Thousands Demonstrate Against US Security Pact;
MPs Said to Receive Death Threats
McClatchy reports that tens of thousands of protesters came out against the US-Iraqi security agreement on Friday, mainly Shiites of the Sadr Movement. Parliamentarians who favor the pact, such as Hadi al-Amiri of the pro-Iranian Badr Corps paramilitary, vowed that the demonstrations would make no difference to the vote.
AP emphasizes that the crowds burned Bush in effigy. Does that mean they aren't planning to name a street after him after all?
The LAT Iraq blog reports the demonstration as well, noting the absence of US troops. The photographs are worth checking out.
Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that there were similar demonstrations in Basra, Diyala and Salahuddin Provinces.
Al-Hayat also tries to figure the support for the agreement in parliament. They count 53 members of the Kurdistan Alliance and 83 members of the United Iraqi Alliance (Shiite fundamentalist), for 136 out of 275, less than the 138 needed to pass. But this accounting ignores the 5 seats held by the Kurdistan Islamic Union, which invariably votes with the other Kurds, so that comes to 141.
Al-Hayat figures 106 firmly against, including 41 from the Iraqi Accord Front (Sunni fundamentalists). But some members of IAF may vote for the agreement (2 of 6 IAF members voted in favor of it on the cabinet).
Al-Hayat speculates that the deputies leaving for pilgrimage to Mecca, who thereby will miss the vote on Monday, are largely from the United Iraqi Alliance, which would subtract positive votes in favor of the agreement. I'm not sure, however, why the UIA MPs would be more likely to go on pilgrimage than, e.g., Sadrists or Sunni fundamentalists.
Al-Hayat also says that some MPs are privately admitting that they will absent themselves on Monday because they are getting severe pressure to do so, and some are even getting death threats. That severe pressure and death threats thing could explain why so many MPs suddenly were stricken with an attack of piety such that they just had immediately to go on pilgrimage to Mecca.
If I were a betting man, I'd say that the security agreement is likely to pass through parliament, even if narrowly-- though if the Sunni Arabs do unanimously vote against or absent themselves, the agreement will lack the legitimacy that would have come from a national consensus across ethno-religious groups.
Kurdish guerrillas of the PKK blew up the Iraq-Turkey oil pipeline on Friday, halting petroleum exports from the north.
McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq on Friday:
' Baghdad
A roadside bomb targeted civilians near a checkpoint manned by National Police in Doura, southern Baghdad at 7 a.m. Friday, killing three civilians, injuring fifteen people including three policemen.
A roadside bomb targeted an Iraqi Army foot patrol in al-Arabi neighbourhood in Mansour, central Baghdad injuring two soldiers and two civilians.
Nineveh
A truck bomb driven by a suicide bomber targeted a checkpoint manned by Iraqi Army in Thawra neighbourhood, downtown Mosul at 8.30 p.m. Thursday, injuring thirty six people including six soldiers and causing severe material damages to surrounding buildings and civilian cars.
Kirkuk
An adhesive bomb stuck to a civilian car parked in front of a civilian home in al-Ghaz neighbourhood detonated at 6.20 p.m. Friday causing material damages to the car.
A mortar round fell in al-Khassa neighbourhood, near Kirkuk Mosque without causing any casualties or damages.'
posted by Juan Cole @ 11/22/2008 12:42:00 AM
|
Facebook
14 Comments:
.
10,000 demonstrators doesn't sound like much to me. Can someone put this in the Iraqi context ?
.
"BAGHDAD — Tens of thousands of followers of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr packed a central Baghdad square Friday, where they protested a U.S.-Iraq security agreement..."
"Tens of thousands" is really a pretty vague quantity. I saw student protests of "tens of thousands" on a single campus in the early 70's. For a city the size of Baghdad, it may not be that impressive.
Pilgrimage to Mecca is not open to all, but a lottery due to the Saudi quota. Demand is normally 6 to 10 times the limit. Corruption is rife even here, which explains why the UIA members are more likely to go to Mecca.
The Iraqi lawmakers will enjoy a twe-week break starting Tuesday, regardless of the pilgrims.
The 58 Kurdish members can be relied on to support the agreement but not the 83 Shiites. A number of MPs have submitted a complaint to the institutional court to alter the majority threshold to two thirds, instead of a simple majority.
A large, peaceful opposition and Shaia to boot. Sounds like a vibrant democracy is blossoming in Iraq.
Meanwhile, following Ayman al-Zawahiri's attacks against Omaba, US Muslims leaders delivered the best answer : "We find it insulting when anyone speaks for our community instead of giving us the dignity and the honor of speaking for ourselves."
From the right place (Malcolm X and Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial, Educational and Cultural Center), the right message at the right moment, by the right people.
Change has come : al Qaeda just lost their best ally, Fundamentalist in Chief Bush.
Are they protesting because the timetable is too protracted? Certainly not because they want U.S. troops to stay?
I wouldn't be surprised if buried somewhere deep in the minutiae of the agreement is a provision that requires a Baghdad street to be named after Bush. You know... so they have to do it.
If I were a betting man, I'd say that the security agreement is likely to pass through parliament, even if narrowly-- though if the Sunni Arabs do unanimously vote against or absent themselves, the agreement will lack the legitimacy that would have come from a national consensus across ethno-religious groups.
Do you think the compradors flown in from London and Jordan to buy this threadbare sofa can possibly be considered to in any way represent the Iraqi people?
Are you implying that the present Iraqi government is anything other than the creature of the Neocon regime in Washington DC?
What kind of government votes to allow the occupation of the nation by a foreign power? A puppet regime of the foreign occupying power is the only possible answer.
Does that mean they aren't planning to name a street after him after all?
Wasn't it a whole large square, according to Richard Perle?
Juan,
According to Raed Jarrar, who has extensive contacts within the Iraqi parliament, a 2/3 majority is required to pass the SOFA. Moreover, should the Maliki government and its parliamentarian allies attempt to pass the SOFA with a simple majority, then major Sunni and Shia parties will view the vote and law as illegitimate. I don't think I need to explain what that would portend.
Meanwhile, right wing bloggers are proclaiming today: "Victory in Iraq Day."
What a joke. At best, Sunnis are in a transient passive phase after losing Baghdad. No salients; no war. And US troops are in barracks, working on their Playstations. No combat; no combat deaths.
Shiite belligerence is being sublimated into political work on SOFA.
Iraq "peace" is a stack of cards that could be blown over at an instant.
What kind of "victory" cries settlement of issues, when 4,000,000 people are in either internal or external exile?
Add it up: there were few Islamofascists in Iraq prior to the Bush aggression. Now they control both the government and the opposition. Secularism was murdered with the abolishment of Baathism in the Coalition Provisional Authority's "Directive Number 1."
I proclaim today: "America's Shame in Iraq Day."
Add it up: there were few Islamofascists in Iraq prior to the Bush aggression. Now they control both the government and the opposition.
Your rhetoric doesn't add up. The term Islamofascist can only be seen for what it is above, a blanket term of condemnation for... well its range seems very broad indeed, from Arabs to Persians to Indonesians.
A "masterful" Neocon hate term, employed above anonymously, as usual, with just what end in mind?
Apparently just to keep it current, and hateful.
jf lee:
Get ideologically literate. Islamofascism was coined by Algerian progressives who opposed the imams kiss-up to French colonists. Cut the christianity-is-regressive/islam-is-progressive crap. The solution to MidEast problems has always been: Secularism. That is where Bush failed and that is why your mentality is a waste of brain cells. Drop your pathological tunnel vision and get with the program.
"Are they protesting because the timetable is too protracted? Certainly not because they want U.S. troops to stay?"
Might they be protesting because they do not believe their "government" should sign an agreement of any kind with the country that illegally invaded their country in an act of pure, unprovoked imperial aggression?
Would the United States sign such an agreement were the roles reversed and it was the United States that had been subjected to massively violent invasion and deadly, destructive, and oppressive occupation?
Post a Comment
<< Home