Influential Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Safr is in a good place, with the election giving his party a strong plurality. With high hopes for governance, Sadr is setting out the conditions by which the next government should deal with the United States.
Sadr was fairly straightforward, saying diplomacy needs to be “state-to-state with full sovereignty” with comments on Twitter. He’s long made the idea of an Iraqi state standing up for its sovereignty a major goal.
The US is emphasized because that’s the most safely popular position within Iraq, though Sadr has long advocated independence on the international stage, which will include not just the US, but influential regional powers like Iran as well.
This ultimately depends on the Sadrist Movement forming a government, of course, and even with the biggest plurality, that’s no certainty. Iraq’s political landscape is a disorganized mess, and cobbling together a majority will likely take a long time.
Can it be imagined that the real terrorists: So-Called Civilized Americans & Western Countries have learned anything from their Historic shameful Surrender by Afghan Taliban, so, Americans will deal with Iraq honourably?
That presupposes that imperialists are a capable of learning lessons. I wouldn’t count on it.
I had a lot of respect for Sadr during the war but since then he’s proven to be a bit slippery when it comes to consistency. The state brings the worst out of the best of us. That’s why I became an anarchist.
Being a Politician in Iraq is kind of a cross between a warlord and a cleric. Not unlike being an American Senator.
Difference is that an American senator is a compromisable commodity. Either with money or blackmail