Shiite Crowds Protest Bombings, US Support for Sunni Arabs;
11 GIs Killed
The US military announced that Thursday was the bloodiest day for US troops since they entered Iraq in March, 2003. The number of GIs killed that day rose to 11. [Readers have written in to say that this assertion is not true and other days have been bloodier. Perhaps a qualifier dropped out when I summarized a summary; sorry for the confusion.]
Friday saw further bombings, in Baghdad and Mosul, targetting police and police commandos.
According to AP, protesters came out in Shiite East Baghdad (Sadr City) and Kadhimiyah on Friday to rally against US support for Sunni Arab politicians, who, they say, have behing the scenes links to the guerrilla groups that were responsible for Thursday's bombing in Karbala, which killed 53 persons and wounded twice that many. The demonstrations were staged by the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a leading Shiite party. The number of protesters was given as only 500 by the New York Times, but as 5,000 in the Arabic press. Crowds are hard to count and their size is easy to exaggerate.
In Karbala, further funerals and mourning sessions [Ar.] turned into angry demonstrations.
The crowds chanted slogans against US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and Sunni Arab Neo-Baathist Salih Mutlak of the National Dialogue Council, whom they accused Khalilzad of supporting. Khalilzad is an Afghan Pushtun of Sunni extraction and has urged a pragmatic reconciliation between Shiites and Sunnis. He has also attempted to have the Ministry of the Interior taken away from SCIRI and given to ex-Baathists from the party of Iyad Allawi.
These demonstrations and denunciations of the US by the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq constitute the first major anti-US street action by followers of this party. Previous major Shiite anti-US demonstrations had usually been staged by the Sadr movement, while SCIRI had maintained a tacit alliance with the Americans. The demonstrations should be seen, however, not as the end of the marriage of convenience but as a way for SCIRI to pressure the US to back off its criticisms of SCIRI management of the Ministry of the Interior.
The US military admits to being in negotiations with Sunni Arab guerrilla movements, in hopes of splitting the Iraqi fighters from the radical Salafis around Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports that [Ar.]Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani supports a government of national unity, which would include the Sunni Arabs and preserve the unity of the country, according to a parliamentarian who visited him on Friday.
Al-Zaman/ AFP/DPA [Ar.]: In the city of Amarah, a government security official announced the assassination of Salam al-Khafaji, the head of the Khafaji tribe in Maysan province while he was traveling to Suwaira.
On Friday, guerrillas fired mortar rounds a the shrine of revered Sunni Sufi shaikh, Abdul Qadir Gilani [al-Kilani] in the Khilani district of Baghdad near the Eastern Gate. Part of the dome of the shrine was damaged. Radical Salafi Sunnis have puritan tendencies and abhor saints' shrines (rather as Protestants felt about Roman Catholic saints and shrines). Some branches of the Qadiri Sufi order, a mystical brotherhood, have declined to join the Sunni guerrilla movement, which has caused the Salafis a la Zarqawi to attack them. It may also be that the guerrillas hope that Sunnis who revere Gilani will blame Shiites for the attack, instigating civil war.
Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari complained while on pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia about the poor quality of Saudi preparations for the event. Some 53 pilgrims died when their hostel collapsed. Tragedies during pilgrimage are so frequent that many observers believe the Saudis are neglecting their duties as hosts of the event.
The Saudi minister of the interior, Prince Naef, angrily rejected Jaafari's criticism, saying that he was just posturing in hopes of salvaging his fading political career. (In fact, Jaafari has a real shot of being the prime minister of Iraq again). The Saudis also said they had be nice enough to let the Iraqi delegation come in numbers greater than their allotted quota, implying that Jaafari was being ungracious.
Tension between the Shiite-dominated government of Iraq and the Wahhabi state in Saudi Arabia have been high since September, when a major Saudi prince castigated the United States for spreading Iranian influence in the region by installing Iraqi Shiites in power.
The Sunni fundamentalist leader of the National Accord Front, Adnan Dulaimi, called Jaafari's comments wrong and oppressive.
posted by Juan Cole @ 1/07/2006 12:46:00 AM
|
Facebook
10 Comments:
I think the Saudis really do prepare a lot. They spend millions on security and first aid and feeding the millions of pilgrims. It's actually said to be an economic loss for the government, when the annual pilgrimmage used to be their source of profit. My Kuwaiti friend emailed me in response:
"as a first eye witness and person who has gone to Hajj, I must admit that the Saudi family and government are providing every possible means to help the pilgrims and King Fahad alone has payed millions in expanding the masjid al haram (ka'ba). They provide daily millions of free meals and drinks, a,s well as shelter, and above all guidance towards performing the right rituals without any kind of Bid'a. [sinful innovation of the religion] God bless them."
Sunni, Shiites and Kurds in ethnic strife after the U.S. invasion. Gee, what 12 year old with internet access could have predicted that?
Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Cheney and the neocon sycophants - they are all just incompetent and living in a fantasy world. The emperor simply has no clothes. This was a bad idea and was incompetently executed anyway. These people just have no idea what they are doing. The only thing that they are good at is a strange kind of propaganda and fearmongering, and even that is starting to wear thin for them. I only hope that their solution to their continuing and inevitable decline is not to start up another war. Common sense says they wouldn't dare, but that's why I'm worried. They are so averse to common sense that I think they will go for it.
What Shape Is the Table?
So Bush's military continues to talk with guerrillas, directly and indirectly?
What happened to killing all the terrorists, squish, squaash, squash?
Or aren't these terrorists? What definition is the military using for terrorist, since there isn't an internationally agreed one?
Will we talk to just anyone, or does it have to be an ineffective group? Or an effective one? Will we talk to groups with the blood of American troops on their hands, or that of Iraqi civilians?
For that matter, how are the talks/contacts/whatever-they-may-be-called going with Al-Qaeda since we met their primary call for withdrawal from Saudi Arabia? They must have gone well, since we haven't bothered to bother Osama Bin/Ben/Boom Laden lately.
Cheney claims there won't be any terrorist attacks on us while Republicans are in power--this suggests a deal, or a degree of control. So what's the deal?
Can no Democrat, Republic, or Independent articulate any degree of frustration with an Administration that is much more concerned with controls over the home population than real attacks on real terrorists?
Have terrorists become National Treasures, to be protected because they are so rare and so valuable, as symbols we love to hate, threatening and lethal in small doses, but ultimately impotent, such as the late Palestinian symbol, Yah-suh what-was-his-name?
The clashes between Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi insurgent will most likely end soon with the Qaeda more or less fleeing the country.
This may not good news to Bush. Al-Qaeda has helped him betray the resistance to the occupation, which he says he wants to end anyway, as Armagaden; clash of civilizations, and GWOT. This will soon be impossible to maintain.
The rest of the insurgency will not be weakened. On the contrary, troop reduction and the mounting US casualties are seen as signs of victory, and success breeds success. Moreover, the fewer the US troops, the easier it will be for the insurgency to succeed.
Thanks for the post. This is great news. SCIRI is right, and hopefully we will stop holding back the majority of Iraqis who oppose terrorism.
Saving a relic of British colonialism isn't worth it.
"The US military announced that Thursday was the bloodiest day for US troops since they entered Iraq in March, 2003. The number of GIs killed that day rose to 11."
Actually, I'm afraid there have been many, many days when we have equalled or exceeded this number of US deaths in Iraq, Professor. I just went down through our database at the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count and found 17 days on which we recorded 11 or more deaths (yes, this surprised even me who lives with these deaths every day):
March 20, 2003 through May 1, 2003 (the end of major combat):
23 Mar 2003: 30 deaths
May 2, 2003 through June 28, 2004 (the day of the official turnover of sovereignty to Iraq):
2 Nov 2003: 16 deaths
15 Nov 2003: 18 deaths
4 Apr 2004: 12 deaths
6 Apr 2004: 12 deaths
9 Apr 2004: 15 deaths
17 Apr 2004: 12 deaths
29 Apr 2004: 11 deaths
June 29, 2004 (the day after the official turnover of sovereignty to Iraq) through January 30, 2005 (Iraq Elections):
6 Sep 2004: 12 deaths
8 Nov 2004: 11 deaths
9 Nov 2004: 14 deaths
12 Nov 2004: 11 deaths
15 Nov 2004: 12 deaths
21 Dec 2004: 15 deaths
26 Jan 2005: 37 deaths
January 31, 2005 (the day after Iraq Elections) through today's date:
3 Aug 2005: 18 deaths
1 Dec 2005: 11 deaths
When you look at the deaths as a whole, you realize that 11 deaths last Thursday was just another blip in the long and bloody Iraq timeline. I for one see no end in the short term.
Pat Kneisler
Moreover, the Saudi government is neglecting its duty to its people. It is an illegitimate monarchy, missrepresenting the wishes of the population over which it rules. It is interesting that they attempt to derive some religious authority from their custodial guardianship of the two holy places.
"The number of protesters was given as only 500 by the New York Times, but as 5,000 in the Arabic press. Crowds are hard to count and their size is easy to exaggerate."
It has been my experience that, when attempting to estimate crowd numbers at our local protests, I invariably underestimated (we used a counter to get an actual tally). When I guessed 200, we had 450. When I guesed 6-700, we had 1,200. While it is true that there can be a motivation to exaggerate crowd sizes, estimates based on just taking a guess generally underestimate the size of the crowd.
In addition to not really organizing the Hajj around safety considerations, the Saudis do very little to ingratiate Shias.
Shia pilgrims are frequently harassed at the Two Holy Shrines. Even before arrival, pilgrims who carry Shia turbas (prayer stones), books, or any other 'innovations' will have their bags turned inside out and offensive belongings confiscated. We sat at the border for seven hours while Saudi thugs took everything out of our bags twice, sent a search dog aboard our bus, and actully started to remove parts of the bus in search of Shiite contraband. 'Welcome to the Land of the Two Shrines, O Guests of the Most Merciful!'
In Medina, believers who wish to touch the 'Pillar of Repentance' in the Prophet's Mosque face physical rebuke at the hands of a Wahhabi guard. Iranian groups are closely monitored by Saudi authorities (they shot scores of them dead a few years back, we should recall). In Medina, I saw long-bearded Wahhabi seminarians kicking women gathered around the Prophet's Mosque to clear the way for male worshippers.
But the real sticking point that many Shias will never let go is the demolition of Jannat al-Baqee, the cemetary in Medina which held shrines to several of the Imams. Access to the cemetary, which now looks more like a Zen rock garden, is highly restricted. No women may enter at all, and men may only enter two hours a day. Men who choose to visit the cemetary are pelted with fundamentalist verbal abuse. Other important spots, like the mosques of Fatima Zahra and Salman al-Farsi, are closed altogether.
Then, of course, the hosts distribute propaganda packets with books and cassettes to all the believers, an extraordinary waste of money as well as paper. A great deal of this propaganda expressly attacks Shia religious principles.
As far as the safety factor, I just don't see how anyone can perform Hajj and say that the Saudis have adequately prepared on that front. Every year dozens of people die at Hajj, and in situations which are preventable with just a little planning. All I saw was chaos. Saudi management of the Hajj should be overseen by an international panel more representative of all the pilgims' interests.
Brian Anthony
Damascus, Syria
readingeagle.com/blog/syria
News stories online indicate "Among the dead: 11 US soldiers, the most killed on a single day since December 1."
Today's Blackhawk down may have resulted in 12 American deaths.
Post a Comment
<< Home