The Media Line: Blocking Thirds and Big Money: Inside Iraq’s Preelection Knife Fight 

Audio By Carbonatix

Enlarge

Blocking Thirds and Big Money: Inside Iraq’s Preelection Knife Fight 

Parties battle over 329 seats while watchdogs and activists describe a bruising campaign marked by media offensives and legal challenges 

By Hudhaifa Ebrahim/The Media Line 

The countdown has begun for Iraq’s parliamentary elections, the sixth since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003. The vote, scheduled for November 11, is taking place amid widespread public frustration. 

As in past cycles, the race is expected to be dominated by the parties that have shaped Iraq’s politics since 2003. Results are widely anticipated to resemble the previous contest, which was led by the list of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Maliki later formed the Coordination Framework alliance—a coalition of pro-Iranian Shia parties—to assemble a government. 

Voters will elect 329 members of the Council of Representatives, who then approve a cabinet under the constitution. If more than one-third of lawmakers reject the government lineup, that “blocking third” can stall formation and push the country back into bargaining until a cross-party deal emerges. 

Alliances Change 

Divisions do not break down strictly along Sunni-Shia lines, echoing the pattern of 2021. Sharp rifts persist within both Shia and Sunni camps. Current Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani is running an independent list, the Construction and Reconstruction Coalition, competing against his former ally, Maliki, who is running as the State of Law Coalition. 

Prominent Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr is again boycotting the election, as in 2021. His supporters are expected to stage large demonstrations before or after the vote, despite a handwritten letter from al-Sadr urging against any protests. 

Among Sunnis, veteran politician Khamis al-Khanjar is facing off against his former ally, former Parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi. Halbousi was previously impeached on allegations of electoral fraud before being acquitted. 

A fierce media war has accompanied the campaign, with dueling TV spots and social-media offensives. Maliki has waged a sustained messaging push for more than two years aimed at weakening al-Sudani, his former ally. 

Against that backdrop, the Independent High Electoral Commission has excluded more than 700 candidates, including many newcomers. Party agents are filing challenges to rival candidacies, and several high-profile social-media figures were barred from running without public explanation. 

Ahmed al-Rikabi, an Iraqi political activist, told The Media Line, “The alliances have changed, but the underlying reality is the same: Everyone will win, and then the formation of the government will be stalled for months before political agreements are reached.” 

He continued, “Although no one wants him, the list of former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is the most likely to win. He possesses significant financial resources and can spend a lot of money. He is also deeply entrenched in many key sectors of the state and can easily rig the elections, as he has done before.” 

Al-Rikabi emphasized, “Iranian financial support is no longer available, and the fragmentation of the Shiite lists and parties is very clear. Therefore, what will happen is that Iran will pressure the winning side after the elections, since it was unable to achieve much before the elections regarding political alliances.” 

He added, “Now there is no significant external support like before, except for America and Iran, who interfere in the elections and pressure political parties in Iraq.” 

Khaled al-Adli, an Iraqi journalist specializing in political affairs, told The Media Line, “Changing alliances have become a phenomenon in Iraq. Everyone is vying for power, and every party wants to secure more seats. Previously, these alliances were based solely on Sunni-Shia lines, but today, the Sunnis themselves are divided, and the Shia are also divided.” 

Al-Adli added, “Sectarianism still exists in the political landscape, but the divisions within the sects were evident in the last elections and are continuing now. This is the most significant division in 22 years, and Iran failed to unite the Shia under a single banner in these elections.” 

Election Disruption 

Spending on campaign activities is estimated at 11 trillion dinars (about $8.3 billion)—a striking sum for an electorate of roughly 21 million, equal to roughly $395 per eligible voter. 

Legacy parties such as the Dawa Party, led by Maliki, and the Hikma Movement of cleric Ammar al-Hakim command the largest budgets. These groups, which entered the political process more than two decades ago, are accused by rivals of using fortunes amassed through dubious deals in office to buy votes. 

Campaign tactics vary by resources. Well-funded parties dominate television, while smaller lists lean on social media to stretch limited budgets. 

Iraq has recently experienced a noticeable throttling of internet service, with users reporting difficulty browsing and delays on WhatsApp, Instagram, and TikTok. 

Mohammed al-Gharbal, an Iraqi political activist, told The Media Line, “I accuse the Iraqi government of deliberately weakening the internet to prevent the voices of those who want to boycott the elections, or the voices of the less fortunate who don’t have billions, from being heard. This is obvious.” 

A source in the Ministry of Communications denied that allegation, telling The Media Line, “There is an upgrade underway on the internet network, and usage is very high, so users in some densely populated areas are experiencing slight internet slowdowns.” 

Vote Buying 

Perhaps the starkest feature of this cycle is overt vote buying. Reports describe bribes ranging from blankets and heaters to as much as $100 per vote, allegedly funneled through local notables. 

The practice varies by district wealth. In poorer areas, hundreds of videos appear online showing candidates distributing goods as winter nears, while others are seen offering cash that can reach $100 per ballot. 

Bribery typically unfolds in two stages. Before voting, part of the payment is made and the voter’s backing is pledged; after voting, the ballot is photographed to document the choice. In some districts, a pre-marked ballot is placed in the box while a blank one taken from the polling station is removed, filled out elsewhere, and passed to another voter. 

Commenting on the practice, Raafat al-Khaled told The Media Line, “This is an ongoing process in every election. They boast about it, and no one takes any action against them, which is why it continues unabated.” He added, “There are also what are called ‘election keymen,’ individuals with influence in their areas who are bribed to ensure that residents of their districts vote for a specific or desired candidate.” He also noted, “Some candidates resort to mass bribery, such as paving a particular street or refurbishing the furniture at a medical center” to win votes. 

Nidal Ibrahim, an Iraqi voter, told The Media Line, “My neighbor received a blanket and a heater from one of the candidates, while I was given a 20-kilogram bag of rice, along with sugar, flour, and other items. She also gave me my voter registration card, and a representative will come on election day to take me to the polling station.” 

Calls for a Boycott 

Against this backdrop, boycott calls are surging—especially among Generation Z. Young activists urge abstention as a rejection of the current political class. 

Such appeals could gain traction. Anger over corruption, failing services and security, scarce jobs, and other pressures continues to fuel public discontent. 

Mohammed al-Amiri, who leads a boycott campaign on Facebook, told The Media Line, “So far, through my page, more than a million young people have confirmed their boycott of the elections and their refusal to participate in any way that allows these same figures to remain in power. The new generation rejects the continuation of corruption, the decline in services, and other issues.” 

Al-Amiri added, “Some parties offered me millions to change the page’s direction, but I refused. They threatened me, but no one knows my whereabouts, and that’s a good thing.” 

Not everyone agrees with staying home. Jamal al-Shaibani, a candidate on one of the lists, told The Media Line, “Boycotting is pointless, and voters should vote for the candidates they trust.” 

He continued, “The Sadrists boycotted the elections and haven’t succeeded so far, and no one can say they have succeeded. Therefore, boycotting is futile.”