Sadr's influence seeps across turbulent Iraq

[leftchick]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/chitribts/20040815/ts_chicagotrib/sadrsinfluenceseepsacrossturbulentiraq&cid=2027&ncid=1480

<snip>

Elsewhere, insurgents took over government buildings in at least five southern towns. Iraq's main oil pipeline was closed, costing the country $30 million a day in lost revenues. Al-Mahdi militiamen seized control of neighborhoods in Basra, a city where they had previously enjoyed little support.


The crackdown against the rebel Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr offered Iraq's new prime minister, Ayad Allawi, the chance to live up to the get-tough promises made when he took over the task of running the country.


Instead, the battle for Najaf has turned into a worrying reminder of just how frail the 7-week-old administration's hold really is.


"Najaf is like a sideshow," said Toby Dodge, an Iraq expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. "When you look at the map, post-hand-over, the government doesn't control much."

[leftchick]

1. I am glad to see Juan Cole's comments here....

<snip>

Though U.S. military estimates have put the strength of al-Mahdi militia at less than a few thousand fighters nationwide, there is no way of measuring the number of angry, unemployed young men prepared to take up arms, said Juan Cole, professor of history at the University of Michigan and an authority on Iraq's Shiites.

U.S. military commanders said in June that their forces killed about 1,500 militia fighters during the seven-week siege that followed the last Sadr uprising. They estimated 360 fighters were killed in recent clashes.

But the scale of the resistance in Najaf and the sympathy uprisings elsewhere suggests Sadr's movement has grown in strength since last June's truce, Cole said. There were sizable uprisings in Kut and Amarah, two towns not previously known to be loyal to Sadr, and his movement also appears to have gained support in Basra.

"The Sadr movement is spreading throughout the south, and it's likely to be a source of long-term instability," he said.

[lil-petunia]

2. Bush, Bremer, Rummie Wolfowitz

have a LOT to answer for.

Any thinking person in State would have told them this.
Any foreign leader would have told them this - and tried.

We created Sadr, we supplied his paper, we thought we could "control" the little puppet, then we fucked it up so royally.

Bremer should be in jail for supreme overconfidence and complete incompetence.

[Wright Patman]

3. It's a sign of egotism

to say we 'created' anybody. As I understand it, the younger al-Sadr took over an Islamic ministry or clerisy or whatever is the proper term from his assassinated father, who was a revered Shiite cleric.

So, in that sense, it is Saddam Hussein and the Ba'ath Party he led and not the 'coalition' who is to blame.

What I see here is the power of the U.S. mass media to inculcate and indoctrinate to the point of 'mind control' the U.S. public. Saddam Hussein was no better or worse than any number of dictators on the world stage.

Yet, ever since August of 1990 when the Republican Guard tanks rolled into Kuwait with the tacit approval of U.S. Amb. April Glaspie, every major media outlet has declared him to be the Arab Hitler and Public Enemy No. 1. How many million Iraqis have died because of this? Was it worth it? It still doesn't look worth it to me.

And now, not even SH's most vehement opponents in that country think it looks worthwhile. I guess when the 'coalition' starts blowing away (or "lighting up" as they call it) innocent civilian members of your own family, you begin to realize the truism of that adage "the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know."

Does anyone know how many civilians have been "lit up" in the last 18 months by the "shoot first, ask questions (maybe, if we feel like it) later" U.S. military? It must be a staggering figure by now.

And yet, you can still get a substantial segment of the U.S. electorate to salivate on demand with the mere utterance of the Pavlovian term, "Saddam."

[NNN0LHI]

4. Plenty of innocent Iraqis have been "lit up" n/t

[0007]

6. ....and some with shit smeared all over them!

[Just Me]

56. Perhaps, we should define "dictator",...

,...because "dictating" can be control over others via force or deception,...and the American people are definitely being controlled by the best-of-the-best in deception.

[bpilgrim]

5. Revolutionary War

i know the media wanna call it a civil war but that comes AFTER...

peace

[Gloria]

7. I wish I could remember the name of the

person interviewed about a week ago during NewsHour on the BBC World Service...who then said that depending on what happened with Sadr and Najaf, we'd know within 2-3 weeks whether the rest of Southern Iraq would be in revolt....

Looks like it's way ahead of schedule...

And let's not forget the north....where Kurdistan is simmering...increasing tension over the return of land...and threats by various leaders about secession.....

[BlackJack8324]

8. Sadr is no hero

The crackdown against the rebel Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr offered Iraq's new prime minister, Ayad Allawi, the chance to live up to the get-tough promises made when he took over the task of running the country.

This is a key statement. Defeating Sadr and taking Najaf has absolutely nothing to do with protecting our mission in Iraq. This is simply a way for Bush and Allawi to appear tough.

I strongly disagree with the people who compare Sadr's forces to Revolutionary war heroes. Sadr and the Mahdi militia are religious fanatics who want to institute the Koran as law.

[NNN0LHI]

9. Yes, it would be much easier if Sadr were to cooperate with the...

...puppet government Bush has installed in Iraq while we are busy pumping our oil out from underneath them Iraqis sand. Allawi could then become our very own Sha Of Iraq. Then everything would be dreamy.

Don

[BlackJack8324]

12. Sadr doesn't care one wit about Iraq...

He's interested in having more influence over the Shia areas of Iraq. He's only spoke out against Allawi when Allawi began cracking down on Najaf. Finally the oil in Iraq isn't found in the South so I don't see how this is about getting more oil.

[aneerkoinos]

16. Who does care about Iraq?

Al-Sadr and his movement represent the poor Shia masses, and Sadr is the only who cares about those people.

He's been speaking against occupations since the day one, and the latest fight broke out because Sardrists have not been given appropriate representation in the counsil, and because treacherous Americans tried to apprehend al-Sadr.

PS: there's oil both north and south.

[BlackJack8324]

22. yeah and Pat Robertson represents poor rural...

Residents who donate to the Christian Coalition. Sadr is willing to be a populist to get political support, sort of like Bush.

[mike1963]

17. Actually more than half of Iraq's oil most certainly IS in the south.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilMap.pdf

[mbperrin]

25. Hi mike!

I shoulda scrolled down further before answering - thanks!

[mbperrin]

24. This map seems to show oil pretty well all over Iraq.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilMap.pdf

[daleo]

34. If there was no oil in the south, the Kuwait war might never have happened

Among other things, the Kuwaitis were accused of slant drilling into Iraqi fields. A quick look at the map verifies that this is indeed in the south. This is a fairly important point.

[bpilgrim]

11. they are repelling foreign invaders

and rebelling against their puppet gov. with apparently widespread popular support.

sounds like a revolution to me. :shrug:

peace

[BlackJack8324]

14. not exactly...

Sadr didn't have much support from anyone until Allawi and Bush decided to attack him. Sadr is no revolutionary hero, he's a religious fanatic who should've been ignored. He had little support from Shias until now and the other ayatollahs like Sistani felt he was too young to remember how terrible the Iran revolution turned out.

[aneerkoinos]

18. bit of history

It was originally Bremer and his attack against Sadr in April, and Sadr's response that made the cleric popular. Even before this latest attack against him, 2/3 of all Iraqis had positive opinion about Sadr.

[Aidoneus]

19. that opinion rating was from even before the April fighting..

it can only have grown stronger since then.

[ilovenicepeople]

61. "He's a religious fanatic who should of been ignored"

Kind of sounds like your talking about Bush.:hi:

[leftchick]

13. I imagine this may be hard for you.....

But imagine yourself as an average Iraqi. You see another US installed puppet (Allawi, surrounded at all times by US mercenaries, btw) taking direct orders from the US Military and Negroponte in the running of Iraq. Right now your choice is al-Sadr ( for now) or more dictatorship ala "American Democracy", Allawi. It would be helpful if you read the linked article and Juan Cole's comments in particular if you care to understand the Iraqi perspective.

[BlackJack8324]

15. I don't think Sadr was the "average Iraqis" 1st choice...

Again his popularity is due to us attacking him. If we had ignored him the Shia would still distrust him. The average Iraqi doesn't think about global affairs, they simply see US troops surround Sadr and the shrine of Ali and say, "Sadr was right these people are evil."

[bemildred]

20. Actually, he got his start in a classic islamic manner,

providing jobs and social services (food, water, health care,
etc.) for the people that Bremer wanted to kick out in the
street so he could sell off the public companies that constituted
much of Iraq's pre-war economy, and that started back in the
immediate post-"war" period. This was only part of the Bushite
plans to demolish the old Iraq so they could rebuild as their
own fantasy Middle Eastern client state. The Bushites and their
Iraqi quislings attacked him because of the political threat he
did and does pose to their plans to exploit Iraq for their own
economic and political ends. Had they been less ignorant of
Iraq and islamic culture, and had they been less prone to
underestimate anyone not like themselves, they might have
handled it better, but then there might have been nothing to
handle. It would be funny if it weren't for all the dead people.

I have not reached a conclusion about what he will do with political
power when he gets it, he presently says he has not wish for
political power, but he says a lot of things, and it seems silly
to think he would shut up and go into retirement any time soon.

[BlackJack8324]

23. I agree

But why do some liberals fall for this crap when Muslim fanatics do it? Don't you think Pat Robertson provides social services too? It's the oldest trick in the book.

[shadu]

26. Maybe Sadr loves the Iraqi people

He is young, but he ain't stupid.
I wouldn't give up on him so easily.
When all is said and done, he may very well turn
out to be a hero.

[BlackJack8324]

27. maybe maybe not

He's just a religious fanatic.

[BlackJack8324]

28. Time magazine reported....

That Critics say al-Sadr had another motivation in putting himself forward: money. The millions of Shi'ite pilgrims who visit the shrine in Najaf are required to pay a tithe to the Hawza, the supreme Iraqi Shi'ite religious authority. The reigning Grand Ayatullah has the largest say in how the money is divided among Shi'ite groups. When al-Sadr's father held the post, he was able to keep his faction well supplied with cash, but his death substantially reduced the cut received by al-Sadr's family. The Grand Ayatullah Ali Husaini Sistani, who now holds the purse strings, is leery of giving much to al-Sadr. He is worried that al-Sadr will use the money to strengthen his militia and eventually take over as the next Grand Ayatullah. And Sistani's moderating influence was sorely missed last week: the senior Shi'ite cleric, 73, was in London to undergo angioplasty to open a blocked artery.

So maybe Sadr has nonaltruistic reasons for getting power in Najaf.

[bemildred]

30. I haven't seen any sign that he is a "muslim fanatic".

Shrewd yes, smart politician yes, and some of his minions
no doubt get a bit carried away with the strict sharia law
stuff no doubt. He is an islamic cleric, so he is going
to want Sharia law, it's a bit like expecting a Christian
minister to say the ten Commandments suck to expect otherwise,
but he's been quite pragmatic from what I can see, and quite
fixated on political and social issues, which is no doubt why
he is so annoying to the colonial government, they would most
likely much prefer if he was an ineffective loon.

[BlackJack8324]

35. Every report(including Tompaine.com) about him says

He is a supporter of Khomeinism and a fanatic. His followers murdered a moderate Shia cleric. Which version of Sadr are you referring too?

[bemildred]

40. Clearly not that one. I think that is bullshit.

Although it is true about the followers killing that guy.
But it was fairly stupid of the coalition to send him in there
like a sheep to be slaughtered.

Here is a story from inside the resistance that relates to
the comments you had on his motives for taking the Shrine:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x67773

It does seem clear he wants the money and cachet, the question is
what for?

[BlackJack8324]

41. Every single story about Sadr..

Makes note of his radicalism. I doubt Tompaine.com is a Bush mouthpiece.

[bemildred]

46. Try this about al Sadr and Iran:

http://www.agonist.org/archives/015147.html

Iran was kind of "in favor of" al Sistani and SCIRI, but seeing
a winner, they seem to be warming up to al Sadr lately. But
he did get in their face a couple times last year, IIRC.

You need to read outside US press and opinion sources if
you want to have a more cosmopolitan view of the World.

I am not, as you might think, a big fan of al Sadr or his ideas,
but you will have little luck trying to drive me into a state of
panic for fear of him either.

[BlackJack8324]

49. so every news source that prints something

You don't want to hear is U.S. propaganda. Having your followers murder a moderate rival is pretty darn radical in itself.

[bemildred]

51. Straw man, sorry, I didn't say that.

Murder is, frankly, common as dirt in the "new democratic" Iraq.

[aneerkoinos]

54. That murder accusation

is definately politically motivated and US propaganda.

But I see that for you it enough that when US accuses somebody of murder, you declare the guy is guilty even before his day in court.

[bemildred]

55. Do you have a source?

I've never seen much but hot air on that.
I don't believe they really know who had it done,
and I would be interested to have that straightened out.

[aneerkoinos]

58. It's clear who did it

An angry mob settled a score with a pro-Saddam cleric IIRC. Khoei tried to intervene and got in the middle, and died also. That's how it was reported when it happened.

Then months later, when Bremer decides to get rid of Sadr, a high ranking Mukhbarat (Saddam's secret police) officer who now works together with the occupation officials, tells that about 20 members of the mob have allegedly confessed that they had received orders from Sadr to kill Khoei. These "confessions" are the only evidence there is. Juan Cole, IIRC, reported that Khoei's family don't consider Sadr guilty and don't have any blood feud with him.

I'd say there's lot of ground for reasonable doubt...

[bemildred]

60. Thanks.

I was aware of who the guy was and why we was sent in,
didn't know how the murder accusation was set up.

[bemildred]

21. Duplicate post, delete. nt

[Career Prole]

50. "The average Iraqi doesn't think about global affairs"

No more than the average American, at any rate.

[0rion]

10. Just think what will happen if they kill him???!!!

Bad news.......but they seem intent on just killing him instead of capturing him.

[Disturbed]

33. Iraq-Sovereignty is Bogus

Whether al Sadr is a religious fanatic is not the relevant issue at this time. The issue is self determination and liberty. Whatever type of Govt. and territorial situation the Iraqi chose is their decision or should be. The US is determined to control Iraq no matter what the cost in lives or money. The Iraqis in the main know that the US has colonized Iraq. The Interim Govt. is purely a puppet regime and any elections will be from these puppets. Most Americans may be fooled but most Iraqis know this entire situation is a sham.

How many Americans or Iraqis know the following?

The Hand-Over That Wasn't: Illegal Orders give the US a Lock on Iraq's Economy

by Antonia Juhasz

Officially, the U.S. occupation of Iraq ended on June 28, 2004. But in reality, the United States is still in charge: Not only do 138,000 troops remain to control the streets, but the "100 Orders" of L. Paul Bremer III remain to control the economy.

These little noticed orders enacted by Bremer, the now-departed head of the now-defunct Coalition Provisional Authority, go to the heart of Bush administration plans in Iraq. They lock in sweeping advantages to American firms, ensuring long-term U.S. economic advantage while guaranteeing few, if any, benefits to the Iraqi people.

The Bremer orders control every aspect of Iraqi life - from the use of car horns to the privatization of state-owned enterprises. Order No. 39 alone does no less than "transition from a … centrally planned economy to a market economy" virtually overnight and by U.S. fiat. Although many thought that the "end" of the occupation would also mean the end of the orders, on his last day in Iraq Bremer simply transferred authority for the orders to Prime Minister Iyad Allawi - a 30-year exile with close ties to the CIA and British intelligence.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0805-07.htm

[genius]

29. If the Iraqis were to vote, they'd probably elect Al Sadr.

Of course, Bush doesn't approve of popular leaders.

[BlackJack8324]

31. I doubt Sunnis would approve of...

A Shia clerical fanatic as leader of Iraq. Neither would neighboring Arab nations.

[NNN0LHI]

32. I am sure they approve of the US appointed, CIA connected, puppet more

:eyes:

[BlackJack8324]

36. did I say that?

You have a habit of putting words in people's mouths. I don't think the Iraqis should elect Allawi or Sadr.

[daleo]

37. But a majority of the population might, since Shiites are the majority

That is usually how elections are decided. Although in the case of a truly sovereign Iraq some form of federalism that requires more than a simple majority for major legislation may well be the best solution. Actually, the constitution drawn up by Bremer et al had many points in its favor, I thought. However, as it was being imposed by foreigners it will always lack legitimacy.

[BlackJack8324]

38. I don't think the majority should be able to force...

Religious rule onto a minority.

[daleo]

39. Actually I agree with you

Saddam Hussein also agrees, as Iraq had a fairly high degree of religious tolerance under his dictatorship.

That is why I mentioned that Iraq would probably need to evolve some form of federalism with tolerance for different forms of religious expression. The polarizing effects of the invasion and occupation make that difficult to foresee for some time, however.

[thebigidea]

44. so you're against elections and democracy for Iraq?

[BlackJack8324]

45. democracy isn't just majority rules...

It's not a democracy if it's ruled by a religious dictatorship.

[thebigidea]

47. democracy is whatever Paul Wolfowitz claims it to be, apparently.

I just love the fact that the US gets to decide what's best for the Iraqi people.

Not that I think Sadr will make a fabulous President or anything, as I'm guessing he's going to be martyred in the coming weeks and will inspire thousands of attacks for years to come.

[aneerkoinos]

53. Democracy is exactly that

a majority rule. And if the people chooses theocracy, socialism, neoliberal market fundamentalism or fascism or whatever, that's their democratic right.

I see that you support plutocracy and oligarchy of which ever ideology you personally sign to, and try to define that as democracy. Wrongly. US is not a democracy, it is a plutocracy that opposes and fights democracy where it sees it, tries to suffocate it and replace it with plutocracy.

[Tight_rope]

42. I bet Allawi is wishing he didn't take the job after all! Too late!

[BlackJack8324]

43. Allawi created half the problem...

Trying to get Shias to accept a centralized govt in Baghdad was a big mistake that required this crazy move of invading Najaf.

[aneerkoinos]

48. Allawi's real problem

Is that he does not represent Iraq, but CIA and interests of US imperialism. He's a Quisling and a traitor to his country, who will hopefully end up in jail instead of getting shot.

Shia's have no problem accepting a centralized govt in Baghdad, as long as it is an Iraqi governement and not puppet of the illegal occupation power.

[bemildred]

52. Bremer created the problem.

Allawi's job, theoretically, is to clean up the resulting mess.
But, of course, he's fucked.

I think there is a decent shot that if they had put Allawi in
in the first place, and kept Garner, things would not have come
to this pass, or at least not so quickly.

[Tight_rope]

57. Actually according to "Allawi"...he didn't order the invasion of Najaf.

I will google to find the article that says he didn't order any attack....it was the US that's been up to their old tricks again.

[PATRICK]

59. Analysis of yet another disaster

The Iraqi regime isn't ready to put down or clean up anyone. The US can't do the mop up for them fast or decisively enough and as a Catch-22 in the process they tear down the regime's prestige and build up the opposition.

Losses short of general massacre are insignificant if the morale and rage holds up. Time is not the friend of Allawi and the US. The awful temptation of vastly superior American firepower is the cookie jar the dumb monkey has its hand stuck in.

The political necessities of the Bush administration in the US are ruinously out of sync with the situation in Iraq. In fact they too are counterproductive, lost in the twist, the double edged mind, and a sample of what happens when things that would seem to be good for everybody suddenly go bad for everyone because two things focused on at one time mean blurred vision- not strength.

The soldiers can triumphantly kill a lot of people, and puzzle over why they have not yet won. The GOP pols can extol the success but never enough to convince the people of any nation.

Persistence in mopping up a destabilizing competitor like Sadr has only revealed the ruthless incompetence of the maniacs running our foreign policy and murdering people needlessly, arrogantly, to no just purpose.

[Disturbed]

62. A con game.

The Interim Govt. was supposed to be temporary and the people are not suppossed to be eligible to run in the Natl. election. The plan was for Iraqis to accept that and all would be stabalized, with the exception of a few bombing or kidnappings via Al Zagawi. This would all look good for the Neo Fascists. The plan didn't include al Sadr, who the Neo Fascists thought they could bribe with whatever it took. Al Sadr isn't buying in. The box that the US is in now is that the more they come down on al Sadr, even if it's pawned off on the Interim Govt. the more support al Sadr is garnering from the populace.

The saga continues.