The streets of Iraq : protests, the public sphere and democracy

Since the invasion of Iraq by Coalition forces in 2003, much attention has been paid to the violence ravaging Iraq’s streets, so much so that they have become synonymous with bloodshed and chaos. This paper begins by countering this prominent view with a brief outline of some of the more positive scenes that have played out on Iraq’s streets, including the successful elections of 2005 and 2009. The bulk of the paper builds on this discussion to detail the various protest movements that have emerged across Iraq since 2003, including those organised by Shia clerics, minority movements, women’s organisations and Iraqi worker unions. This paper concludes by arguing that the willingness of normal Iraqi citizens to exercise their democratic right to protest indicates the degree to which democratic ideals are taking hold in Iraq and represents a fundamental step towards a more peaceful and inclusive future.

Targeting the cultural history of Iraq : implications for national identity and democracy

Since its inception in 1921, a number of successive regimes have sought to politicize Iraq’s cultural history in order to build nationalistic sentiment and social cohesion across this rich and complex nation. Foremost among these were the Baath party, particularly under the rule of Saddam Hussein, who used much of the nation’s Oil wealth to undergo an extensive nation-building campaign. However, with the invasion of Iraq by the US in 2003 came the deliberate destruction and blatant negligence of the occupying forces. In addition, Iraqi civilians targeted the cultural landscape of their nation with wanton looting and arson, as well as systematic attacks on sites of archaeological or ethno-religious significance. More recently, the Shia and Kurdish dominated Iraqi Government have organised the “Committee for Removing Symbols of the Saddam Era” and plan to purge the state of its Sunni dominated past. This paper argues that the destruction of Iraq’s cultural history has played a part in eroding the national identity that many of these symbols and institutions were designed to promulgate. In turn, this has brought about the rise of ethno/religious sectarianism in Iraq which has had particular implications for the nation’s fledgling democratic order.

Read all about it : the free press, the public sphere and democracy in Iraq

Despite a wealth of recent research which has detailed the impact that new media outlets and technologies have had on the Middle East’s nascent public sphere and its role in promoting democracy, there has been little investigation into the re-emergence of the free press in Iraq following the toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003 and the corresponding end to his tight control over the nation’s media sector. This paper begins by reviewing Iraq’s long relationship with the written word and its corresponding public sphere. It traces the introduction of the printing press to Iraq by the Ottomans and details those periods when the Iraqi press was truly free, fostering the emergence of a civil society and democratic reforms (such as under the Young Turks, the early Hashemite era and following the Second World War). It also examines those periods when the Iraqi media was most restricted and did little else than praise the regime at hand (such as under Ottoman rule and most recently under the Ba†th regime, especially under Saddam Hussein). Following on, this article reviews the developments since the fall of Saddam Hussein and, despite the extensive interference in Iraq’s media sector from governmental entities both outside and inside Iraq, it concludes by arguing that these papers have been central to the re-emergence of an Iraqi public sphere which has openly debated and discussed the issues pertinent to post-Saddam Iraq.

Manipulating Islam and democracy in Iraq’s ‘Pluralised Authoritarianism’

With the realisation that the initial motives for the 2003 invasion of Iraq – Saddam’s alleged stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and his links to Al-Qaeda – were grievous intelligence errors the Bush administration, with varying degrees of success, were able to spin the war’s rasion d’etre and redefine the parameters of victory. A central tenet of this approach was to begin speaking about democracy as if it had always been one of the aims of the war itself. For the first few years, the effort to democratise Iraq appeared to gain some credible momentum: a complex array of political, religious and ethno-sectarian factions formed political parties and civil society movements; uncensored news was enthusiastically consumed across the nation; Iraqi citizens took to the streets to protest key government decisions; and millions of Iraqis voted in relatively free and fair national elections (Davis, 2004, 2007, Isakhan, 2008, 2011b). Central to each of these developments were various Iraqi religious establishments – but especially those of the Shia Arab population of Iraq – who saw no distinction between their Islamic faith and the notion of democracy. Not surprisingly, a body of literature has emerged which has been very optimistic about Iraq’s engagement with both ‘Islam’ and ‘democracy’ in the post-Baathist period, while acknowledging the challenges it faces in creating a stable, egalitarian and democratic society (Al-Musawi, 2006, Cole, 2006, Davis, 2005, Dawisha, 2009, Isakhan, 2011a, Stansfield, 2007).

However, there have been virtually no studies which have sought to question this optimism in the light of more recent events. Addressing this lacuna, this paper documents the last few years (2006- 2011) which have seen many elements within the Iraqi political elite – most notably the Maliki government and his State of Law Coalition (SLC) – demonstrate what has been referred to in literature on other Arab states alternatively as ‘liberalised autocracy’ (Brumberg, 2002), ‘semi-authoritarianism’ (Ottaway, 2003) or ‘pluralised authoritarianism’ (Posusney and Angrist, 2005). That is to say, that these states consolidate their incumbency while putting in place measures that can be considered more or less liberal. To do this, the regime actually utilises (and controls) nominally democratic mechanisms such as elections, media freedoms, political opposition and civil society as part of their strategy to retain power. Of particular interest here are the ways in which the Maliki government – and Shia Arab Iraqi political factions more broadly – have manipulated both ‘Islam’ and ‘democracy’ towards such ‘pluralised authoritarianism’.

The role of Australia's public broadcasters in development and democracy

In this article I investigate the ways in which the ABC and SBS use the internet. I predominantly focus on how the public broadcasters’ promote an informed citizenry though participation online. Such online participation further develops a second vital role of public broadcasting which is to develop a sense of nationhood—through Australian content (which can include information and communication in languages other than English) and which provides for local and international communities in rural and metropolitan areas to engage with each other. In order to understand the capacity for the public broadcasters to enhance online public communication and democratic participation, I firstly examine general internet theory and evaluate how liberating the internet has been for those living in countries where the state and political alliances control traditional broadcast and print media. For this analysis, the key aspects of virtual communication and cyber-democracy are explored as they are relevant to the services the public broadcasters could provide. Furthermore, case examples of current practical work undertaken in these areas are examined. The framework of the ‘virtual agora’ is considered because it represents the ideals of a public sphere in cyberspace where people are currently able to discuss and debate key issues. The theory is then related to activities undertaken through the ‘vortals’ of the ABC and SBS. Finally, the extent of political intervention and commercial influence is evaluated.

Semiotic, rhetoric and democracy

This paper unites Deely’s call for a better understanding of semiotics with Jaeger’s insight into the sophists and the cultural history of the Ancient Greeks. The two bodies of knowledge are brought together to try to better understand the importance of rhetorical processes to political forms such as democracy. Jaeger explains how cultural expression, particularly poetry, changed through the archaic and classical eras to deliver, or at least to be commensurate with contemporary politics and ideologies. He explains how Plato (429-347 BCE) struggled against certain poetry and prose manifestations in his ambition to create a ‘perfect man’ – a humanity which would think in a way which would enable the ideal Republic to flourish. Deely’s approach based on Poinsot and Peirce presents a theoretical framework by means of which we can think of the struggle to influence individual and communal conceptualisation as a struggle within semiotics. This is a struggle over the ways reality is signified by signs. Signs are physical and mental indications which, in the semiotic tradition, are taken to produce human subjectivity – human ‘being’. Deely’s extensive body of work is about how these signs are the building blocks of realist constructions of understanding. This paper is concerned with the deliberate use of oral and written signs in rhetorical activity which has been deliberately crafted to change subjectivity. We discuss: (1) what thought and culture is in terms of semiotics and (2) Jaeger’s depiction of Ancient Greece as an illustration of the conjunction between culture and subjectivity. These two fields are brought together in order to make the argument that rhetoric can be theorised as the deliberate harnessing of semiotic affects. The implication is that the same semiotic, subjectivity-changing potency holds for 21st century rhetoric. However fourth century BCE Athens is the best setting for a preliminary discussion of rhetoric as deliberate semiotic practice because this was when rhetoric was most clearly understood for what it is. By contrast a discussion concentrating on modern rhetoric: public relations; advertising; lobbying; and public affairs would open wider controversies requiring considerably more complex explanation.

Oil unions and democracy in post-Saddam Iraq

Since the invasion of 2003, a complex array of political, religious and ethno-sectarian factions have formed civil society movements; uncensored news has been consumed across the nation; ordinary citizens have taken to the streets to protest key government decisions; and various local councils have been formed, deliberating on key decisions facing their immediate communities. Given this context, this paper focuses on the specific case of the Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions (IFOU), Iraq’s largest and most powerful independent workers union. The IFOU has repeatedly taken the Iraqi government to task over their poor pay and the dangerous nature of their work, as well as the government’s initial kowtowing to US plans to privatise the entire Iraqi oil sector. To do this, the IFOU have utilised a variety of very democratic mechanisms including peaceful strikes and protests, media campaigns and political lobbying. Such moves have met with mixed results in Baghdad – at times the central government has pandered to the requests of IFOU, but it has also gone as far as issuing arrest warrants for its senior members. The IFOU therefore serve as an interesting example of public power in Iraq and may well pose one of the greatest challenges to rising authoritarianism there.

Lessons in aiding journalism and democracy: a study of Australian educators working in the Asia Pacific region

 This paper examines assumptions about democracy and the role of media held by journalism educators working outside Australia, and the extent to which those assumptions influence teaching styles, regardless of the maturity of the political systems in the nations in question. This paper looks at the work emerging from academics Beate Josephi, Barbie Zelizer, John Nerone, Cherian George and Silvio Waisbord, who argue in Journalism (2012) that there needs to be a change to the understanding by journalism scholars of the central place of journalism in democracy because that view is not global in its perspective. This paper specifically considers Zelizer’s point that “much of the scholarly world in the West – and specifically in the United States – depends directly or indirectly on the presumption of democracy and its accoutrements”. The researcher asks, “what can we learn about our Australian perspective on teaching journalism in the developing world where there may not, yet, be an operating democracy or a form of democracy that replicates the Western liberal model?”