Matters in Iraq are still heading towards more complexity, with the Sadrist movement's insistence, on the words of its leader Muqtada al-Sadr, to hold early elections. While calling for the rest of the political forces to launch a national dialogue and negotiation.
Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr continues to pressure his political opponents, to the extent of calling for early elections, thus further complicating the already tense political scene in Iraq.
Does this mean that the country is really heading towards new elections? Or is a way out of the crisis to be negotiated between the conflicting parties, as usual, is still possible?
Why Muqtada al-Sadr demands new elections?
The last elections, held in October 2021, were early and were organized with the aim of quelling the popular anti-political protests that rocked Iraq in the fall of 2019.
The Sadrist movement won 73 seats at the time, becoming the largest bloc represented in the parliament, which includes 329 deputies.
Al-Sadr, along with his Sunni and Kurdish allies, wanted to name the prime minister and form a "national majority" government.
However, this was rejected by his opponents within the coordination framework that includes pro-Iranian factions. The requirement of the coordination framework was to preserve the traditional consensual solution between all parties of the "Shiite House" in the formation of the government.
To put pressure on his opponents, Sadr, who used to take sudden steps, pushed his deputies to resign from parliament last June.
Currently, thousands of his supporters have camped since Saturday in Parliament to protest the name of the Coordination Framework candidate for prime minister. This proved that he is still able to move the street card to push for the realization of his political demands.
And assistant professor at the University of Copenhagen, Fener al-Haddad, who specializes in Iraqi affairs, explains that al-Sadr "expects to be a major partner in any new government, otherwise he will continue to prevent the formation of a government."
Likewise, "Parliament will not be allowed to meet without its deputies," according to Al-Haddad.
The Iraqi constitution allows parliament to dissolve itself. In Article 64 of it, it states that the dissolution of the House of Representatives takes place “by an absolute majority of the number of its members, at the request of one-third of its members.”
As for the other option, it is at the request of “the Prime Minister and with the approval of the President of the Republic.” Al-Haddad explains that "it is not clear whether the second option is even possible, because the current government is a caretaker government."
By calling for early elections, al-Sadr believes that he will "achieve a great balance, that is, more seats than before," as Ihsan al-Shammari, a professor of political science at Baghdad University, explains to Agence France-Presse.
Differences within the coordination framework?
Since the beginning of the crisis, the parties to the coordination framework, which includes in particular the Al-Fateh bloc, which represents the Popular Mobilization Forces, an alliance of pro-Iranian factions that have become affiliated with the official forces, have been divided over the strategy they should follow towards al-Sadr.
The most hardline wing is represented by former Prime Minister and historical opponent of Sadr Nouri al-Maliki, and the leader of Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, one of the Popular Mobilization factions, Qais Khazali.
And push them towards confrontation.
As for the other camp, it is pushing for an "alternative approach: slowing down the process of forming a government and trying to achieve rapprochement within the Shiite house by offering incentives to Sadr," as stated in an analysis published by The Washington Institute by Hamdi Malik and Michael Knights.
For his part, Ihsan Al-Shammari believes that Khazali and Al-Maliki will be "a brake on the framework's move towards early elections."
He adds that the coordinating framework may oppose holding new elections, "but this reluctance is for the purpose of gaining guarantees... such as a change at the level of the electoral law, at the level of the Federal Court, at the level of the Independent High Electoral Commission, or even at the level of the form of government."
For his part, analyst Fanar Al-Haddad reminds that "Iraqi politics often reaches a point of no return before the concerned parties decide to resolve their differences behind closed doors."
Al-Haddad does not rule out an agreement between the two camps, considering that the assignment of a "consensual prime minister remains the most feasible scenario."
Another important obstacle may stand in the way of dissolving Parliament, which is that "half of the parliament's representatives are new MPs entering the political arena for the first time and want to exercise the political experience and enjoy the benefits of power and obtain privileges such as taking a social position," explains political analyst Ali Al-Baydar.
More escalation?
Ali Al-Baydar believes that the ball is now in the court of Al-Sadr's opponents.
He adds that if they resort to the early elections step, it will be evidence of their desire for dialogue, discussion and negotiation.
The analyst considers that the parliament sit-in was only "a test, or a wake-up call for the political system unless it adheres to what al-Sadr wants and seeks."
In a country that is still experiencing the effects of the traumas of decades of conflicts and a bloody sectarian war, there are strong fears of an open internal Shiite war.
Meanwhile, everyone is calling for restraint to prevent bloodshed, even though all the leading political parties are armed.
However, the room for maneuver of al-Sadr's opponents is limited: Iran, their powerful ally, opposes escalation, experts say.
Ihsan Al-Shammari believes that Tehran "prevents the coordination framework, specifically the armed factions, from going towards raising the ceiling of confrontation towards confrontation."
Iran considers that it is still possible to find "political solutions," according to Al-Shammari, "but if fighting breaks out, it is difficult to control the weapons owned by both sides."