S-2

It appears that the Mahdi Army have chosen now to make their reappearance. Conincidence? I'd suspect not, wouldn't you? Self-preservation has been perhaps trumped by more urgent requirements imposed by their Iranian masters.

http://http://www.nytimes.com/2007/0...html?ref=world


Al-Sadr blames Iraq's woes on U.S., calls protest*-*World*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper

I remain curious as to the rationales behind the Iranian actions. A BBC analyst has suggested that Iran is frustrated with pursuing a diplomatic victory for it's nuclear program through the UN. Imagine that! Seemingly, America isn't the only nation who's ambitions are routinely thwarted at the hands of the UN.

Still, it might seem that the capture of fifteen Brits performing a UN mandated mission would suggest that Iran has upped the ante. So too the re-emergence of Sadr and his minions. It was inevitable in any case, I suppose. For internal reasons of credibility, Sadr needed to get back into the fight, if only to maintain his personal credibility in the eyes of his constituency and militias. His authority has been increasingly challenged from within. I suspect that he feels a need to get out in front of his organization, re-establishing it's viability as a player in Iraqi politics while lending a hand to his sponsor, Iran, by stirring the pot just now. It seems inevitable that the coalition and the Mahdi Army (w/perhaps the Badr Brigades from SCIRI included) would have their day of reckoning. Al-Maliki cannot but see Sadr as a challenge to his government's authority. We certainly do.

That said, is Iran tossing all their cards on the table? Where or how else might we see more? Lebanon? It would seem that the "more robust" UNIFIL troops might well be next.

S-2

Sorry lads & lasses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/31/wo...html?ref=world

Parihaka

It does indeed seem that we are coming to one of those 'crisis' points.

__________________
In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

S-2

ABC News: Al-Sadr Calls for Attacks on U.S. Troops

al-Sadr calls for attacks on U.S. troops

By SAAD ABDUL KADIR
Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD (AP) -- The renegade cleric Muqtada al-Sadr urged the Iraqi army and police to stop cooperating with the United States and told his guerrilla fighters to concentrate on pushing American forces out of the country, according to a statement issued Sunday.

The statement, stamped with al-Sadr's official seal, was distributed in the Shiite holy city of Najaf on Sunday - a day before a large demonstration there, called for by al-Sadr, to mark the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad.

"You, the Iraqi army and police forces, don't walk alongside the occupiers, because they are your archenemy," the statement said. Its authenticity could not be verified.

In the statement, al-Sadr - who commands an enormous following among Iraq's majority Shiites and has close allies in the Shiite-dominated government - also encouraged his followers to attack only American forces, not fellow Iraqis.

"God has ordered you to be patient in front of your enemy, and unify your efforts against them - not against the sons of Iraq," the statement said, in an apparent reference to clashes between al-Sadr's Mahdi Army fighters and Iraqi troops in Diwaniyah, south of Baghdad. "You have to protect and build Iraq."


I remain fascinated by this development. It will be interesting to see how Crocker, Fallon, and Petraeus decide to approach al-Maliki with this challenge. The elephant in the room of America's last, best plan remains the ethnic-religious based militias, most notably the Mahdi Army, SCIRI's Badr brigade, and the kurd Peshmergas. Too, the emergence of sunni tribal militias in al-anbar ultimately represent a similar challenge to national sovereignty. Both the Iraqi government and the American military-political leadership continue to tip-toe around this looming confrontation.

However, the notion of some unifying gestalt emerging within the Iraqi mosaic is currently laughable. Thus the militias of all forms. The clear momentum remains towards sectarian division of the nation or a proxy government catering to Iranian dictates despite our last, belated effort.

I worry that, however gifted a counter-insurgent strategist Petraeus may be, that he's fallen for the trap of implementing yesterday's plan today. The political dynamics are such that rapid positive results are needed to maintain the American public's endurance. His tack is not suited for a quick ROI and he's long lost the advantages and operating conditions where a nuanced "softly-softly" approach could take decisive effect. That window closed two years ago, IMHO.

He may be the right man with the correct approach at the wrong time. Sadr has seemingly thrown down the gauntlet, whether at the direction of Iran, responding to internal challenges against his authority, or both. If so, were I Petraeus, I'd counsel that the Mahdi Army be engaged by the Iraqi and U.S. forces.

It's time to test the will of a shia-dominated government and army to confront their religious "brothers" in the name of national sovereignty. Either the al-Maliki gov't is capable of building sufficient consensus to do so or must fail. So too Iraq's army and our efforts. If it fails, it must either be replaced with a national leadership willing and able to mobilize Iraqi national sentiment or resort to partition- planned or not. Partition is failure. It also remains the most likely scenario to unfold.

That's what America had best be considering. What then?

Ironduke

Sadr organizing mass protests in Najaf:
Source: BBC NEWS | Middle East | Sadr supporters set for protest

__________________
The Buck Stops Here

Ray

I thought this man had been put in the cold storage by the Iraqi Shia govt.

However, the fact that he is getting restless is actually a good sign since it shows that his efforts to foment problems, especially in Baghdad, is being frustrated.

There is another report by NYT (which I have posted elsewhere in Iraq sub forum) which indicates that even though the killing has not abated, things are looking up in Baghdad, where localities have been totally sanitised of the terrorist. Therefore,Al Sadr has reasons to feel frustrated.

I have also read in the Indian newspapers that Sunnis in Anbar are evicting the foreign terrorists from the area. This too indicates some good has emerged. But, even though Sadr is a Shia, it sure would not be good news to him.

He maybe preparing to wage some confrontation with the US troops, but hopefully the 'surge' would be able to take care of him.

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

S-2

Brigadier,

"Mr. Sadr’s influence over the security forces in Diwaniya is unclear. Many Iraqi Army commanders and police officials there take orders from the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a powerful Shiite party that is the main rival to Mr. Sadr’s organization."

Sir, this sure was some doozy of a comment. Guess I ought to be glad that those Iraqi army and police commanders answer to Hakim's SCIRI, and not Badr, eh? God, does Patraeus have a tough job, or what?

I loved the touch at these recent shia demonstrations of all the Iraqi flags. Shiaism and Iraqi nationalism- one and the same. Uh huh. An interesting tack taken by Badr and the Mahdis