Though a number of comparable “deals” have seemingly emerged only to collapse over the past seven months, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki seemingly is on the brink of having ensured himself a second term in office after the Iraqi National Alliance (INA) backed off its previous objections and agreed to back him, bringing him just a handful of seats short of a majority government.
The real winner in the deal though is influential cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who became the de facto leader of the INA following the March vote and has turned the alliance between the Shi’ite religious bloc and the State of Law bloc of Maliki into a Shi’ite powerhouse which is committed to increasing the power of Iraq’s Shi’ite clergy.
Sadr, an outspoken critic of the US occupation, has been a longtime rival of Iraq’s political establishment, but found himself in the surprising position of kingmaker after his normally tiny political faction gained big in the vote, creating an opportunity for him to advance his own agenda in the near term as well as setting the stage for a long term trend in Iraqi politics.
The allied government has already agreed to give the Najaf Marjaiyah, the Shi’ite religious council, supreme power to issue binding edicts in the country, and would make Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the dominant power in the council, the virtual ruler of Iraq.
Sadr’s role in this is almost certain to cement him as a growing force not just politically but religiously, and as he continues to pursue his own Ayatollahship he will find those powers increasingly one and the same, and establishing himself as a dominant force in the country long beyond Maliki’s term.
So now we see the folly of American interference in Iraq – we will soon have a Government in which a sworn enemy of the USA will ultimately inherit domination of Iraqi politics.
So much for establishing a friendly ally in the Middle East.
Well done BUSH and OBAMA!!!
He's not an enemy of the US, he's opposed to the US occupation of Iraq. Big difference.
Iraq's drift towards a Shi'te Islamic state was very much predictable. I already mentioned this possibility last year in my blog CONTRAVIEWS (post 10 December 2009). More than 4,000 Americans soldiers killed (and many more maimed for life) and more than a milion Iraqis killed to establish an Islamic state.
When are people going to learn that miliatry adventures are no solution to worldwide problems, no matter whether that is in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel/Palesine or wherever.
The Iraq drift towards Shi’ite Iran was predictable. I alreay made mention of this possibility in my blog CONTRAVIEWS( Post 10) December 2009
Four thousand plus Americans and a million plus Iraqis killed to establish an Iraqi Islamic Republic. When are people going to realise that military action is not the answer and solution to worldwide political problems, no matter whether that is in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel/Palestine.
Why is al-Sadr always referred to as anti-American. If it's because he wants the US occupation of his country ended then most of Iraq is anti-American.
Despite his faults, Saddam held the country together as a secular state, and had good health, education and infrastructure before US and UK sanctions and invasion. Now the whole place is a ruin, millions dead or fled, and extreme religion takes over. Great success for the "West".