Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Saturday, June 14, 2008

2 Killed, 45 Injured in Bombings Saturday;
Sadr To Appoint Special Ops Commanders;
Sadrists Withdraw from Provincial Elections

A female suicide bomber injured 34 soccer fans and police in the town of Qara Tappah in Diyala Province, 75 miles northeast of Baghdad. The fans had poured into the street after watching Iraq beat China in a sports cafe. Likely this was an attack by a radical Sunni Arab cell on a largely Kurdish and Shiite Turkmen town.

AP adds, "In Baghdad, a bomb hidden on a bus exploded in a Shiite neighborhood, killing two people and wounding eight, police said. Three other civilians were injured Saturday when a roadside bomb exploded near a police patrol in the capital's Karradah district, police said."

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that joint American and Iraqi patrols have been set up in the southern city of Amarah, and the al-Maliki government has given the Mahdi Army militia an ultimatum that members must surrender heavy and medium weapons within 3 days (i.e. they can keep their automatic rifles but no rocket propelled grenades). Amarah is largely a Marsh Arab city that politically began supporting the Sadrists strongly from at least 2004. Sadrists won the Maysan Provincial council elections in January, 2005. Sadrist control of Maysan has long been an obstacle to the plans of the leader of the rival Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, to form a Shiite provincial confederacy in the South modeled on Kurdistan in the north. As with al-Maliki's show of force in Basra in late March, the attempt to assert central government control of Amarah is likely motivated in part by a desire to help ISCI and Da'wa (the Islamic Mission Party) do well there in the provincial elections next fall.

In another report, Al-Hayat writes in Arabic that Sadrist sources are explaining that the decision of Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr to form a special operations cell of the Mahdi Army to attack US troops even as the Mahdi Army itself becomes a social service organization is intended to out disobedient Mahdi Army leaders.

The new special operations force of the Mahdi Army, they says Sayyid Hasan al-Battat of the Diwaniya Sadrist office, will only attack Occupying forces, not other Iraqis. Muqtada al-Sadr will hand pick the commanders. The bulk of the Mahdi Army will be ordered to stand down and to conduct a cultural struggle against Western influence in Iraq. (This model strikes me as similar to that of Hizbullah, which until recently had pledged that its 5,000 fighters would not take on fellow Lebanese).

Aides of Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr announced Saturday that his Sadr Movement would not take part in the provincial elections scheduled for this fall. Movement spokesmen said that they did not want to be part of a government widely seen by the Iraqi people as illegitimate because it labored under US military occupation. At the same time, sources in the movement intimated that the newly formed special groups of the former Mahdi Army militia would begin striking soon. In the Shiite holy city of Najaf, government security forces mobilized to protect the shrine of Ali ibn Abi Talib and the offices of the grand ayatollahs.

Although the WaPo article quotes critics of the Sadr Movement suggesting that they decided not to contest elections because they knew they would go down to a crushing defeat, my own information is that the Shiite South has been trending Sadrist and they should have done well in the elections if they had run. It is more likely that they decided that the elections would be fixed or they would be excluded from running, and so they are behaving like any blocked group and turning to rejectionism and even terrorism.

Labels:

10 Comments:

At 2:23 AM, Blogger Walking Wounded said...

Re Sadrist boycott of Fall elections:

Perhaps someone with expertise can tell us what is going on with the enabling legislation for the provincial elections?

I've heard that the election law is blocked by ISCI/Hakim in parliament, and that it's too late for the Oct. 1 deadline that was talked about earlier this year.

If you have a truer rumor, I'd like to hear it.

 
At 5:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The lists submitted to the election commission reveal important changes.

The UIA (Shi'a Alliance) will not compete as one list, i.e. it has disintegrated. Furthermore, the Da'wa party itself has split into 3 lists. Therefore, the Da'wa party is no more, and Hakim has lost the clout he had as the leader of the UIA. Hakim does not have a grip on the security forces or government institutions either, so the chances are that both (ex) Da'wa and the Hakimists will be decimated. But the Sadrists and Fadhila do not enjoy as much popularity as most people think, mainly as a result of the abuses. New groups and the independents may reap the benefits, if proper elections are held.

The Barzanis and Talabanis have submitted a combined list. They have been for some time trying to unite the two parties, which makes a mockery of democracy, that never was any way. Their winning is almost assured in Kurdistan, but they will lose some in the rest of Iraq.

The Misan operation is not anti-Sadrist. He himself wants to clean up the Mahdi Army from the criminal gangs and, since the initial Basra fiasco, operations in the south are coordinated with him first.

 
At 5:41 AM, Anonymous lidia said...

"turning to rejectionism and even terrorism."

No, to LEGITIMATE resistance!

 
At 9:12 AM, Anonymous JHM said...

JC takes absolutely for granted that the elections will be fixed.

Doubtless the Crawfordites will take a whack at some good ol’ Austro-Hungarian Wahlgeometrie, "electoral geometry," but this is the gang that can't shoot straight, remember?

They really thought their Dr. ‘Alláwí was a shoo-in in December 2005, and then they were flabbergasted when the Hamás won an election in occupied Palestine.

Nuff said. Happy days.

 
At 12:14 PM, Blogger Tommy Times said...

If indeed the U.S. is allying with the central government in fighting the Sadrists, who are the provincial government in Amarah, it is taking sides in the civil war, and not 'preventing a bloodbath', as the pro-war faction claims when opposing withdrawl. The next time some U.S. politician says 'if we withdraw there will be chaos', ask them how operations like this contribute to preventing chaos.

 
At 1:40 PM, Anonymous Bill Stearns said...

The Sadrists backing out of the fall elections (provided the elections are even held) makes it really difficult for me to understand what is happening in Iraq now. I had assumed that their standing-down on militia activities had to do with them waiting for the elections since if they are as popular as Mr. Cole claims they would likely gain many seats in the new government, and this could be a way for them to help end the occupation of their country.

In fact, if the elections were to be held in October as originally planned (which it appears they will NOT, as someone above notes), and the Sadrists were to gain many seats in the new assembly, this would surely help Obama's presidential chances, which you'd expect the Sadrists to favor since he has promised pulling most U.S. troops out of Iraq within a year and a half of his election.

If they are not going to participate, then I don't see how their actions can really be understood as anything other than that of a weakened political party. It seems that if it is true that they are not going to participate in the next elections, then their plan is to position themselves as THE opposition party in an attempt to regain popularity going into the future.

I think that there is a possibility that this is a strategic threat and that they are holding out the 2005 Sunni boycott as an example of what might happen after these elections if the Sadrists decide not to participate. If they are as marginal force as some claim their threat won't matter to the U.S. If they are as powerful as Cole suggests, then you'd expect some sort of negotiation to take place to ensure that they do participate in the upcoming elections.

Of course the latter course assumes a kind of competence and rationality that has been missing from the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq all these years, and what we could be seeing is yet another prelude to years of failure ahead. Of course, those that favor a long-term occupation would like to see nothing else happen.

 
At 1:42 PM, Blogger wmmbb said...

Voter suppression is no doubt part of the gift of American democracy nurtured by occupation.

 
At 1:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"This model strikes me as similar to that of Hizbullah, which until recently had pledged that its 5,000 fighters would not take on fellow Lebanese"

When did Hizbullah say they were going to start taking on "fellow Lebanese"?

 
At 3:50 PM, Blogger McCutchen said...

Juan,

Seems to me that Maliki may really truly have Muqtada on the run. According to McClatchy's latest , he's going to field candidates as independents or not otherwise openly affiliated with the Sadr Trend.

"There has been much grumbling about his lack of clear leadership and enigmatic directions," said Vali Nasr, author of "The Shia Revival," speaking from Basra. "If there is a strategy behind his approach, it is one of fence-sitting."

Lenin's famous maxim - "two steps forward one step back".

Muqtada Sadr seems to me to be taking three steps back and Maliki knows this

So too will his followers.

Joost Hilterman is quoted that Sadr "is waiting on the U.S. departure"

Too cautious by half in my view. The Iraqis who oppose the US occupation need to appreciate the narrow window of policy opportunity that is now opening. Jaafari didn't see it in 2004...The Permanent Bases/100 Years War Agreement (aka SOFA) is ripe for decision and key to all this

Advantage - Maliki/al-Hakim from where I sit...in California!

 
At 6:30 AM, Blogger Christiane said...

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that joint American and Iraqi patrols have been set up in the southern city of Amarah, and the al-Maliki government has given the Mahdi Army militia an ultimatum [....] As with al-Maliki's show of force in Basra in late March, the attempt to assert central government control of Amarah is likely motivated in part by a desire to help ISCI and Da'wa (the Islamic Mission Party) do well there in the provincial elections next fall.

It is interesting to confront these last developments in Amara with a recent paper of Reider Vissar, where he stressed its potential exemplary role.

The argument in this paper is two-fold: on the one hand, the oil-rich far south of Iraq has a special potential for radical and unpredictable millenarianism by discontented Sadrists; on the other hand, developments among the Sadrist leadership nationally suggest that many key figures – including Muqtada al-Sadr himself and some of his lieutenants with links to Basra – still prefer a more moderate course and will seek to hold on to a veneer of Shiite orthodoxy as long as possible. Accordingly, the future of the Sadrist movement, including in the far south, will likely be decided by how US and Iraqi government policies develop over coming months. If Washington chooses to support Nuri al-Maliki in an all-out attack against the Sadrists, the response may well be an intensification of unpredictable Mahdist militancy in the far south, in a far more full-blown picture than anything seen so far. There will be no genuine national reconciliation in Baghdad, simply because the centralism of the Sadrists is a necessary ingredient in any grand compromise that can appeal to real Sunni representatives. Conversely, if the Sadrists are encouraged to participate in the next local elections, Amara, where Sadrists have been engaged in local politics since 2005, could emerge as a model of positive Sadrist contributions to local politics in Iraq(1). At the national level, too, the Sadrists could come to play the same constructive role as that seen in February 2008, when they together with Fadila reached out to Sunni Islamists and secularists to challenge the paralysed Maliki government on a nationalist basis by demanding early provincial elections.

From what Al-Hayat reports, it seems that the US has gone for the all out option.

(1) Bold chars not in the original, added by me.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home