LOS ANGELES TIMES: IRAQ ELECTS PARLIAMENT SPEAKER AFTER 4-MONTH IMPASSE

Iraq’s parliament ended four months of legislative paralysis Sunday by electing a new speaker who supporters hope will bring both muscle and discipline to the notoriously disorderly body.  The selection of the mild-mannered Iyad Samarrai of the Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party is seen as a setback for the Shiite-dominated government of Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, however he replaces Mahmoud Mashadani, who resigned as speaker in December amid universal complaints about his erratic and abrasive style.   The impasse occurred because of concerns by some, including Maliki, that the Iraqi Islamic Party would use the position to challenge the prime minister’s power.   The impasse was broken after Maliki received assurances that the Iraqi Islamic Party would not seek to challenge his rule.  The deadlock had delayed the passage of many key pieces of legislation, including the 2009 budget and the much-anticipated oil law, which has been dragging through parliament for years.

Question to the Blogosphere:  This incident marks a good example of how conflicts can negatively affect the context in which the participants find themselves.  Here, legislation has been paralyzed by the quarrell.  How do you think the government of Iraq built enough trust between Maliki and the Iraqi Islamic Party to be able to gain a credible assurance that the party would not launch a no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister?  What role does religion sect have in this conflict versus the role of personalities?  Do you think the fact that the new speaker is Sunni will cause division and more confusion in the parliament, or will the fact that he is mild-mannered and profession increase the capacity of the government to work productively for the country?  Do you think Maliki will be able to work effectively with Samarri?