By Salama A Salama As Iraq hurtles with ever greater speed towards chaos US occupation forces continue to insist that the elections will take place as scheduled. Moreover, interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi still claims that things are proceeding as they should and that free elections are around the corner. No one can predict how things will develop until the end of January, the date set for the elections. What is clear, however, is that the more American and Iraqi officials insist on holding the elections on time, the worse violence and sectarian divisions become. Ayatollah Al-Sistani, the country's senior Shia cleric, wants his followers to take part in the elections. His zeal is such that he has denounced the boycotting of the elections as a cardinal sin. Sunni clerics disagree. They want their followers to boycott the elections, telling them that elections are sinful as long as they are held under occupation. By casting the elections in a religious light the clerics are turning a political debate into a potentially violent and bloody drama. The elections were supposed to turn a new leaf in the country's life. But it is impossible to imagine they can really be held on time. UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi has already voiced the opinion that, should the violence continue, the timetable for the elections will inevitably be derailed. Efforts by veteran politician Adnan Pachachi, among others, to get the interim government to delay voting has proved unsuccessful. Nothing good can come out of the current standoff between the proponents and opponents of the elections. The situation is perilous. The elections will not, as the Americans claim, be a step towards democracy. Instead they will fuel sectarian strife. The elections pit the Sunni community, which traditionally ran the country, against the Shia majority, which believes that it is its turn to rule. As various communities emerge with consensual election lists the Sunnis are left out in the cold. The Sunnis don't seem to have fully grasped the changes that have come upon their country. And in the meantime the US is determined to crush the resistance at any cost, even if elections have to be postponed in Sunni areas and Sunni representatives selected from among tribal leaders. If this were to happen the elections would be reduced to the consensual pattern common in some neighbouring countries. As controversy over the elections has flared the Allawi government has failed to do anything about the host of problems dogging the country. Nor do the Americans, for their part, seem overly alarmed by the prospects of sectarian mistrust. And yet, if allowed to continue, sectarian divisions could easily unravel the very fabric of Iraqi society. Instead of helping the country feel united once again the elections could drive a wedge in the heart of nation which makes one wonder about the real motives behind the US claim that it would bring democracy to Iraq. Unless the UN -- perhaps in cooperation with the Arab League -- supervises elections in such a way as to maintain total independence from the occupation authorities then democracy in Iraq will remain elusive. Without that independence the elections will simply be one more step on the road to catastrophe. They will sow the seeds of sedition in Iraq and those seeds will be hard to eliminate once they have taken root.
