A political storm had been heading over Iraq with the bombing of the al-Askariya shrine and the sectarian tensions that rose out of it. The Shia United Iraq Alliance used the occassion to push forward with it’s plan to nominate current Prime Minister Ibraham al-Jaafari for the position again, despite the wishes of every other political bloc in the new parliament. In essense, they said that they are the only group fit to rule the country right now and their choice for prime minister is constitutional and must be respected by the other parties.

Well, a few people disagreed. The two main Sunni parties, the two Kurdish parties, and former Prime Minister Allawi’s secular list have decided to oppose his nomination and, if necessary, form a larger umbrella bloc in parliament in order to nominate their own prime minister. Even President Talabani, an ally with the UIA-led government this past year, broke with them on the issue. All of them said that al-Jaafari is too inefficient and too divisive given his allowing of the intrusion of sectarian militias into the police force, and the fact that he won the nomination by one vote given to him by radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in a UIA internal caucus.

The Shia are lashing out at this. One word I heard to describe it was “coup.” Even Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who generally stays away from politics except to encourage Iraqi unity and progress, has taken to saying that this Shia must remain united in order to fully protest their interests.

The problem is that the Shia are not united at all. They lost seats this election cycle, putting them far short of the 2/3 vote necessary to simply appoint a prime minister directly. Also, Jaafari only won the nomination by one vote, and some factions within the UIA gave indications earlier on that they intended to leave the bloc. In essence, they’re falling down the ladder and grabbing at anything they think will allow them to hold on. That thing is playing on sectarian tensions.

Strangely enough, it may be the Kurds and Sunnis who will be the harbringers of Iraqi unity. While the current leadership of the UIA view the forming of a larger bloc by the other parties as a coup, the reality is that this other potential bloc wants a unity government where all groups are included and the prime minister is acceptable to them all. The Iraqi constitution states that the largest bloc can nominate the prime minister, but the candidate must be approved by 66% of the parliament. Jaafari will not get this no matter what. The Shia are therefore setting themselves up for an embarrassing defeat. They must realize that there is no coup, because if the Sunni-Kurdish-secular bloc nominates someone that only they will approve of, then the Shia could just as easily bloc that choice.

That brings us up-to-date on the latest news. The man who came in second to al-Jaafari, Adil Abdul-Mahdi, is much more popular with Iraq’s other groups and they have indicated that they would accept him over al-Jaafari. While the Shia up until now have tried to enforce unity by trying to prevent the first meeting of parliament, and therefore the potential vote-down of al-Jaafari, the move completely failed because of Abdul-Mahdi. This is because in order for parliament to convene, the two Vice Presidents must sign off on it. Abdul-Mahdi is one of these two, and while he previously refused to sign, he gave in.

The Shiite vice president relented Wednesday and signed a presidential decree calling Iraq’s parliament into session as early as this weekend, ending a critical stalemate but setting the stage for a rancorous political fight among majority Shiites.

The dispute centered on Shiite Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari’s bid for a second term, which is opposed by a coalition of Sunni Arab, Kurdish and secular Shiite politicians.

President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, hopes to bring the controversy to a head by convening parliament.

But to convene the session, Talabani needed the approval of his two vice presidents. Ghazi al-Yawer, a Sunni who is out of the country, gave Talabani power of attorney Monday to sign on his behalf. Adil Abdul-Mahdi, the Shiite, initially declined but reversed his position Wednesday.

Abdul-Mahdi “signed the decree today. I expect the first session to be held on Sunday or by the end of next week at the latest,” said Nadim al-Jabiri, head of one of seven Shiite political factions.

A second key Shiite political figure, speaking anonymously because of the sensitive nature of the information, said Abdul-Mahdi acquiesced after U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad sought the intervention of Shiite leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim in breaking the stalemate during a meeting Tuesday.

Or was it something else?…

The article notes that constitutionally the parliament had to be called by Sunday, and the Iraqi Federal Court had said that even if Abdul-Mahdi did not sign the decree, it would be convened anyway. So maybe this was to save face. Maybe not.

Abdul-Mahdi’s intention of becoming prime minister isn’t exactly a secret. Convening parliament is just what he needs for al-Jaafari to be voted down and for a new candidate to be nominated. The Sunni-Kurd-secular alliance has said that they would choose someone from the UIA that they find acceptable. This indicated, to me at least, Abdul-Mahdi.

The implications of this are profound if this happens. Not too long from now, Iraq could have the unity government it seeks and approves of. The balance of power in the UIA itself would change, with the SCIRI (where Abdul-Mahdi hails from) one-upping the Dawa party (al-Jaafari’s party). And if the latter cannot accept this, it could lead to the degradation of the UIA itself as parties voting for Abdul-Mahdi break from the main alliance. To prevent this, those backing al-Jaafari might just have to give in, but it may be too late, in their eyes, to do so.

So let me make one thing clear: in the coming weeks and months, Iraq will not be the same country we knew before December 15 or even this week. The balance of power looks to be shifting. And it’s a good thing.