans to take the blame. In purely partisan terms, as I argued several times before the election, this was a good one to lose.
Read More »