The elections for the Kuwaiti National Assembly have ended peacefully, without major problems. I followed their progress in two districts, namely the First and Fourth districts, so I can attest to their fairness just as international observers did. The turnout has a great deal of significance. Indeed, it was about 40 percent in a country where about half of the registered voters usually vote. This time, there were 422,569 voters who chose 50 representatives in parliament out of 307 candidates. Thus, the opposition, which had a large majority in the dissolved parliament, could not convince more than 10 percent of the voters to boycott the elections this time, although the opposition established "boycott centers", and tried to intimidate and terrorize voters, to the extent that some political adolescents accused voters who took part of treason. Democracy, by definition, is one man (or woman) one vote. I do not understand how the previous elections were held on the basis of one voter four votes, which produced results that did not represent the people of Kuwait. The Decree of Necessity addressed this situation and imposed a one man one vote rule, and the new parliament can overrule it if it so wishes. Democracy, by definition too, means that there is an opposition, without which democracy would be false. For this reason, I welcome the opposition in every Arab country, but I admit that I do not understand the cause of the Kuwaiti opposition's tension and belligerence, and its pursuit of a path that damages the interests of the whole country, that is to say, the interests of the opposition itself along with the rest of the citizens. Today, Kuwait is one of the most fortunate Arab countries, probably taking up the top ten positions among 22 Arab states by itself. Indeed, Kuwait has a real state and a democratic constitution that is the oldest in the Gulf. Kuwait is a country with its borders intact and without any external threats, and enjoys a wide democratic margin with high oil revenues that are more than enough for the country. All the above is fact, and is not an opinion, and I refuse for them to be disputed. All those who deny these facts are either ignorant people who do not know the meaning of democracy, or they have an agenda. Yet this talk about God's gifts to the people of Kuwait does not mean at all that Kuwaiti democracy is perfect, because no democracy is in the world is perfect. To be sure, this democracy is subject to correction, improvement, additions and deletions every day, and this is the duty of Parliament - a duty that can not be achieved by boycotting the vote, but only by participation. The Emir Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah affirmed his commitment to the implementation of the Constitution, and perhaps the keyword in his work is "help me", that is, he wants all citizens to assist him and participate in the work and have a share of power. Perhaps another explanation of the opposition's belligerence in a prosperous country like Kuwait can be found in a statement by Prime Minister Sheikh Jaber Al-Mubarak, who acknowledged that the previous parliament had contributed one way or another to the disruption of development in the country, which led to sharp polarization in Kuwait, and acknowledged that the government bears part of the responsibility for the disruption by agreeing to go out of its way to accomodate the opposition and offer successive concessions, until its stance was taken as a sign of weakness. I don't know officials in any other Arab country who are more willing to cooperate with the citizens than Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, Nasser Al-Mohammad Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah and Jaber Al-Sabah. I hope that the opposition will reconsider its positions, and learn a lesson from the failed boycott and its consequences. The opposition lost, and all talk other than that is a lie or is denial of a fact. Some in the opposition stubbornly pressed ahead with their plans to the extent that their tribes lost along with them, with the result being that for the first time in the history of independent Kuwait, no one will represent them in the parliament. The Shia of Kuwait did not boycott the vote, and proved on the one hand that they are loyal citizens of their country, and proved on the other hand that they know how to play the political game. In the new parliament, they have a bloc of 17 MPs, compared to 9 in 2009. I argue that the opposition, by boycotting the elections, was behind the victory of the new Shia lawmakers, and it will be the one to pay the price. To be sure, the opposition demands participation in power and money and then boycotts the vote, when participation and boycotting are opposites, both in language and political practice. I hope the opposition will reconsider its positions and come up with a new policy, based on cooperation, and I am confident the opposition can achieve a lot. Indeed, I do not complain about its demands, but about its methods. [email protected]
