BAGHDAD, Feb 17: The US administrator for Iraq, Paul Bremer, on Tuesday signalled he was willing to use the occupation's veto if the Washington-appointed Interim Governing Council (IGC) drafted a temporary constitution that challenged the spirit of Western-style democracy.
The statement drew immediate condemnation from Shia leaders, warning that Mr Bremer risked a crisis should he carry out his threat to veto an Islamic constitution for the country.
The Najaf head of the main Shia party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), warned against US intervention in the drafting of the country's legal code.
"I think that if one seeks to impose another solution than what the Iraqi population wants, it would spark a crisis and none of the parties want this to happen," Sheikh Sadreddin al Kubbanji said.
The Governing Council has been charged with writing the temporary constitution or fundamental law that will govern Iraq until elections are held some time next year, but many observers believe that some council members are pushing to implement rule by religious hard-liners in the post-occupation era.
"The Transition Administrative law will establish equal rights. The text of the current draft established Islam as the state religion, but says it will be a source of inspiration for law," Mr Bremer told reporters during a tour of a women's centre in Karbala on Monday.
He vowed the new law would protect civil liberties according to the agreement he reached with the Governing Council in November that set June 30 as the final day of the US-led occupation.
"Our position is clear, and the text that is in there now is as I say. It can't become law until I sign it," Mr Bremer said. as the final day of the US-led occupation. "Our position is clear, and the text that is in there now is as I say. It can't become law until I sign it," Bremer said.
QUID PRO QUO: Shia members on the interim Governing Council are ready to back off from their demands for elections before a planned US transfer of sovereignty - but at a price.
They would want an appointed transitional government that ensures their political dominance as Iraq's majority group. "There are two choices: elections, or compromises that respect the existing balances," said Adel Abdel Mahdi, a senior official of the SCIRI.
"There can't be any playing of the one issue against the other. If you refuse the elections, then you have to accept the balances." Washington's original plan for handing power back to Iraqis on June 30 foresaw a complex system of caucuses to pick an interim body that would draft a constitution and see the country through to full elections next year.
But that plan was cast into disarray by Ayatollah Ali al Sistani, the Shias' most revered leader. Demands by the reclusive Sistani that the interim body be elected sparked big protests of support in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq late last year, leading Washington to ask a UN team to judge the feasibility of an early vote and explore alternatives.
Last week, the team met Iraqi politicians, including leaders of Sunnis fearful an early vote would hand power to Shias. It then all but ruled out a vote by June 30.
Since the UN visit, Council members, including Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani, have proposed that the body assume sovereignty if there is no vote, as the best alternative to caucuses they backed in November but now consider all but dead.
The about-face on caucuses on the US-appointed Council compounds the dilemma of a US administration that faces a November presidential election and insists the June 30 date is not negotiable even if details of a transfer of sovereignty are.
Members of the IGC say the caucus plan they agreed to with Washington - hastily and under pressure from the US-led occupation authority, according to some of them - is now probably beyond salvaging. -Reuters/AFP