Trina's Kitchen: Cacio e Pepe in the Kitchen

Wednesday night, Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Sam Seder's Amused" went up.

Now let's deal with a question in an e-mail Patty sent. She is considering an instapot purchase but doesn't see the point in spending X amount of dollars.

I hear you. And if you're hesitating, that may be your answer. However, if you need more facts, here are a few to consider.

You can cook a chicken -- or chicken pieces -- in the instapot. It's about to be summer. You're not going to want to heat up the kitchen and the home with the oven. The instapot will not heat up the house.

It can also be a huge time saver. I'm gong to list some times for various items of food:

* beef stew in 20 minutes

* beef ribs in 20 to 25 minutes

* chicken breasts in 6 to 8 minutes

*pork ribs in 15 to 20 minutes

* white rice in 4 minutes

* brown rice in 20 to 22 minutes

* Jasmine rice in 4 minutes

* Basmiti rice in 4 minutes

* dried black eyed peas in 4 to 5 minutes

* dried lentils in 8 to 10 minutes

* dried lima eans in 12 to 14 minutes

* whole cabbage in 2 to 3 minutes

There are many more examples. For recipes, you can refer to Instant Pot's recipes. And here's one that I enjoy, Cacio e Pepe:

Have you ever wanted to whip something special up but only have a box of spaghetti, pepper, some grated cheese, butter, and broth on hand? Good news: All it takes are these very five ingredients to make my spin on one of the simplest, yet most comforting and beloved Roman dishes ever. Cacio e pepe translates as “cheese and pepper” which also translates as “comfort and joy.” My version adds additional flavor by using broth in place of water; the pasta absorbs the broth along with the butter while cooking to give it a slightly creamy edge.

Ingredients

4 cups chicken broth, vegetable broth, or garlic broth (e.g., Garlic Better than Bouillon)
1 lb spaghetti
8 tbsp salted butter, divided into 1-tablespoon pats 1 stick
1 cup grated Pecorino Romano or Parmesan (or 1/2 cup of each) plus more for serving
1 tbsp cracked black pepper plus more to taste ( note: For best results freshly crack the pepper with a pepper mill

Instructions

Pour the broth into the Instant Pot, break the spaghetti over it and add to the broth, then follow with 4 tablespoons of the butter.
Secure the lid and move the valve to the sealing position. Hit Manual or Pressure Cook on High Pressure for 8 minutes. Quick release when done. (NOTE: The pasta will appear soupy once the lid comes off. This is what we want because adding the dairy will thicken it up perfectly.)
Stir in the remaining 4 tablespoons butter until melted, then add the cheese and stir until well combined. The sauce will thicken as soon as the cheese is absorbed, which is almost immediately.
Add the cracked black pepper and give it a final stir. Add more pepper to taste.
Transfer the pasta to bowls and top with more cheese and pepper, if desired.

Now this is C.I.'s "The middle finger snapshot" for Thursday:

Friday, April 15, 2022.

Let's kick it off with a long section of Anne Sexton's "For John Who Begs Me Not To Enquire Further:"

Not that it was beautiful,
but that, in the end, there was
a certain sense of order there;
something worth learning
in that narrow diary of my mind,
in the commonplaces of the asylum
where the cracked mirror
or my own selfish death
outstared me.
And if I tried
to give you something else,
something outside of myself,
you would not know
that the worst of anyone
can be, finally,
an accident of hope.
I tapped my own head;
it was glass, an inverted bowl.
It is a small thing
to rage in your own bowl.
At first it was private.
Then it was more than myself;
it was you, or your house
or your kitchen.
And if you turn away
because there is no lesson here
I will hold my awkward bowl,
with all its cracked stars shining
like a complicated lie,
and fasten a new skin around it
as if I were dressing an orange
or a strange sun.
Not that it was beautiful,
but that I found some order there.
There ought to be something special
for someone
in this kind of hope.
This is something I would never find
in a lovelier place, my dear,
although your fear is anyone’s fear,
like an invisible veil between us all…
and sometimes in private,
my kitchen, your kitchen,
my face, your face.

An e-mail asks: "So you're not going to repost Jackson Hinkle's show at your site anymore?" No.

I have ethics. Jackson offers little more than a cheering section, usually for Jimmy Dore. It's not like he was leading on any issue.

Which is perfect for this topic, by the way.

Let's pretend that Jackson Hinkle is an expert on something. Let's pretend that he's the only one in the world who can speak to Russia.

And let's say I have a show and can invite him on.

While Jackson is an expert on Russia, turns out that he's also been arrested three times for trying to get (trick?) underage girls online into meeting up with him for sex. One time, he got off on a promise that he'd never do it again -- yes, sadly, the justice system was that pathetic in the '00s. The second time, he got probation. The third time he got sent to prison. He is now a registered sex offender.

He is the best and only expert on the topic of war with Russia.

Do I bring him on my YOUTUBE program?

See, I'm not visualizing such an internal debate taking place for Fiorella Isabell or Richard Medhurst aor any of the other people putting Scott Ritter on their programs.

For me?

Hell no, I'd never put someone like that on a program. It's called ethics.

As I noted on Wednesday, if someone wants to disagree about whispers and claims, that's fine. Have that person on. But if someone's been arrested multiple times and been convicted, that's not the same thing as someone being targeted with a whisper campaign or someone involved in a disputed situation (i.e. he said-she said, he said-he said, she-said-she said, they said-he said, they said-she said, they said-they said).

We can disagree about Michael Jackson or whomever. We weren't three. We form our best judgments based on the abilities at reasoning that we've been given. Michael was never convicted in a court of law. There was the opportunity to do so and it didn't happen. So we can disagree. And I may roll my eyes over this or that person being on a broadcast but that's all I'm going to do.

Scott Ritter, like Harvey Weinstein, has been convicted. The court has ruled.

This is not disputed. He did time in prison for what he did.

And he is a threat to girls everywhere since that's who he stalks.

No, I'm not going to put him on a program.

It's not even open to debate. Why would I put other females in jeopardy?

Now Queen Bees like Fiorella, they're on their own. There's a reason she has no female friends. There's a reason she does a program that is nothing but men, men, men. She's Patty Hearst. She's been in the closet and conditioned into hostage mentality.

As for the men involved, if this is new to you, let me say, "Welcome to our sad world."

I'm so sorry if no one ever told you that working to end a war and working for the rights of all led to the second wave of feminism precisely because too many men don't give a s**t about women. I'm sorry that I have to be the one to impart that hard truth on you.

But it was the rank sexism in the movements of the sixties that led to the rise of second wave feminism.

Their bias is based on many things including a lack of understanding.

They don't get the way some people are targeted -- that's women of all races, that's people of color, that's the LGBTQ community.

Ignorance, we can deal with. We've all been ignorant of something and you address ignorance by sharing.

It also shouldn't be that hard today because it is a different world.

The sixties had a huge shift, the seventies as well, every decade has brought us closer as a people.

Sharing and listening has led to greater understanding.

But ignorance was only one aspect.

And let's not just point our fingers at the men.

Let's use Fiorella. She's doing nothing to help other women -- that's pretty much her entire work. She won't and the reason being is she's a Queen Bee (as defined by Gloria Steinem in REVOLUTION FROM WITHIN). She's got to be the only woman in the room. Otherwise, she doesn't feel special. She wants to be the token because she's allowed herself to embrace defined standards that were imposed by a male dominated culture and I'm going to come back to that at the end, by the way, that topic and we're gong to address WSWS on a different but related topic.

But Fiorella surrounds herself with men because she hates women including herself. She hates them, she thinks they aren't worth anything. So she will gladly do her part to hold the rest of us down.

Her chit chatting and smiling and laughing with a man arrested three times for pedophilia -- let's call it what it is -- and a man who was sent to prison for it?

That's just fun for her.

"Look how tough I am," she's beaming not realizing that she doesn't look tough, that she looks tragic and pathetic.

So there are women like Fiorella out there.

There are also men out there that need to be called out.

"Identity politics.''

We are constantly forced to hear that term and hear it with derision.

That, we are told by various men, is what is holding the left back.

WSWS wants to tell you that it's all class issues and that's what we need to focus on. By focusing on other things -- gender is their direct target because they know they have to whisper when they're targeting race -- we are drawing lines between one another that prevent us from working together as a group and effecting change.

We are the bad ones, they insist. If we'd just drop our 'issues' and go along with what they deem important, there would be no problems and we'd all have Medicare For All by now, for example.

I fully support Medicare For All and I think everyone should have it.

But it hasn't happened in my lifetime and there's a good chance it won't.

However, rape has happened in my lifetime. Girls have been kidnapped in my lifetime (including me). We've been raped. We've been beaten. We've been violently murdered.

And that's not an isolated moment.

I hear the horror over gun violence -- the constant bleeting.

Gun violence is appalling.

But women and girls are the victims of violence more times a day than gun violence. And it's just shrug and pretend that's okay?

We may never get Medicare For All. I'm happy to work on that issue but I'm not dropping other issues. And I'm certainly not gong to sacrifice women and girls to get Medicare For All.

If we're not all free, none of us are free.

Decrying abuse is not deflecting from larger issues. The personal is political worked as a slogan because there is so much truth to it. You can use Judith N. Shklar's works to back that up -- whether it's FACES OF INJUSTICE or THE QUEST FOR INCLUSION (others as well but I'd recommend those two).

When someone who is being mistreated can grasp that this is not 'personal' in the ways that Benjamin Barber's sad work has implied over the years, and not just their lot in life, that person can see other levels of oppression and can move from point A to point B or further as a result. Once they see that it's not their fault or 'just you,' they are radicalized and see links and a system that needs to be taken on.

Now there is excess in everything and sometimes "the personal is political" devolves into a lot of nonsense and an excuse to right about nonsense while pretending that this nonsense -- often 'reality' TV -- is worth recapping. A very strong and revolutionary look can be taken at 'reality' TV -- and could even result in finding some good in that genre -- but I'm not referring to that. I'm referring to websites that try to present as weighty when they're not. They're not even able to use the excuse of first principles. And, when it comes to feminism, we've had more than enough first principles writings. We've all gone to pre-K now and are ready for weightier topics and more evolved discussions.

So the personal is political should not be used as a cop out that allows you to avoid dealing with actual issues.

Sadly, it sometimes has been.

But the slogan still works because it is embedded with truth. The student in class noting that she's not called on and that others of her race are not called on by the TA, is making connections and grasping that it's not just her and that there is a system of oppression taking place.

We applaud that in other areas. We're allowed to as leftists. But we won't applaud it when it comes to racial consciousness and if it results in gender consciousness or sexuality consciousness, we'll outright hiss as a leftist collective.

And we think that makes us look cool.

Really, it makes you look stupid.

You're not just a pothead comedian in your basement, you're a moron who doesn't know the first thing about anything and maybe shouldn't be hosting a program due to your extreme stupidity.

This shared consciousness, this awakening that leads to change? Karl Marx addressed it. The term wasn't coined when he was writing about it but that's the whole point of the worker grasping that he has shared grievances with another worker. That's what's behind the concept of class consciousness.

If Marx were alive today, hopefully, he'd be addressing the barriers to class consciousness. Those do include that some can't see beyond certain identifiers -- meaning that their inability to relate to what a transgendered person or a young gay teen has to endure creates a barrier that prevents working as a collective.

Identity politics is not the problem for all the derision heaped upon the term. The derision itself is a sign of discrimination. Certain people -- men and, yes, sadly women as well -- feel that their 'improtant' issue is getting less attention or none at all because this or that 'fluffy' issue is getting attention.

You saw that with the reaction of some to what happened to Chris Rock. You saw a lot of writers on the left -- at DISSIDENT VOICE for example, insist that time was wasted on the topic.

A man was assaulted. Now, yes, Chris Rock is my friend. But that doesn't change the fact that he was assaulted on live television at a global event. That was broadcast around the world live and now lives on forever on YOUTUBE and elsewhere.

A man was assaulted and that's a distraction? Talking about it is a distraction?

A Black man was assaulted for the 'crime' of offending a woman's 'honor' and that's not worth addressing? Even with the historical practice in the US of justifying assaults on African-American males on the grounds that some woman's 'honor' had been besmirched?

I'm so sorry that your little pet issue -- in the case of DISSIDETN VOICE, a program that's been going on for over a decade but that the writer had just discovered that week -- didn't get the attention you felt it deserved.

Welcome to my world where Iraq is ignored completely in the US.

We are the country that destroyed Iraq. You can say the UK and Australia helped. But we are the country that destroyed Iraq. Our government's actions ensured the destruction -- and it's an ongoing destruction. They are a land of orphans and widows. 21 is the median age in Iraq and that's not the result of a baby boom, that's the result of the massive deaths that have resulted from this war.

An ongoing war. US troops remain on the ground. The US continues to occupy Iraq.

How many Iraqi politicians will it take to say the US needs to leave before the US leaves?

A major report on the ongoing assault on Iraq's LBT community is released this year and everyone in the US ignores it.

The 19th anniversary of the ongoing war took place last month and the US couldn't be bothered.

So, yeah, I get your frustration.

But don't pretend that the assault of Chris Rock wasn't actual news and didn't deserve actual discussion and actual analysis.

The US destroyed the rights of women in Iraq.

I have called that out here. If I don't call out this Scott Ritter nonsense, what message am I sending?

I'm first off saying that he's a good guy and trust him and remember that when he rapes you so that you can pursue me as an accessory to that assault since I not only refused to identify him as a convicted sex offender but also used my platform to promote him as someone to listen to and to trust.

Second, I'm saying that it's okay for women to be assaulted and we should just take it.

Iraqi women have showed real bravery and strength throughout this ongoing war.

But I'm going to back off from calling out a bunch of pampered men for bringing a convicted sex offender on their program and promoting him?

What message would that send?

So ____, no, I don't need you to "smooth things over." One of the YOUTUBERS who has been promoting Scott wanted me to know in an e-mail that they could fix this and if I'd just agree not to mention it again, everything would be okay.

What will be okay?

Do you really believe i want to be a part of your circle jerk?

Kid, you're not that important. Equally true, DAILY KOS and others tried to make me a part of their circle jerk almost two decades ago. Nope. Didn't want it. A friend mentions me on their NPR pgoram and my response was, "Please don't eve do that again." Or when ALTERNET was linking to us and I'm the one who tells them to me off their blogroll.

You're under some foolish notion that I'm in fear over this topic having fall out. That I'm afraid this site will be harmed or I will be if we don't have your support.

The only thing I'm in fear over regarding this topic has nothing to do with you or your other YOUTUBERS. As I said in the roundtable last night for the gina & krista round-robin, I'll address it tomorrow, late tomorrow. I'll sleep in. I'll work out. Then I'll write it myself, type it, not dictate it. I'll take my time posting it. Because I'm just too damn sick of having to relive.

I was assaulted.

And I was lucky because there was no debate on it. I was young (single digit age), I was kidnapped from my school and I was taken off and assaulted. There was no way to play blame the victim. I was lucky in that regard.

A lot of people aren't.

But I really don't like having to relive this and certainly not on someone else's time table.

I have no fear of calling out Scott Ritter.

I know he needs to be called out and I have had to do so over and over since 2004. But, no, it's not something, the topic itself, that I want to spend each morning with.

Tina and I have talked about how your day can be gone, shot to hell, Tina Turner, when you're forced into these conversations about abuse. And I feel forced into it now.

That's why I am appalled that it has to be me yet a-damn-gain. Just once, I'd love to see one of you supposed strong and brave men step up and call out Scott Ritter on your platform. Just one damn time, it would be great to hear you say that what he did was wrong and that it is appalling that elements of the left are embracing him. Instead, I have to victimize myself -- that is what it feels like -- and relive an experience to call out what needs to be called out.

If the YOUTUBER e-mailing me truly wanted to 'help' me, he'd be using his program and platform to state he was wrong to bring Scott Ritter on his program and to promote him. He'd be saying that he stands with those who have survived assault and not with the convicted sex offender.

But he can't relate to that and so he can't relate to me. And his ignorance is the real barrier preventing us from all working together. It's not identity politics that's the problem, it's that he's more comfortable identifying with a convicted sex offender than he is with the survivors of assault.

I watch from the US amazed at the way the Iraqi girls and women keep fighting for their rights and against various assaults. They are inspiring and they will avenge the injustices that were imposed on their country. The US government was fine to make them the sacrificial lambs.

And, sadly, in the US some elements of the left are happy to make females here their ritual sacrifice as well. It's not right and it's not liberation and it's not about building a class consciousness.

Alice Walker has spoken often about how she uses her work to create the world we could have and it's a shame that far less talented people can't see that using their platforms to promote a convicted sex offender is not creating anything of value.

Yet they bring Scott on their programs. They don't identify him as a convicted sex offender. They joke with him and smirk with him and sometimes they even lie for him: 'Scott was banned by the media because he spoke out against the Iraq war!' No, Scott was kicked off corporate media when they learned the truth. It's up here, in real time. A CNN friend called me and said not to note him, that CNN had just learned of his arrest for attempting to meet up with a young girl for sex. And that CNN was further shocked to learn that this was his second arrest for it. He's now got three arrests and he's been sent to prison for it but keep repeating the lie that his speaking out against the Iraq War is what got him kicked off TV. You look like a cheap whore but then, outside of a carnival, most mirrors reflect reality.

I've had to deal with this topic repeatedly this week including Tuesday in a snapshot that I dictated but scrapped.

I will note that is it very disappointing what so many are doing. It's especially sad with regards to Jackson Hinkle because he's only 22 yet not only has instilled the worst of an oppressive patriarchy, he's also bound and determined to actively participate in furthering the worst. How sad.

And I'm pulling a section. It'll go into Saturday's entry. There was a need originally to include it -- it's related and it would ensure peak readership for this post that I want people to read, I want the word out on Scott Ritter. But as I look over the snapshot, I'm seeing that it will actually overwhelm what came before, or stands a good chance of doing so. It'll go up Saturday in whatever I post that night.

We opened with Anne Sexton and we'll wind down with her again, from "Flee On Your Donkey:"

Anne, Anne,
flee on your donkey,
flee this sad hotel,
ride out on some hairy beast,
gallop backward pressing
your buttocks to his withers,
sit to his clumsy gait somehow.
Ride out
any old way you please!
In this place everyone talks to his own mouth.
That's what it means to be crazy.
Those I loved best died of it—
the fool's disease.

The following sites updated:

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Thursday:

Thursday, April 14, 2022. Joe Bdien cries 'genocide' -- maybe he's looking at his polling numbers?/.

This morning, Andre Damon (WSWS) reports:

On Tuesday, US President Joe Biden claimed that Russia was committing genocide in Ukraine. In a subsequent statement to reporters in Iowa, he added, “I called it genocide because it’s become clearer and clearer that Putin is just trying to wipe out even the idea of being Ukrainian.”

Biden’s accusation that Russia is engaging in genocide is aimed at poisoning public opinion and galvanizing popular hatred of Russia. It was a transparent pretext for the White House’s announcement, just one day later, that the United States would send attack helicopters and hundreds of armored vehicles to Ukraine in the largest escalation of US military involvement in the war to date.

The weapons being shipped to Ukraine include 300 “kamikaze drones” known as “Switchblades,” 300 armored vehicles, and 11 Mi-17 helicopters, as well as land mines, radars, thousands of anti-tank weapons and nuclear protective equipment.

Announcing the action, the Pentagon declared, “The United States has now committed more than $3.2 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since the beginning of the Biden Administration.” This includes $2.6 billion within the past six weeks.

On Wednesday, White House press spokesperson Jen Psaki was asked, “Is it the US policy that genocide has been committed in Ukraine, or was that the president’s personal beliefs?” To this Psaki replied, “Our objective now is evidenced by the enormous package of military assistance that we put out today.”

This exchange is revealing precisely because it stands reality so neatly on its head. In the statements of the White House, the unprecedented funneling of arms to Ukraine is a testament to how strongly the US believes Russia is committing “genocide.”

Joe Biden 'cares' -- we're supposed to beleive. Because there's a genocide taking place that he' never said 'Boo!' about. We'll get 8back to t8hat later n the snapshot.

He's looking for a reason to make the massive spedning that's going on right now look justified. It's not going to. As someone said in ZOON yesterday, "He's Diamond Joe Biden and he's spending all this money to impress the neighborhood while, at home, his own kids are starving."

Exacty.

Well, now we know how Hunter Biden ended up believeing it was okay to be a Dead Beat Dad -- the fruit didn't fall far from that rotten tree.

On Hunter, Jonathan Turley notes

There was nothing subtle about the alleged influence-peddling effort of Hunter Biden or his uncle James. In Washington, influence peddling is a virtual cottage industry. However, there was a little sophistication in these e-mails to hide the corruption. The Hunter dealings were more like influence peddling by eBay in terms of the raw pitches and open admissions.

On May 1, 2017, Hunter Biden recognized how his work with CEFC at a minimum could trigger FARA and acknowledged that his uncle was also aware of the danger:

“No matter what it will need to be a US company at some level in order for us to make bids on federal and state funded projects. Also We [sic] don’t want to have to register as foreign agents under the FCPA which is much more expansive than people who should know choose not to know. James has very particular opinions about this so I would ask him about the foreign entity.”

The e-mail is a prosecutor’s dream. FARA violations, like tax violations, can be viewed as cut-and-dried charges for jurors. In this case, the potential defendant not only incriminated himself under the law, but his associates and family, as well.

That is why, if the Justice Department applies the same standard applied to figures like Manafort, Biden would likely be indicted.

The question is whether the same standard will apply. I have long criticized the sweeping language of FARA. However, the Justice Department has shifted from prior administrative enforcement to criminal prosecutions. The Justice Department in recent years has convicted various individuals for engaging in public relations and lobbying efforts for foreign countries, including China and Ukraine.

A sudden shift away from such criminal enforcement would raise questions of favored treatment — and magnify the concern over Attorney General Merrick Garland refusing to appoint a special counsel in the scandal.

In The Washington Post, the Manafort and other FARA cases were heralded as essential to protecting democracy. A columnist concluded, “FARA can be a powerful tool for detecting those foreign instruments. We should use it. No matter whom it ensnares.”

It has now ensnared the son of President Biden. The question is whether the Justice Department and the media still have the same appetite for FARA prosecutions.

Despite rumors for the last five days, Nouri al-Maliki has not been put forward as a nominee for prime minister by the Coordinating Framework -- the body tht's trying to put together support now that Moqtada al-Sadr' repeat failures at forming a government have led Moqtada to step away (for 40 days). They appear to be struggling the same way that Moqtada did though their efforts are still young. Moqtada has failed three times so far -- three times a vote was scheduled for Parlaiemtn, three times it failed to take place because not enough MPs shoed due to the fact that Moqtada can't garner enough support.

This, please remember, is the man that the western press hailed as a king maker.

The Coordinating Framework is said to be favoring Mustafa al-Kahdimi for the post.

Grasp that.

Why did they even have elections?

Yeah, Moqtada wants his own cousing to be prime minister -- an underling with no national presecnec.

Bu tthe Iraqi people are deeply unhappy with their government.

And yet thanks to Moqtada, the Speaker of Parliament will be the same person.

The Coordinatign Framework wants Barham Saleh to8 remain as Iraqi president and now they're flirting wit8h Mustafa?

Why wasted the time and the money on elections if nothing is going to change.

There's also the fact that Mustafa -- a failure and a liar 8-- o8nce declared he would serve only one term.

October 10th the elections took place and still the Parliament can't elect a president and, without a president, no one can be named prime minister designate. (Once named prime minister designate, the person has 30 days to form a Cabinet. If they do so, they are supposed to then become prime minister. That rule's been fudged repeatedly over the years.)

MEMO noted:

After Parliament failed several times this year to elect a new president, Iraq has entered a constitutional vacuum.

These events led to the end of the constitutional deadline set by the Federal Supreme Court on 6 April.

This required the court to resort to legal jurisprudence and issue a decision to continue the term of current President Barham Salih until a new president is elected.

Since its first session on 9 February, Parliament has been unable to elect a president from 40 candidates led by the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) candidate, the current president, Barham Salih, and the Kurdistan Democratic Party's candidate, Rebar Ahmed.

Did the Court extend it to April 6th?

Well if you think it's a crisis, why don't you get honest with your readers. The due date, per the Constitution, not the Court, passed in February. That's reality.

And it's yet another example of the Court trying to make law and not interpret it. That's not their function. They came under heavy criticism for their recent decision against the KRG and what the KRG can do with oil because their decision was not based upon existing law.

Laws are written by the legislative branch, not by the Court. The Court can uphold them or find them unconstitutional. But they cannot write laws, that's not their power. Maybe if the world's press would pay attention, the Iraqi Supreme Court would feel less likely to attempt to grab powers that they have no right to?

Little that needs attention receives it. For example, a certain figure started calling the stalemate a ''crisis'' on Saturday and while some reported on it, most refused to explain how this was about a politician's self-interest. Amr Mostafa (THE NATIONAL) reported:

Iraq’s President Barham Salih on Saturday said that the current political deadlock in the country would have dangerous repercussions, and called for the process of forming a new government to be speeded up.

Nearly six months have passed since Iraq held parliamentary elections, yet the country still has no government, due to wrangling over who will take the roles of president, prime minister and important posts in the Cabinet.

The parties have been unable to agree on a candidate for president, a problem that may also extend to the position of prime minister.

Barham insists it's a "crisis." Well if he really feels that way, he holds the highest office of any member of the PUK political party. They have been one of the stumbling blocks in forming a government because they want him to have another term as president. The PUK has gotten less and less votes every election (we've addressed the why of that before). And this go round? Their worst ever. So why do they get to hold the post of the president? It's one thing to say that the post has to be held by a Kurd, it's another thing to say it has to be held by an unpopular party.

The KDP has consistently gotten more votes than the PUK.

Again, Barham's the one calling it a ''crisis.'' If he really believes that, then, for the good of the country, he should announce that his political party is withdrawing their nomination (the PUK is nominating him).

He doesn't do that.

And he didn't consider it to be a "crisis" until last week when Moqtada al-Sadr, having failed three times to build support for his presidential choice (always from the KDP though the nominee has differed) decided to step away for a few weeks *forty days) to see if the 'other side' could have any more luck forming a government.

So shame on THE NATIONAL for reporting on this without disclosing that Barham's sudden 'concern' over the 'crisis' comes as his alliance has a few weeks time to try to install him into another term as president.

At AL-MONITOR, Ali Mamouri sees three potential outcomes:

Scenario 1: The two sides reach an agreement to form a consensual government together and share the government based on a credit point system, which was common after 2003. Accordingly, each party will get a share in the government based on the number of seats they won in the elections. This is unlikely to happen this time due to Sadr's demands to form a majority government, rejecting any proposal to reach an agreement with the Coordination Framework. He has tried several times to break up the Coordination Framework and convince some of its groups (Fatah, led by Hadi al-Amiri, or State of Law, led by Nouri al-Maliki) to join him separately. However, the Coordination Framework appears solid, rejecting any offer that does not include all of them in the new government. On the other side, Sadr is facing great pressure from his social base as he had promised them since the beginning of his electoral campaign to form a majority government with the Sadrist prime minister. Sadr has nominated his cousin, Jafar al-Sadr, the son of prominent political cleric Muhammad Baqer al-Sadr, for the prime minister position. Now it is difficult to withdraw from this promise, as it would lead him to great losses in the next elections.

Scenario 2: A Sadr-Halbusi-Barzani coalition obtains the remaining required numbers to select a president and go ahead with forming a government. They have already gone through negotiations with possible allies like the PUK and independent members. But it seems difficult to achieve this goal, especially after they failed to do so three times.

Scenario 3: The current government continues indefinitely as a caretaker government, and another early election is held sometime in 2023. This is likely, due to the fact that the constitutional deadline for forming the government has already passed and the political parties have failed to form a government. Meanwhile, the two axes will compete in dominating parliament and expanding their influence in state institutions. They will also work on changing the electoral law to their benefit for the next elections, which will create another source of conflict between them.

In such circumstances, it seems the political deadlock is likely to remain for a long time and the conflict between the two sides is unlikely to be resolved, which means any newly formed government, if such occurred, would be weak and subject to collapse soon.

We'll note this statement from KRG President Nechirvan Barzani:

Today, we pay tribute to the memory of more than 182.000 innocent civilians who were killed in 1988 in one of the most heinous crimes of human history, perpetrated by the former Iraqi regime in Kurdistan.

The genocidal Anfal campaign, which was carried out in 8 stages across the Kurdistan Region, will remain one of history’s greatest infamies. It is the responsibility of all and everyone to prevent the repeat of such vicious mass crimes anywhere in the world.

As the Kurdistan Region currently moves through a critical period, the best way to honor the victims of Anfal and all the martyrs of Kurdistan is tolerance, common purpose and unity among all parties and communities in Kurdistan to ensure and preserve the constitutional rights of the Kurdistan Region and its political and federal status.

In view of the fact that the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal recognized the Anfal as genocide and war crime against humanity, we urge Iraq’s federal government to live up to its legal, ethical and human responsibility, to restitute the victims of Anfal and their families and to alleviate their sufferings and sorrows.

The Kurdistan Region will do its utmost to better serve and support the families of the Anfal victims, and will continue its efforts to reconstruct the areas ravaged by the campaign. We will spare no efforts to return the remains of all the martyrs, and will continue to work for an international recognition of the Anfal campaign.

Tribute to the memory of the martyrs.

Nechirvan Barzani
The President of the Kurdistan Region

And we'll note this Tweet:

34 years have passed since the #Enfal genocide in which 182,000 #Kurds were massacred
———
#TwitterKurds #Anfal #Kurdistan

1:52 AM · Apr 14, 2022

RUDAW Tweets:

Nugra Salman castle, a remote prison fortress in southern Iraq, served as a concentration camp during the former Iraqi Baathist regime’s Anfal campaign against the Kurds in 1988. 

: Bilind T. Abdullah/Rudaw