Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Saturday, January 28, 2006

Sistani Calls on Iraqis to Turn in Terrorists
Sadrists Call for Sunnis to Fight Zarqawi


Al-Zaman/ AFP report that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the Shiite spiritual leader, called Friday on his supporters to aid the authorities in combatting the perpetrators of violence, according to the members of a delegation that met with him. According to their statements, Sistani said, "Most Iraqis, and in particular the Shiites, face great hardships and numerous problems. It is necessary that they consult experts, and especially the learned. They must beware of enemies. Our enemies have multiplied, even though the Shiites, who follow the family of the Prophet, do not attack others. But their enemies, because of their political weakness, wreak murder and destruction." He added, "Here, we bear the responsibility to direct the people to help the state and prevent terrorism, and curb them and eliminate them, even if only by informing on them." He continued, "The Shiites, from the political and social point of view--even in the West--have come to be characterized by an absence of violence and refraining from infringing against the rights of others. The clerics of Najaf play a role in this excellent molding of character."

Sistani said, "It is a shame for Iraqi blood to be shed by other Iraqis." He concluded that ignorant inciters to violence attempt to spread anarchy [by promoting sectarian hatred] "even though it is useless to them and to the Iraqis, given that they believe in a single religious belief, pray toward a single point of adoration [Mecca], and share in common much among them."

Meanwhile, al-Hayat reports [Ar.] that Shaikh Hazim al-A'raji praised the people of Ramadi in his Friday prayers sermon at the mosque attached to the shrine of Imam Musa al-Kadhim . Al-A`raji, a follower of Muqtada al-Sadr, said that "our people" were standing against terrorism and the Zarqawi group. (For a Shiite preacher to refer to Sunni Arabs of Ramadi as "our people" is a deliberate appeal to pan-Islam, similar to that of Sistani.) He said, "The tribes in those regions have formed popular committes to struggle against Zarqawi and al-Qaeda in the area." On 19 January, the US military had announced fighting between Iraqi rebels in Ramadi and foreign fighters. Al-Hayat says that the Iraqi government hopes to make what happened in Ramadi a model for other provinces.

[Cole: Baghdad is surrounded and much of it is in the hands of the guerrillas, and they are starving it effectively of fuel and electricity, which doesn't sound to me like all this amazing progress is being made, as trumpeted by al-Hayat. Guerrillas launched a significat attack at Ramadi only a few days ago,which was repelled with US help.]

4 Comments:

At 1:30 PM, Blogger sherm said...

If the Sunni guerillas are turning on Al Qaeda in Iraq the temptation will be huge for the US to support the guerillas is some way - if its not already being done.

This amy be the beginning of the "Big Switch" where we start defending the Sunnis against the Kurds and Shiites.

While we profess disgust with any thing of the old regime, the Whitehouse must daydream often about having all those experienced professionals, academics, and public servants back on the job. Ah, if only Iraq could take a Baath.

 
At 1:41 AM, Blogger Calculator said...

Sherm,
But in Iraq today, the Sunni guerillas are a bigger threat to the US than Al Qaeda. The Sunni guerillas main focus is fighting the occupation while Al Qaeda is killing Iraqis more than Americans.

 
At 10:51 AM, Blogger sherm said...

Calculator, I don't disagree with you, but I'm thinking in terms of Bush administration political mentality rather than facts on the ground.

A defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq can be spun into great self congradulatory puffery. Defeat of anything with an al Qaeda tag resonates very strongly in the US, whereas the virtualy stagnent, high loss, operations against the guerillas generates calls to bring the troups home, victorious or not.

Taking it a step further defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq could be the handhold rationale Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld needs to withdraw "victoriously".

Just speculation, but I think if you try to understand US policy in terms of US politics, you'll be better off than trying to understand it it terms of rational fact based decision making.

 
At 11:12 PM, Blogger Calculator said...

Sherm, I realize the difference between analyzing a topic based on “facts on the ground” or “the mentality of the policy-makers” or from some other perspectives. In my opinion, if you analyze this topic based on both perspectives, American government still won’t be better off by supporting the Sunni Militias against Al Qaeda. Below is discussing the argument based on the American policy-makers perspective since we both agreed with the analysis based on “facts on the ground”.

Today, the American media is not clearly differentiating the enemies of the American troops in Iraq in terms of Al Qaeda or Sunni Guerillas. The media is portraying the enemy as one group of terrorists. Therefore, this makes the vast majority of Americans (not the CIA and few others who are well-rounded in this topic) associate the enemy they are facing in Iraq to one side, which is Al Qaeda, the most prominent group after 9/11 attacks.

Because of this confusion that widely spreads among Americans, any victory over militants in Iraq whoever they are, will be a considered a victory over Al Qaeda. Simultaneously, any increase in the death toll of American soldiers, whether they are killed by Sunni Militias or Al Qaeda, will be considered a loss to Al Qaeda.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home