DEBATE BUT NO ACTION IN PARLIAMENT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KABUL 000417

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SA/FO AMBASSADOR QUINN, S/CT, SA/A, G KATE
FRIEDRICH, G/IWI CHARLOTTE PONTICELLI AND DIANNE GRAHAM
NSC FOR AHARRIMAN, KAMEND
CENTCOM FOR POLAD, CG CFC-A, CG CJTF-76
TREASURY FOR LMCDONALD, WBALDRIDGE, APARAMESWARAN, ABAUKOL
STATE PLEASE PASS USAID
USAID FOR AID/ANE, AID/DCHA/DG

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/30/2016
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR KDEM AF
SUBJECT: DEBATE BUT NO ACTION IN PARLIAMENT

REF: KABUL 275

Classified By: A/DCM ANGUS SIMMONS FOR REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D)


1. (C) SUMMARY. The National Assembly's first week in
session after a holiday recess was marked by heated debate
over procedures for approval of the Cabinet and travel by
Members of Parliament overseas. After initially agreeing to
approve the Cabinet Minister by Minister, the Wolesi Jirga
(lower house) reversed its decision and postponed a final
vote on the matter until after the London Conference. Both
houses also spent a significant amount of time debating the
composition of delegations to London and the United States.
The debate was most heated in the Meshrano Jirga (MJ - upper
house),where Speaker Sebghatullah Mojadeddi's delegation
choices were rejected in a power play by a large group of
MPs. The announced invitation of Meshrano Jirga Deputy
Speaker Hamed Gailani to attend the State of the Union
Address provoked debate and politicking by members who
thought they should select a representative rather than
allowing Gailani to accept a White House invitation. The MJ
ultimately came around on Gailani's acceptance, but these
episodes reflect the strong personality-driven nature of the
new National Assembly. END SUMMARY.

Cabinet Approval Decision Delayed
--------------


2. (SBU) The Wolesi Jirga (WJ) spent two days debating a rule
of procedure on how to approve members of the Cabinet -
individually or as a slate. After coming to a decision at
the end of the first day to approve the Cabinet one by one,
the WJ rescinded that decision the next day. Those arguing
that Ministers should be reviewed individually stated that
this would be the only way to ensure all were qualified,
while those advocating a group vote held that slate approval
would ensure that the Cabinet confirmation did not fall prey
to ethnic politics. Unable to reach a final decision, they
postponed further debate on the matter until the week of
February 4, when Speaker Yunus Qanooni returns from London.


3. (C) The unlikely duo of ultra-conservative Abdul Rasul
Sayaf and outspoken women's activist Shukria Barakzai were
the first to challenge the decision to approve the Cabinet
individually. Sayaf reportedly later backed down from his
position, but the slate option appears to remain the
preference of the Pashtun block in Parliament, possibly with
some Hazara support. Whichever method is ultimately chosen,
various ministers are certain to face a difficult time in
front of the Parliament. Even if the approval is done as a
group, Parliament has the right to interpellate ministers on
an as needed basis.


4. (C) Despite Speaker Qanooni's efforts to move the WJ
toward organizing committees, little progress was made on
this front. Formation of political groups must precede
committee selection (REFTEL),and members seem reluctant to
tie themselves to a single faction at this time. Many argued
during floor debate that more time is needed to get to know
fellow MPs. Some MPs confessed during meetings with POLOFFs
that they do not yet have enough support to meet the
21-member requirement to form a group. Yet other members are
very confident that they have large blocs of supporters in
the Parliament and claim they can easily control enough MPs
to establish political groups. There is no lack of claims
one way or the other, but there is little discussion of
political philosophy. The political groupings, at least
initially, may simply end up like so many of Afghanistan's
political parties, support groups for individual MPs who have
power and money.

Meshrano Jirga MPs Challenge Speaker's Authority
-------------- ---


5. (C) Meshrano Jirga Speaker Mojaddedi faced a more serious
test of his leadership. Mojaddedi, who has been in Turkey
for the past three weeks for medical treatment, decided from
his distant location to name the Meshrano Jirga delegates who
would accompany him to the London Conference. This provoked
a burst of protest by some members, who believed that the MPs
themselves should select the delegation rather than
Mojaddedi. These MPs claim that Mojaddedi was basing his
selection purely on personal political criteria rather than
on expertise or true representation. Our invitation to Sayed
Hamed Gailani, the Meshrano Jirga's Deputy Speaker, to attend
the SOU Address provoked similar debate, and the initial
reaction from the Meshrano Jirga members was that Gailani
should not attend the SOU and that the Mojaddedi-selected
delegates should not attend the London Conference.


6. (C) The Meshrano Jirga ultimately approved Mojaddedi's
choices for London after three days of debate, but initially
voted not to allow Deputy Speaker Hamed Gailani to travel to
the United States for the State of the Union Address.
Gailani decided to attend the SOU regardless of the MJ
decision. There was never any indication that MPs
disapproved of the event itself, on the contrary each one of
Gailani's critics spoke of his own personal regard for the
White House and the US. The Meshrano Jirga MPs were far more
embroiled in the question ofwhich of them should go in lieu
of Gailani, since they saw the trip as being both very
important as well as a major perk. The invitation to Fawzia
Koofi from the Wolesi Jirga was handled by WJ staff and MPs
in a far less controversial manner. By noon on 30 January,
the MJ MPs had calmed down and seemed reconciled to Gailani's
attendance at the SOU. We understand they contacted Gailani
to inform him that they now are agreed to his attendance, but
ordered him "not to stay too long in Washington."

Comment
--------------


7. (C) After several weeks of relative order, the cracks in
the facade of a harmonious Parliament are beginning to show.
Ethnic divisions do not dominate debate, but in the absence
of a formal organization for the Assembly (be it committees
or parties) the leadership of Parliament - particularly when
they are out of the country - is not always strong enough to
move issues in a straightforward manner through either house.
With no legislation yet to review, the topic of debate has
been who should travel to which overseas meeting, but the
purpose of the disagreements has been to flex the muscles of
nascent interest groups in the Assembly.


8. (C) The Meshrano Jirga debate in particular shows the
current weakness of leadership there. The Speaker and both
deputies in the Wolesi Jirga were originally elected to
Parliament with clear signs of solid support from their
constituencies. The Speaker and his deputies spend long,
hard hours at their jobs. Mojaddedi, on the other hand, has
not been a presence in Kabul for several weeks, and his
opponents clearly resent the fact that he was elected Speaker
of the Meshrano Jirga in what some see as a trick. He also
continues to head the PTS Taliban reconciliation program,
which some would argue is a full-time job. As time passes,
it seems likely that Mojaddedi will come under increased
attacks from within the Parliament as younger, more dynamic
political hopefuls threaten his leadership role. END COMMENT.

NORLAND