The failure of Iraqi parties to form a government up till now is a cause for serious concern among writers as it is dashing any hope for political stability and impeding development. It could also delay the withdrawal of US troops due to start in September. The editorial of the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan noted that although 100 days had passed since the Iraqi elections, and a 30- day ultimatum set by the constitution to choose a president, prime minister and head of parliament had ended, paralysis is still the main feature in Iraq's political scene. The editorial ascribed the situation to the differences among the main political powers and their inability to reach a consensus that would help their state tackle the major challenges facing it, mainly a shortage in basic services, rebuilding its infrastructure and development. "It is high time Iraqi leaders break the deadlock by reaching an agreement that does not exclude any political party and prioritises the interests of the state. That is the only way that will allow the people and the country to regain their political power. Iraqis are capable of that if they have the will and good intentions," the edit concluded. Mohamed Nagui Amayreh regarded the formation of the new government as a national-regional issue rather than internal. Although the new government should be formed before the end of next month, that time coincides with other factors that are as influential to the future of Iraq. The first of these factors is the withdrawal of US forces which is supposed to start by early September. However, observers expect that the failure to form an Iraqi government before that date would delay the pullout because US forces cannot withdraw and leave Iraq to Iranian influence especially in the light of the tense US- Iranian relationship and the sanctions imposed on Tehran. The second factor is the Iranian declaration that it will resume talks with the US and Europe regarding its nuclear plans in September. The outcome of the talks would affect Iraq as well as the whole region. The third factor is the expected start of the direct Palestinian- Israeli negotiations. The failure of the indirect talks and the Israeli procrastination in halting settlement building would further contribute in making the region tense. Other factors include the Israeli stand on Iran's nuclear programme, Iran's expected role in Lebanon and Gaza, and Tehran's ties with Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas. On the internal level, differences on the formation of the government are political rather than legal, as the constitution states that it is the right of the majority list -- Iyad Allawi's -- to form the government. The internal difference between Iraqi parties in addition to the conflict between Shia and Sunnis, and the Kurdish demands for a federal state could further affect the future of Iraq. In light of all these intermingling regional and internal factors, Amayreh wondered in the Oman's political daily Al-Watan whether the Iraqis will succeed in forming their future government. He did not provide an answer. Jaber Habib Jaber seemed to be more certain of the eventual formation of the government. He described the present political scene as hazy as the negotiations among the parties are still far from reaching the core of their differences, the coalitions are fragile and the political state is volatile. As a result, Jaber did not rule out the dissolution of political coalitions and the formation of new coalitions overnight. However, he predicted that the government would be formed eventually from the four biggest winning blocs for two reasons: the external factor which would intervene in the last minute to prevent a complete deadlock. Second, the inclination of all the victorious blocs to be part of the ruling coalition rather than that of the opposition. All big political blocs, Jaber explained, tend to respect the ruling authority and relinquish opposition for fear of missing having a say in the formation of the new Iraq. Thus, Jaber concluded in the London-based political daily Asharq Al-Awsat one does not need to be exceptionally bright to realise that the expected scenario will be one that includes all the parties in a ruling coalition. And opposition would be an option for nobody. US President Barack Obama's policies in the Middle East came to light after his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu last week. Atef Abu Seif wrote that the ascension of Obama was a big event because he was the first African American to assume the post. In the Middle East, there were high hopes that he would make a change in the biased US policy towards Israel. However, there are some facts Abu Seif pointed out, mainly that the US citizen does not elect his president because of his external agenda but mainly for his internal policies especially those regarding health insurance, education and taxes. The other fact is that the US president is part of an institution that controls a lot of the president's policies. Obama, Abu Seif explained, did not succeed in making a clear change in external US policies especially in hot issues like the peace process and Iran. Even when he took a clear stand regarding Israeli settlement activity, Obama was forced to give up his stand to guarantee that legislation regarding healthcare would be accepted. He did what every other US president did: give priority to internal matters at the expense of external issues. Abu Seif expected that Obama's relationship with Netanyahu would witness a noticeable improvement in the future as it was clear in their meeting last week. He based his expectations on the fact that Congressional mid-term elections is later this year and Obama needs Israel's support to guarantee a majority for his Democratic Party. Thus, Abu Seif wrote in the Palestinian independent political daily Al-Ayyam that Obama will exert an effort to achieve peace through George Mitchell's visits to the region, his contacts with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his emphasis on the two-state solution. Meanwhile, he will keep positive relations with Israel by confirming its right to defend itself against any aggression and his understanding of its concern over Iran's nuclear plans and the growing capabilities of Hizbullah.
