Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Sunday, February 26, 2006

More Shrines Destroyed, 60 Killed
Sistani forms Militia


KarbalaNews.net reports that [Ar.] guerrillas blew up a Shiite shrine in Bashir, south of Tuz Khurmato. This Turkmen region near Kirkuk is largely Shiite. It was not clear how much damage was done to the shrine. The people of the region formed units to guard the shrines and places of worship from any further destruction.

The same source says that [Ar.] Iraqi officers announced that 20 guerrillas attacked the shrine of Salman the Persian. They killed the guards and placed explosives at the tomb, then blew it up, destroying it.

US military sources have later denied that the shrine was destroyed, though they said it did take rocket fire. The rocket was a dud, and did no damage, they say.



Salman al-Farisi was a companion of the Prophet Muhammad who advised the early Muslims on military tactics, and is said to have introduced the technique of digging a trench to trip charging enemy cavalry. Because he was from Iran, and because the Iranians largely became Shiites after 1500, Salman is especially beloved by Shiites. The desecration took place 24 hours after 48 Shiites were killed in the same region. They had been on their way to a peaceful demonstration against Wednesday's destruction of the Askariyah Shrine at Samarra.

Guerrillas also set off a bomb in the Shiite shrine city of Karbala, killing 8 and wounding 31.

In response to these further attacks on Islamic and Shiite shrines, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani called for the establishment of tribal levies to protect tsuch holy sites. He received a delegation of tribesmen from Kufa. Most of the rural clans of the Middle Euphrates are devoted to Sistani and woul be willing to provide such a militia. This proliferation of militias is however extremely worrisome.

In some of the best reporting on the role of the Shiite clerics in this crisis, Robert Worth and Ed Wong of the NYT reveal that the Americans in Iraq initially were powerless when the crisis broke out on Wednesday, and could only hope that the Shiite clerics would calm people down. They only gradually realized that the clerics were equally capable of stirring people up, and that the clerics themselves were under enormous pressure from enraged followers to do something.

This last point is why it is so dangerous for Sistani to form his tribal levies into a militia. He will be hostage in some ways to their enthusiasms.

The Iraqi army and American forces have stopped hundreds of pilgrims who had been in Karbala from heading north to Samarra.

NPR reported eyewitness accounts, corroborated by other reports, that the Mahdi Army took over several Sunni mosques in Baghdad and hung black banners from them. These banners signify the Twelfth Imam, who is associated with the tomb destroyed at Samarra. That is, the Mahdi Army took over Sunni mosques and rededicated them to the messiah of the Shiite branch of Islam, which is highly provocative.

Young Shiite nationalist Muqtada al-Sadr reached an agreement with a hard line Sunni organization to work to tamp down the communal violence.

Al-Hayat [Ar.] says that Bush called the major Iraqi politicians on Sunday to encourage them to go back to working on the government of national unity. He appears to have convinced the Sunni Arab leaders to come back to the bargaining table.

5 Comments:

At 12:18 PM, Blogger InplainviewMonitor said...

More grey PR from NYT

Once we compare the NYT coverage of younger clerics position with AJ and wiki, it becomes clear that NYT simply takes the US / offical Iraqi position as an axiom. So, they blame Sadr for the sectarian violence and even talk about his "anti-American crusades".

This absurd language alone qualifies the NYT article for crude PR because "crusader" is a regular Islamist anti-American cursing. That is, NYT simply uses the old "I am no idiot, you're an idiot" rule.

In fact, we have no way to know who exactly does what in Iraq, so AJ makes it clear that Sadr blames pro-US forces for the destruction of Askariya shrine. In return, he is blamed for fueling the sectarian violence.

1. ROBERT F.WORTH, EDWARD WONG. Younger Clerics Showing Power in Iraq's Unrest
The violence and new militancy has come in part from a competition among Shiite factions to be seen as the protectors of the Shiite masses.

The main struggle has been between the leading factions, both backed by Iran, and their spiritual leaders.
Many of the retaliatory attacks after the bombing were led by Mahdi Army militiamen loyal to Moktada al-Sadr, the Shiite cleric whose anti-American crusades have turned him into a rising political power.

His main rival, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, a cleric and the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, or Sciri, defended the right of Shiites to respond to the bombing. He has shown a new willingness to publicly attack the American role in Iraq, once the preserve of Mr. Sadr, and he also commands a powerful militia, the Badr Organization.

2. AJ. Iraq violence flares despite appeal
In Basra, al-Sadr appeared at a rally to call for Muslim unity against US occupation and summoned his many followers to hold joint prayers next Friday at Sunni mosques, especially those damaged in the past days' violence.

Shortly afterwards, journalists heard a loud blast nearby that turned out to have been in a Shia mosque.

Though al-Sadr's black-clad al-Mahdi Army militia have been accused by officials of taking part in attacks on Sunni mosques, al-Sadr himself, his influence rising within the ruling but factionalised Shia Islamist bloc, denies ordering violence.

However, the Shia show of force after the bloodless destruction of the Golden Mosque in Samarra has exceeded any sparked by earlier attacks and may strengthen the rival militia leaders' hands in negotiations with Sunnis and with fellow Shias.

3. Wiki on Askariya Mosque bombing

 
At 3:47 PM, Blogger Charles said...

While the news so far is fragmentary for those of us who don't read Arabic, and while clearly security is tighter now than it was before the bombing in Samarra, there seems to be a very different MO.

The Askariyah bombing was very well-planned. Minister Jaafar's estimate of 16 hours required seems wildly at odds with the capacity of modern equipment. But he has a point:
* The pillars at Askariyah were drilled. That tends to be noisy and require lots of power. Unless one has very specialist equipment. Atlascopco.com is a major supplier in the area and I would speculate some of their equipment could comfortably do the drilling in an hour or so.
* The guards were, as far as I can tell, not killed, though the amount of rubble left that unclear. For that to happen without gunfire speaks of high training on the part of the attackers (or really bad or absent guards). It could mean that the attackers either wanted witnesses to describe them publicly, that they had penetrated shrine security, or that they were for some reason trusted by the guards.
* Other attacks on shrines have been more of the frontal assault variety, leading to lots of dead. Basra had a bathroom bomb, too small to have much effect. None of what I have seen shows any sophistication.
* It's hard to tell from photos, but the Askariyah bomb seems to have been designed to wreck the dome rather than permanently destroy the overall structure. I understand from Wikipedia that the dome is from 1905 (note: Wikipedia also says that 75% of the structure is destroyed, whereas my uncalibrated eyeball says that about that much will be salvaged). If this is correct, it could point to a desire to destroy a symbol. It probably would have been easier to level it than to do what they actually did.

All in all a fascinating incident, but vastly better as an object of analysis than to have to live through.

 
At 6:05 PM, Blogger the actual rod said...

Dr. Cole, given the realities of the day and the always aggressive posturing of the Bush Administration, could you please comment on the 'Khuzestan Gambit'? Do you think it is likely that the United States will attempt to sever Khuzestan from Iran and declare it an independent state? What outcome would you predict as a result of this action (aside from $150-a-barrel oil, which is a given)?

 
At 10:07 PM, Blogger Rabbit said...

You know the thing which scares me the most is the realisation which began about the time of the provoked cartoon riots, and has matured for me now, is this.

There are just as many braindead sheeple and moronic dittoheads among the Islamic Nations as among our Corporatocratised Western Nations.

God help us but we are headed for a clash of the lowest common denominators in both our cultures.

Those of us who see are complicit to the degree we are not screaming, kicking and scratching and biting and fighting every last inch of the way.

We are all Muslim terrorists in our turn otherwise.

 
At 10:49 PM, Blogger Charlie said...

Is it just me, or is someone trying really hard to get Iran to intervene in Iraq and/or declare war on the United States?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home