Muqtada al-Sadr

[DanS]

In the end, at least this is how the story will be spun, it was Sistani, NOT the US nor Allawi that was able to bring peace to Najaf, make sure the shrine was not damaged, and got Sadr to give. This diminishes Sadr slightly, builds up Sistani greatly, the US keeps its bad image and Allawi barely gains, if he gained AT ALL.

The important stuff is positive for the government and the US, even though there might be some red faces in the government. This government's (police) role of protecting the shrine, Najaf, and Kufa was validated by the highest religious authorities. Sadr's role of protecting the shrine, Najaf, and Kufa was discredited. This is several months after Sadr's role of protecting Karbala was likewise discredited.

This round began 3 weeks ago with an attack by Sadr on a police station in Najaf after the Marines started patrolling some new areas. Sadr held the Imam Ali mosque. 3 weeks later, the police are in control of the Imam Ali shrine, not Sadr.

To me, this seems like symbolicly valuable "territory" that the government gained. A big success. If Sadr continues acting up, we can finish him off in a less sensitive area of the country.

Also, there's the possibility that the shrine treasures will be audited by Sistani and Sadr will be blamed for stealing some of them. This would be bad news for Sadr.

[GePap]

To me, this seems like symbolicly valuable "territory" that the government gained. A big success. If Sadr continues acting up, we can finish him off in a less sensitive area of the country.

But Sadr did not turn the shrines over to the government- he handed it over to Sistani. It was not Allawi, but Sistani that ends the issue- it is the deal reached by Sistani that holds, not the deal made by Allawi...over and over- Sistani leave the country- a mess develops, he returns, the mess ends (sort of).

If you are a religious Shiite, who do you think is the more powerful? Allwai, whos power comes form the US Marines (and even then after 2 weeks had not yet ended the deal) or Sistani (who 3 days after coming back gets control of the shrine?)? Add to that that in the last few days there have been reports (true or false) that Allawi's police fired on Sistani supporters.

All in all, a homerun for Sistani.

[Arrian]

Good for Sistani, agreed. Simply "not terrible" for us. I'll take that.

-Arrian

[GePap]

Anything that is not a plus for the US is negative, cause the longer we are there, the worse we are. In short, we are always losing points with time- any event in which we don't gain points is essentially a wash for us.

I mean: Sadr is still free, his fighters in Najaf leave armed, he still has his base in Sadr City- people streaming to Najaf see a city devastated by US firepower and get to blame not only the US but Allawi as well- I mean, the only "good" is that Sadr is much weaker (if no out), but Allawi is diminished as well, and he is our guy in Iraq, cause we are not turning the show over to Sistani.

[DanS]

But Sadr did not turn the shrines over to the government- he handed it over to Sistani.

It doesn't matter. The police are now the ones patrolling the shrine. They are the only ones who can legitimately carry arms in the city. Their legitimacy is secured. Sadr is challenging the government's legitimacy, so he lost this battle. It's true that the city is battered, but the claims for damage will be paid, which reinforces the government's legitimacy.

[GePap]

And who made that demand? Sistani, not Allawi, who happens to be the head of the government- so goodie, the government has authority! as long as Sistani approves.

On the other hand, the very men who are in the government look like a bunch of indecisive men without power in Iraq save for the backing of the US Army- that is the problem- Sistani showed he has real authority in IRaq without anyone elses aide- Allawi can only demand with the help of the US military.

[lord of the mark]

well, sistani was calling for Sadr to leave the shrine earlier. They only left when two things happened - US and Iraqi troops finished clearing out the old city and approached the shrine AND Sistani organized his visit. So an Iraqi can look at either as the driver, or both. Or even suspect, as i do, that the two actions were coordinated, and that the Sistani visit was to allow Sadr to save face.

Certainly the result is that the city goes to Iraqi forces - it seems that Sistanis view of who rightfully should be securing Najaf is one that is favorable to the Allawi govt, even if he has his own political agenda.

[DanS]

GePap: It's a religious site. How can you begrudge the proper religious authorities a predominate say over what happens at the site?

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
well, sistani was calling for Sadr to leave the shrine earlier. They only left when two things happened - US and Iraqi troops finished clearing out the old city and approached the shrine AND Sistani organized his visit. So an Iraqi can look at either as the driver, or both. Or even suspect, as i do, that the two actions were coordinated, and that the Sistani visit was to allow Sadr to save face.

Which might be to Sistani's interests, but how is that to Allawi's interests? Also, given the violence of yesterday and the fact Sadr's men walked away armed, I fail to see this is anywhere near a rousing success for the Government.

Certainly the result is that the city goes to Iraqi forces - it seems that Sistanis view of who rightfully should be securing Najaf is one that is favorable to the Allawi govt, even if he has his own political agenda.

I doubt this is a nod to Allawi as opposed to a nod to the idea that the political process must be allowed to continue free of violence. That is not a nod to Allawi and his admin., but a nod to the system and the rules.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DanS
GePap: It's a religious site. How can you begrudge the proper religious authorities a predominate say over what happens at the site?

Well, in theory the temporal powers should have the final say at all times in terms of violent uprisings, not religious centers.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by GePap

Which might be to Sistani's interests, but how is that to Allawi's interests? Also, given the violence of yesterday and the fact Sadr's men walked away armed, I fail to see this is anywhere near a rousing success for the Government.

Not rousing no. But at least several hundred of Sadrs men didnt walk away at all. And at least a few were caught smuggling weapons out and were arrested, along with some Sadr lieutenants. And most reports indicate many did turn in their weapons.

as for those who kept their weapons, next place they turn up they wont have the shrine for protection.

I doubt this is a nod to Allawi as opposed to a nod to the idea that the political process must be allowed to continue free of violence. That is not a nod to Allawi and his admin., but a nod to the system and the rules.

Well there are still some of us who think Allawi is on the side of the system and the rules. Certainly what Iraqis want from Allawi is for the system and the rules to be enforced. I think working with Sistani is one alternative way of doing that - I dont think they expect him to rely on force alone, though some rightwingers here do.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Not rousing no. But at least several hundred of Sadrs men didnt walk away at all. And at least a few were caught smuggling weapons out and were arrested, along with some Sadr lieutenants. And most reports indicate many did turn in their weapons.

as for those who kept their weapons, next place they turn up they wont have the shrine for protection.

The men Sadr can replace relatively fast- like there is a shortage in Iraq of unemployed, disaffected young men who know the basics of holding an AK-47.

Hopefully he does not try anything in Sadr City, becuase there things would be very, very ugly.

Well there are still some of us who think Allawi is on the side of the system and the rules. Certainly what Iraqis want from Allawi is for the system and the rules to be enforced. I think working with Sistani is one alternative way of doing that - I dont think they expect him to rely on force alone, though some rightwingers here do.

That's not the point. Sistani believes that working through a suystem of rules, the Shiia will come to dominate Iraq, and fears armed Shiia resistance would simply lead to the US setting up another Sunni dictator to keep them in line. That is why he has little patience for someone like Sadr. That said, I doubt Sistani's and Allawi's vision of Iraqs future is the same- this is a question of whom wins the coming elections, and what factions come ahead. I think this whole episode weakens the political support for Allwai and his faction- is that a good thing? maybe, maybe not. I do know the US does not seem to know which faction it thinks best.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by GePap

The men Sadr can replace relatively fast- like there is a shortage in Iraq of unemployed, disaffected young men who know the basics of holding an AK-47.

Im not sure, there were apparently quite alot of youngsters bearing arms at the shrine. And if this is more a win for Sistani than Allawi, its still a loss for Sadr, who had defied Sistani and then gave in to him (we will defend this shrine to the last drop of our blood -er, well, no) That MAY have an impact on recruitment.

That's not the point. Sistani believes that working through a suystem of rules, the Shiia will come to dominate Iraq, and fears armed Shiia resistance would simply lead to the US setting up another Sunni dictator to keep them in line. That is why he has little patience for someone like Sadr. That said, I doubt Sistani's and Allawi's vision of Iraqs future is the same- this is a question of whom wins the coming elections, and what factions come ahead. I think this whole episode weakens the political support for Allwai and his faction- is that a good thing? maybe, maybe not. I do know the US does not seem to know which faction it thinks best.

I would hope that we dont have our policy staked on one side or another winning the elections. I hope we are realistic enough to realize that we cant control that. BTW, Sistani wont be on the ballot in any future Iraqi election - the vehicles for the outcome you claim he wants would have to be SCIRI and Dawa, yet they played NO role in the outcome of Najaf.

[lord of the mark]

AP

"If the agreement brokered Thursday by al-Sistani holds, Allawi could be the biggest winner.


The government not only gains sovereignty over Najaf, it stands to receive a boost in legitimacy among Iraqi Shiites for working with al-Sistani, the most senior Shiite cleric in Iraq and one of the most respected people in the country.


It was a shrewd move by Allawi, who introduced the idea that al-Sistani and the Iraqi government were working toward a common objective, said a Bush administration official in Washington. It shows that al-Sistani recognizes Allawi's authority, and will lend his authority and prestige to the government, the official added, speaking on condition of anonymity.


But the resolution also points to the power of al-Sistani, who — even ailing after heart treatment in London — could resolve a crisis that government negotiators and troops could not.


The outcome for the U.S. military was less impressive. But it's hard to see how the Americans could have ended the Najaf standoff on a better note.


The military contorted itself to neutralize al-Sadr without killing him and creating a beloved martyr or desecrating the Imam Ali Shrine — where the militants had taken refuge — and enraging Iraq's Shiite majority. "

[GePap]

"If the agreement brokered Thursday by al-Sistani holds, Allawi could be the biggest winner.


The government not only gains sovereignty over Najaf, it stands to receive a boost in legitimacy among Iraqi Shiites for working with al-Sistani, the most senior Shiite cleric in Iraq and one of the most respected people in the country.


It was a shrewd move by Allawi, who introduced the idea that al-Sistani and the Iraqi government were working toward a common objective, said a Bush administration official in Washington. It shows that al-Sistani recognizes Allawi's authority, and will lend his authority and prestige to the government, the official added, speaking on condition of anonymity.