Informed Comment

Dozens of Mosques Attacked, Over 100 Dead, Thousands Protest

CNN reports that 7 US GIs were killed in Iraq on Wednesday.

There will be a curfew in the core Sunni Arab areas, including Baghdad, to prevent the worshippers from rioting afer the Friday prayers ceremony.

Sunni Arabs in Iraq blamed US troops for not protecting Sunni mosques and worshippers from violence. The US military ordered the US soldiers in Baghdad to stay in their barracks and not to circulate if it could be helped. [Later reports said some US patrols has been stepped up.] This situation underlines how useless the American ground forces are in Iraq. They can’t stop the guerrilla war and may be making it worst. Last I knew, there were 10,000 US troops in Anbar Province with a population of 1.1 million. What could you do with that small force, when the vast majority of the people support the guerrillas? US troops would be useless if they hcad to fight in alleyways against sectarian rioters. If they tried to guard the Sunni mosques, they’d have to shoot into Shiite mobs, which would just raise the level of violence they face from Shiites in the south.

Reuters reports that ‘ The main Sunni religious group said 184 Sunni mosques had been damaged, some destroyed; 10 clerics had been killed and 15 abducted. The Muslim Clerics Association accused Shi’ite religious leaders of stoking the anger by calling for protests. ‘

Abdul Salam al-Kubaisi of the [Sunni] Association of Muslim Scholars slammed grand ayatollah Sistani for calling for demonstrations, and implied that Shiite trouble makers were coming over from Iran:

“They are all fully aware that the Iraqi borders are open, and the streets are penetrated with those who want to create strife among Iraqis,” Abdul-Salam al-Kubaisi said at a news briefing. Al-Kubaisi said US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad may also have enflamed the situation when he warned on Monday that the US would not continue to support institutions run by sectarian groups with links to armed militias.

In Diyala province, guerrillas set up a phony checkpoint and pulled 47 largely Shiite factory workers off a bus and summarily executed them. Other bodies showed up in the streets of Baghdad and other cities. Guerrillas set off two bombs in Baghdad, causing casualties.

Guerrillas used a bomb to kill 16 persons and wound 20 in Baqubah.

Thousands of Shiites marched in Baghdad, Tal Afar, Kut, Karbala and Najaf.

Young Shiite nationalist leader Muqtada al-Sadr charged that the Iraqi government and the US had failed to protect the Askariyah shrine in Samarra, and commanded his Mahdi Army militiamen to guard Shiite shrines throughout Iraq.

In Mahmoudiyah to the south of Baghdad, Muqtada’s Mahdi Army militiamen fought a pitched battle with Sunni guerrillas, killing two civilians and wounding 5 militiament.

Muqtada issued a statement:

“If the government had real sovereignty, then nothing like this would have happened,” al-Sadr said in a statement. “Brothers in the Mahdi Army must protect all Shiite shrines and mosques, especially in Samara.”

Al-Hayat [Ar.] says that Muqtaada al-Sadr had originally called on his followers to go to Samarra for Friday prayers, but cancelled this call later when it became clear that there might be riots.

Pakistani Shiites demonstrated against the destruction of the Askariyah shrine.

Likewise, tens of thousands of Shiite protesters came out to rally in Beirut against the bombing on Thursday. In both Lebanon and Pakistan, the demonstrations turned anti-American.

I am interviewed at the Metro Times by by Curt Guyette & W. Kim Heron about Iraq and the war on terror.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Sistani threatens to turn to Militia
Sadr Calls for Calm

The shoe seems to be on the other foot now, with Muqtada al-Sadr attempting to cool Iraq’s Shiites down and Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani threatening to create a paramilitary to protect Shiites.

Al-=Hayat says that [Ar.] the Sunni cleric Abdul Ghafur al-Samarra’i led a demonstration of Sunnis in Samarra’ in protest against the “Excommunicators” for having attempted to set off a sectarian civil war in Iraq by bombing the shrine. They also blamed “the Americans”. Al-Samarra’i asked for restraint and the avoidance of civil war. Sunni and Shiite demonstrators in the city (but presumably mostly Shiite) chanted “With our spirits and our blood, we sacrifice ourselves for you, O Imam!” [Bi'r-ruh wa'd-dam nufdika ya Imam!]

The ministers of defense and the interior made a joint announcement that the Iraqi armed forces had been put on alert for any contingency.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani was shown on Iraqiyah television meeting with the other 3 grand ayatollahs in Najaf, among whom he is first among equals. They include Bashir Najafi, Muhammad Ishaq Fayyad and Muhammad Sa`id al-Hakim. Sistani called for self-discipline and for peaceful demonstrations. He said Shiites must not attack Sunni mosques, but called for them to demonstrate peacefully. He laid responsibility for security on the Iraqi government, saying that it “is called today more than at any time in the past to shoulder its full responsibilities in stopping the series of criminal actions that have targeted holy spaces. If the security apparatuses are unable to safeguard against this crisis, the believers are able to do so, by the aid of God.”

Astonishingly, Sistani seems to be threatening to deploy his own militia, Ansar Sistani, if the Iraqi government doesn’t do a better job of protecting Shiites and their holy sites. One lesson Sistani will have taken from the bombing of the Askariyah shrine in Samarra is that he is not very secure in Najaf, either. But all we need in Iraq is yet another powerful private sectarian militia!

Muqtada al-Sadr had been in Lebanon. He cut short his trip and went overland to Iraq. He told the Syrian news agency that he condemns this “despicable crime” and called the Iraqi people to “unity and solidarity so as to deny any opportunity to those who wish to ignite public turmoil.”

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim said during a press conference in Baghdad that the statements of the US ambassador in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, had “contributed to greater pressure [on the Shiites] and gave a green light to terrorist groups, and he therefore bears a part of the responsibility.” Al-Hakim has long wanted to unleash the Badr Corps, his Shiite paramilitary, the Badr Corps, but has been checked by the Americans so far.

The Association of Muslim Scholars [hardline Sunni] called for calm but then blamed the Americans for the downward spiral of conditions.

After Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei blamed the US and Israel for the bombing on Wednesday, Shiites all over the world staged demonstrations in some of which they burned US and Israeli flags.

On the other hand, the thousands of protester in Bahrain blamed Sunni “excommunicators” instead.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Iran Blames Bush
Sunni Shiite Clashes

Dan Murphy of the Christian Science Monitor has an excellent piece interpreting the significance of the turmoil over the bombing of the Askariyah shrine in Samarra.

Shiites came out in the thousands all over the Shiite south on Wednesday to protest. Quoting Sunni Arab spokesmen, the wire services are saying 75 Sunni mosques have been attacked, with two burned to the ground and 3 Sunni clergymen assassinated, with 6 Sunni Arabs dead altoghether in the violence.

In the southern city of Kut, AP says, 3,000 protesters came out to rally against the United States and Israel.

AFP says that 10,000 people in East Baghdad converged on the office of Muqtada al-Sadr, chanting against “Wahhabis” and America.

AP also describes some of the other violence:

‘ Large protests erupted in Shiite parts of Baghdad and in cities throughout the Shiite heartland to the south. In Basra, Shiite militants traded rifle and rocket-propelled grenade fire with guards at the office of the Iraqi Islamic Party. Smoke billowed from the building.

Shiite protesters later set fire to a Sunni shrine containing the seventh century tomb of Talha bin Obeid-Allah, companion of the Prophet Muhammad, on the outskirts of the southern city. Police found 11 bodies of Sunni Muslims, most of them shot in the head, in two neighborhoods of Basra, police Capt. Mushtaq Kadhim said. Two of the dead were Egyptians, Kadhim said.

Protesters in Najaf, Kut and Baghdad’s Shiite slum of Sadr City also marched through the streets by the hundreds and thousands, many shouting anti-American and anti-Israeli slogans and burning those nations’ flags. ‘

The hardline Shiite Mahdi Army has come out of Sadr City and is all over Baghdad. They are clashing with Sunnis in Basra.

Sunni leader Tariq al- Hashimi threatened reprisals for reprisal killings.

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim blamed the US for holding back the Badr Corps.

Grand Ayatollah Sistani called for nonviolent street protests that he must know won’t be nonviolent.

Iran is blaming Bush and the Israelis, which is ridiculous but already widely believed in Iraq and Iran.

The threat of terrorism and attacks on Americans just went way up.

—

Postscript:

A reader writes in:

‘ An hour ago [my Iraqi Shiite fried] recieved a call from Najaf. You know the Najaf boys are losing their heads over what happened.

No wonder. 80 years or so ago their relatives bought some land up there [at Samarra] and established Shia communities around the mosque and in Samarra. So the boys had been working there living there from time to time and some really settled down for good. A month or two ago lots of Shia were expelled, thrown out of town or scared off.

And now this.

They told B. how the demolition was carried out. You see, it was nothing like
a hipshot sneaking up bombing by night. It was meticulous, skilful piece of work,
taking a lot of time, the guards knowing all about what was going on. At least that´s what they told him today.

So now they all gather downtown Nejef rallying, preparing a gruesome revenge.
Sistani tries hard to stop them, they told him, but the boys won´t listen. They´re heading for Samarra. ‘

[Revised].

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Shiite protests Roil Iraq

Tuesday was an apocalyptic day in Iraq. I am not normally exactly sanguine about the situation there. But the atmospherics are very, very bad, in a way that most Western observers will miss.

The day started out with a protest by ten thousand people in the Shiite holy city of Karbala, against the Danish caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. These days, Shiites are weeping, mourning and flagellating in commemoration of the martyrdom of the Prophet’s grandson, Imam Husayn. So it is an emotional time in the ritual calendar. when feelings can easily be whipped up about issues like insults to the Prophet. An anti-Danish demonstration in Karbala is a surrogate for anti-American and anti-occupation sentiment. The US won’t be able to stay in Iraq withiut increasing trouble of this sort.

Then guerrillas set off a huge bomb in a Shiite corner of the mostly Sunni Arab Dura quarter of Baghdad, killing 22 and wounding 28. Another 9 were killed in other violence around Iraq. These attacks are manifestations of an unconventional civil war.

Then real disaster struck. The guerriillas blew up the domed Askariyah shrine in Samarra. The shrine, sacred to Shiiites, honors 3 Imams or holy descendants of the Prophet. They are Ali al-Hadi, Hasan al-Askari, and his disappeared son Muhammad al-Mahdi. Thousands of Shiiites demonnstrated in Samarra and in East Baghdad, against this desecration.

The Twelfh Imam or Mahdi is believed by Shiites to have disappeared into a supernatural realm (just as Christians believe in the ascension of Christ) from which he will someday return.

Some Shiites think his second coming is imminent. Muqtada all-Sadr and his followers are among them. They are livid about this attack on the shrine of the Mahdi’s father.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is also a firm believer in the imminent coming of the Mahdi. I worry that Iranian anger will boil over as a result of this bombing of a Shiite millenarian symbol.

Both Sunnis and Americans will be blamed. Very bad

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Bringing the United Nations Back In

There will be anti-War protests in the coming month, as the 3-year anniversary of the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq approaches.

I think it is time to demand a timetable for US withdrawal from Iraq. I suspect a majority of Iraqi parliamentarians want that. The Sunni Arabs demand it. The Sadrists demand it. It is time. Saying that the guerrillas would take advantage of a timetable, given the carnage we saw on Monday (see below) is frankly silly. They are taking advantage of the current situation. We have to create a new situation, with which they might be happier so that they stop blowing things up. Staying this course is untenable.

But that step will not necessarily resolve the crisis.

I think the peace movement has a real opportunity here to make a push for much heavier United Nations involvement in Iraq. I say, let’s make up placards calling on Kofi Annan to get involved, and calling on Bush to let the UN come in in a big way, with proper protection.

Here are the advantages:

1. The United Nations has political legitimacy in the Middle East. American unilateralism does not. The guerrillas would be humiliated to deal with Bush, who crushed them and marginalized them. They would be more likely to treat with the UN.

2. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani has demanded greater UN involvement, and he has enormous authority with the Shiite majority.

3. No country is going to send troops to Iraq under a United States military command. There has to be a United Nations peace-enforcing command. Once that exists, it might become an umbrella for Arab League troops, e.g. Cheney was told as much when he was in Cairo, according to the Arabic press.

I.e., by keeping out the UN, the Bush administration is guaranteeing that it is mainly American (and British) blood and treasure that is spilt in Iraq for years to come.

4. If the United Nations could be mobilized to help Iraq through the coming years of instability and help shepherd it to independence from the US and UK, it would help to strengthen international, multilateral organizations generally and contribute to an institutionalization of international law.

5. The permanent members of the UN Security Council, as well as all UN member states, have a keen interest in the fate of Iraq and the Gulf. They should be encouraged to deploy some of their treasure (and probably some blood) for the common benefit of Iraqis and the world.

6. The peace movement will be more credible if it has a program other than simple US withdrawal from Iraq. The US public is aware that an Iraq in flames at the head of the oil-rich Gulf could have a horrible impact on the US itself. A demand that the Iraq situation be internationalized is a responsible way of getting the US out, getting Iraq out of Bush’s incompetent hands, and helping Iraqis move forward.

7. Bush invaded Iraq in part in order to destroy the United Nations. Forcing him to bring it in to Iraq would be a blow against American unilateralism and rightwing American aggression for decades to come.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Thinking about Suing

If among my loyal readers there are any attorneys with expertise in libel law, in the US or UK, who might be willing to consult on a possible series of lawsuits for reckless defamation of character resulting in professional harm–done on a contingency basis– I’d much appreciate hearing from you.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

The Ambassador Versus the Ayatollah
: Khalilzad to Iraq: No Shiite Control of Interior, Defense
Sistani Contradicts Him

On Monday, the stage was set for an epic struggle between the two forces behind the scenes in Iraqi politics, US Ambassadro in Baghdad Zalmay Khalilzad and Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani of Najaf, the spiritual leader of Iraq’s majority Shiites. In every previous such contest, Sistani has handily won against his American opponent.

Nancy Youssef of Knight Ridder reports on the press conference in Baghdad on Monday in which Khalilzad publicly threatened to cut off funding for the training of Iraqi troops if the ministries of defense and the interior are under “sectarian” control.

In plain English, Khalilzad was saying that the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) may not retain control of Interior (which in Iraq is a security organization) and continue to pack it with members of the paramilitary Badr Corps, most of them trained originally by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Sunni Arabs have charged that Interior Ministry police commandos have functioned as death squads, conducting reprisal killings against Sunnis.

It is in fact important for the recovery of social peace in Iraq that SCIRI and Badr be gotten away from Interior. The problem is that the Shiite religious parties have 132 MPs who will vote with them in a parliament of 275. Barring an unforeseen and substantial defection from among their ranks, they will almost certainly form the government. SCIRI has made it clear that it wants Interior, i.e. federal domestic policing and surveillance, under its control.

So Khalilzad does not have a lot of options. He appears to be attempting to undermine the Shiite government by encouraging the Kurds to ally with the Sunni Arabs. Some theorize that a Kurdish-Sunni alliance could outmaneuver the Shiite United Iraqi Alliance. They argue that the two main Kurdistan parties have 53 seats, the two main Sunni Arab coalitions have 55, and Iyad Allawi’s National Iraqi List has 25, for a total of 133. If they could get the 5 Kurdish Islamists to join them, they would have 138, or 51 percent. There are also 3 Sunni Arab seats of the list of Mishaan Juburi, who had to flee the country in fear of being prosecuted as a Baathist agent; I’m not sure what will happen to his three seats, though.

The Kurdish-Sunni alliance scenario, however, makes no sense. First, it cannot provide the 184 seats needed to select a president, who appoints the prime minister. Only a Shiite alliance with Kurds or Sunnis could accomplish that. And, whoever selects the president will set things up to be sure that the president will ask them to form a government. So the Shiite MPs could strike and refuse to allow a president to be seated unless they were allowed to form the government.

Second, the Kurds want loose federalism. The Sunni Arabs are die-hard opposed to it. Both have their own plans for oil-rich Kirkuk. The 11 neo-Baathists around Salih Mutlak would be absolutely despised by most Kurds. Mutlak praised the Baath as the best party Iraq could have! The Kurds don’t have fond memories of Baathism. A government coalition between Kurds and Sunni Arab Islamists and neo-Baathists wouldn’t last longer than the first cabinet meeting.

Third, the Constitution absolutely requires the president to offer the prime minister post to the party that has the largest number of seats in parliament. It would would be unconstitutional to ask the Kurdistan Alliance with 53 seats to form a minority government with support from other parties, unless the largest party had already tried and failed to form a government.

It should also be remembered that the leading party in parliament controls Iraq’s petroleum profits, of some $17 billion a year, and that this money becomes political patronage for members of the government. That’s a big incentive to any group to stay with a sure thing rather than pulling out in favor of possible role in another, unstable, coalition.

Like it or not, it is the Shiite religious parties that have the cohesion to form a relatively stable government. They would only need to be joined by the Yazidi MP and the 5 Kurdish Islamists to have a majority. (It is also not impossible that some Shiite members of the Allawi list could jump ship and join with the religious Shiites). If Khalilzad goes too far in undermining them, he risks throwing Iraq into complete political instability and hot civil war.

Although there has been talk of the Fadhila or Virtue Party of the United Iraqi Alliance breaking off and going its own way, there has also been talk of Virtue getting one of the vice-presidencies so as to keep it in.

There is another thing. Al-Zaman/ AFP reports that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani has called for all due speed in the formation of a new Iraqi government. A source close to Sistani said after the visit to him Monday of Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari said that the new government should not only be formed quickly but should “ensure the provision of services to the people. It should be a government based on competence, spotlessness and transparency.” He added, “Sistani also affirmed during the visit the necessity to hew to the perogatives explicitly stated in the constitution with regard to powerful cabinet positions.”

Jaafari said, “My visit to Sistani was so as to get his opinion insofar as he is the shepherd of the political process in Iraq.” He added, “I came to listen to his views, and he affirms the necessity of haste in forming a government that is competent, spotless and transparent, and which acts in accordance with the constitution and the law, and takes an interest in the people and their demands.” Jaafari said he hoped it would not take the three months to form a government that it took the last time. He said Kurdistan would be handled as specified in the constitution (i.e. there will be a popular referendum there in 2007 to decide if it will join the Kurdistan Regional Confederacy of Dahuk, Irbil and Sulaymaniyah).

Sistani, it should be remembered, has resources and authority that might be useful in keeping the Virtue Party from leaving the Shiite coalition. Most Shiites in Basra would not like to be denounced personally by the Grand Ayatollah.

Sistani appears to believe that since the leading party in parliament gets to choose the prime minister, and since the prime minister gets to choose the cabinet members, that it would be wrong for the United Iraqi Alliance to give away its right to powerful cabinet posts such as Defense and Interior, under American pressue.

There is one way for Khalilzad to avoid a debilitating and destructive contest with Sistani on this issue. It is for Khalilzad to identify a member of the United Iraqi Alliance in parliament who is not tied to the militias and who could be minister of the interior. That is, Sistani isn’t demanding that the post go to SCIRI and Badr. He is demanding that it go to the UIA if the UIA wants it. Not all the parliamentarians in the UIA are tied to militias!

——
Appendix:

Provisions of the Iraqi Constitution on the Formation of a Cabinet:

‘ Article 73:

First: The President of the Republic shall name the nominee of the Council of Representatives bloc with the largest number to form the Cabinet within fifteen days from the date of the election of the president of the republic.

Second: The Prime Minister-designate shall undertake the naming of the members of his Cabinet within a period not to exceed thirty days from the date of his designation.

Third: In case the Prime Minister-designate fails to form the cabinet during the period specified in clause “Second,” the President of the Republic shall name a new nominee for the post of Prime Minister within fifteen days.

Fourth: The Prime Minister-designate shall present the names of his Cabinet members and the ministerial program to the Council of Representatives. He is deemed to have gained its confidence upon the approval, by an absolute majority of the Council of Representatives, of the individual Ministers and the ministerial program.

Fifth: The President of the Republic shall name another nominee to form the cabinet within fifteen days in case the Cabinet did not gain the confidence. ‘

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off