In a surprise move, influential Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and militia leader Hadi Amiri have announced on Tuesday that their political blocs will ally. As the top two seat-getters in the May 12 election, this would go a long way toward forming a government.
This is a surprising move as Sadr had campaigned heavily on the idea of Iraq being more independent, and less aligned with either the US or Iran. Amiri, by contrast, is the head of the Badr Brigade, and is very close with the Iranian government.
The announcement of the deal said that the blocs would be carving out a “nationalist” alliance. This is more what Sadr has long advocated. It is not clear what positions within a coalition government are being offered to Amiri’s bloc.
Final seat totals are still not totally clear, as the parliament has called for a recount, and a fire at a Baghdad ballot warehouse has left that in limbo. Some of the worse performing officials are demanding a re-vote, which may be one thing Amiri and Sadr, as the top performers, can agree they wouldn’t want.
fire at ballot warehouse. classic.
Iraq moving closer to Iran a positive step for peace in the ME and deter the Zionist regime from attacking Iran and Syria.
Shiite factions coming together for Iran, what could go wrong?
They also happen to represent a heavy majority of population, and by dispensing of political correctness of US sponsored Iraqi governments, they could actually govern. There is a romantic tale spun in our media that Shia anything is automatically bad for Sunnis and Kurds. It is more then obvious that vast majority of Sunnis did not and does not support ISIS or other Takfiri Islamic brands, including Al-Qaeda. They know that it is due to Shia irganizing and wherewithal that ISIS is ousted. Sunni tribal leaders have collaborated with Shia led fight against ISIS for more then two years. And Kurds? Are they all for bad relations with Baghdad? Not at all. They saw first hand how foreign powers propped them up and raised hopes for independence, but only to dump them. They were just a pawn, a leverage against Baghdad. Now that Baghdad has secured victiry on the ground against ISIS, victory over secessionist Kurds, secured Turkey’s support against PKK brand of Kurd secessionism — the handwriting is on the wall. Baghdad has the key to settling various claims. Would they rather negotiate with Baghdad, or place hopes into Israeli, British and American advisors to play hardball with Baghdad? They are at this point sick and tired of promises, and need a normal life.
It appears that by two top vote gathering parties coming together — any issue of vote unhapiness is irrelevant. Losers are not in any position to challenge such supermajority. And while US will not be happy — big deal. If US can survive European grumbling over Iran deal, it can survive Iraq closeness to Iran.
After all, the redevelopment of the region will not be US burden, and the infamous Iran desire to reach Mediterranean— is nothing more then an already planned interconnections between Central Asia and Far East with Middle East, Turkey, Europe, Africa. The list of planned rail, road and port interconnections is already lenghty. Why is even India financing Chabar port in Iran? The American conventional wisdom is to avoid Pakistan to access Central Asia. India knows what is up. Iran is becoming a hub of all Eurasian transit to Middle East, and world trade routes will become more independent of oceans. Land transit can be powered by electricity produced by gas or coal, and not heavy oil dependent as ocean bound transit. World is getting adjusted to the time when it will not matter so much on who rules the waves.
I sincerely hope you are correct, but recent history argues against it.
We will see.
Post ISIS history has not been tested yet. Iraq is receiving armaments, latest about 100 tanks from Russia. They are clearly rebuilding military. It will really be interesting to see if Iraq can heal some fractures, and move onward.