Nouri Maliki reappointed as Iraqi prime minister

[RoccoR]

cape_royds, et al,

I apologize for getting back to this so late. I've been on the road and the Internet in my hotel in Sanaa is not functioning.

Maliki did well.

He got Moqtada to back his government, without having to cede to them any major cabinet posts.

(COMMENT)

I think this is a fair, but an optomistic assessment. Although I am not sure that enlisting al-Sadr into the government process was a concern; but, more politically advantageous (even an act of desparation) for al-Maliki.

Maliki himself made a nice power-grab, "temporarily" holding onto the ministries of Defense and Interior, i.e. Maliki is not only Prime Minister, but he retains direct personal control over both the army and the police.

(COMMENT)

I'm not exactly sure that this should have been the outcome of the election.

As far as retaining control over ISF resources, that is a necessity of every dictator. That is how they remain in power. While it can be said that al-Sadr doesn't have this ISF control, it remains to be seen if he has the influence.

I'm not as discouraged as some of the others on this thread. From my standpoint, nothing took place that isn't the usual sort of parliamentary horse-trading. I find it rather promising that Maliki and Sadr could be openly fighting in '08 and become basically colleagues in '11. Maliki got the better of Sadr in '08, and perhaps he got the better of him once again. On the other hand, Sadr's back-down in '08 looks smart today--bend, don't break.

Sadr's still got fiery rhetoric and attracts big crowds. ...

(COMMENT)

I have to say, this is very optomistic; but, becoming "colleagues" is NOT what I would considered an outcome without "some risk;" either in terms of the Iraqi people and their expectations, internal stability (long term), or an outcome pleasant for America - given the investment. Once US influence is significantly reduced, what will al-Sadr set his sghts on next?

But of course any politician in Iraq that wants to succeed is going to have spit some fire at foreigners. There would be something terribly wrong with any people, who after a foreign occupation, didn't want to at least rhetorically shake the dust off.

(COMMENT)

And Americans are such an easy target in this regard.

Most Respectfully,
R

[cape_royds]

Maliki did well.

He got Moqtada to back his government, without having to cede to them any major cabinet posts.

Maliki himself made a nice power-grab, "temporarily" holding onto the ministries of Defense and Interior, i.e. Maliki is not only Prime Minister, but he retains direct personal control over both the army and the police.

I'm not as discouraged as some of the others on this thread. From my standpoint, nothing took place that isn't the usual sort of parliamentary horse-trading. I find it rather promising that Maliki and Sadr could be openly fighting in '08 and become basically colleagues in '11. Maliki got the better of Sadr in '08, and perhaps he got the better of him once again. On the other hand, Sadr's back-down in '08 looks smart today--bend, don't break.

Sadr's still got fiery rhetoric and attracts big crowds:

We are still resisters, and we are still resisting the occupier militarily and culturally and by all the means of resistance. Repeat after me: No, no for the occupier. Let's have all the world hear that Iraqi people reject the occupier.

Al-Sadr hammers anti-US message in 1st Iraq speech

But of course any politician in Iraq that wants to succeed is going to have spit some fire at foreigners. There would be something terribly wrong with any people, who after a foreign occupation, didn't want to at least rhetorically shake the dust off.

[RoccoR]

tantalus, et al,

This is a type of test.

and he returns

BBC News - Moqtada Sadr, anti-US cleric, returns to Iraq from Iran

(COMMENT)

I think, somewhere in the Iraqi system, there is still an active warrant for his arrest in connection with the murder of Abdul-Majid Khoei.

It will be very interesting to see how this plays-out, as I know someone is going to raise the issue; sooner or later.

If --- al-Sadr gets a "pardon" or if Iraq fails to act --- sweeping it under the rub and destroying the records and evidence, then that will even be more telling. The Iraqi Government will claim "insufficient evidence" and decline to take action under the "Rule of Law."

It will be interesting to see what happens.

Most Respectfully,
R

[tantalus]

Originally posted by RoccoR
More and more, people are beginning to be concerned about the very open influence both Moqtadar al-Sadr and the Iranians have and projected to get.

and he returns

The anti-US Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr is back in Iraq after years of self-imposed exile, officials have said.

After spending more than three years in Iran, the radical cleric returned to Najaf, his stronghold south of Baghdad.

The militia he founded, the Mehdi Army, clashed several times with US and Iraqi forces after the 2003 US-led invasion.

Last month, his political movement secured a deal to be part of the new government, with 39 parliamentary seats and seven ministries.

BBC News - Moqtada Sadr, anti-US cleric, returns to Iraq from Iran

[S2]

RoccoR Reply

"More and more, people are beginning to be concerned about the very open influence both Moqtadar al-Sadr and the Iranians have and projected to get"

That's been a long-standing concern.

Everything that's been posted so far by you, myself, and others WRT this topic is almost fore-ordained.

I repeat- being called a nation is more than simply borders, a constitution and the usual trappings of governance. Like too much of the middle east, Iraq is a a tribal-based society that has a western facade reaching back to colonial decisions imposed over the top. There has, is, or will be a litmus test with each to determine if that facade reaches at all deeper into the social fabric-and to what extent.

America had its own civil war and, from my view, was a critical component in defining our nation. We're not the only such nation. There'll yet be others. Maybe Iraq. Maybe Afghanistan. Maybe, too, Pakistan.

Who knows?

[RoccoR]

S-2, et al,

What you predict the U.S. might claim is yet unknown and not particularly relevant even should it prove true.

Each competing entity must weigh the risks/benefits of what partition may hold. Each, therefore, must also weigh the risks/benefits of a united Iraq. Nothing new here, if painful nonetheless.

In my humble view, it's the process of earning the right becoming a sovereign, united nation. Not all deserve to be called such and there's a price to paid in crossing that bridge to true collective unity.

We've provided Iraqis the opportunity to determine their path. Now they'll do so-for better or worse.

(COMMENT)

Ref Links:

• Secularists, Islamists Clash In Iraqi Culture War : NPR

  The fight is between religious political parties — the Islamists — against secular Iraqis, long part of the country's social fabric. It is a struggle to define the country's identity.

• Iraq: Preparing for the Return of Moqtada al-Sadr - TIME

When Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki unveiled his new cabinet on Dec. 21, Sadr's lieutenants were awarded eight of the 29 positions announced — a reflection of the fact that Maliki would not be premier without Sadr's support.

Like I said before, individually, just as Washington often depicts, none of the problems I have cited about Iraq are fatal. But the accumulative effect continues and is unmistakeable; having a great chance of creating a cascade effect.

The latest exodus follows a massacre led by al-Qaida at a Chaldean Catholic church in central Baghdad on 31 October, which left about 60 people dead, almost 100 maimed and an already apprehensive community terrified. Since then, the terrorist group has targeted Christians in their homes, including family members of those who survived the attack.

SOURCE:

• Christian exodus from Iraq gathers pace | World news | The Guardian
• ADLERSTEIN & MOELLER: Iraq's Christian 'religicide' - Washington Times

Others see a slightly different or more likely case as an indicator.

-- Iran's "Special Groups," Tehran's paramilitary proxies in Iraq, are likely to flourish under the new Shiite-dominated coalition government being formed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Iran's choice to rule in Baghdad.

SOURCE:

• In Iraq, Iran's Special Groups to flourish - UPI.com

More and more, people are beginning to be concerned about the very open influence both Moqtadar al-Sadr and the Iranians have and projected to get.

Most Respectfully,
R

[S2]

RoccoR Reply

"But I believe the ignition will be a result of a cascade failure, which the US Government will claim as 'unforeseeable.'"

What you predict the U.S. might claim is yet unknown and not particularly relevant even should it prove true.

"As al-Sadr gains more and more power and influence, we will meet a critical mass..."

That's possible. He's one important element to that. Others have a say.

Article 2:

First: Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation:

A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.
B. No law that contradicts the principles of democracy may be established.
C. No law that contradicts the rights and basic freedoms stipulated in this constitution may be established.

Second: This Constitution guarantees the Islamic identity of the majority of the Iraqi people and guarantees the full religious rights of all individuals to freedom of religious belief and practice such as Christians, Yazedis, and Mandi Sabeans.

Each competing entity must weigh the risks/benefits of what partition may hold. Each, therefore, must also weigh the risks/benefits of a united Iraq. Nothing new here, if painful nonetheless.

In my humble view, it's the process of earning the right becoming a sovereign, united nation. Not all deserve to be called such and there's a price to paid in crossing that bridge to true collective unity.

We've provided Iraqis the opportunity to determine their path. Now they'll do so-for better or worse.

[RoccoR]

S-2, et al,

Yes, I believe the volcano can erupt at any moment.

"...volcano lies dormant..."

Should dissolution occur, it'll unfold before us. The crystal won't be shattered overnight.

It's a risk incurred by Iraq when accepting sovereign authority. It's a risk incurred by any multi-ethnic/multi-cultural society if integrative and representative governance is the ultimate objective.

(COMMENT)

But I believe the ignition will be a result of a cascade failure, which the US Government will claim as "unforeseeable."

When Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki unveiled his new cabinet on Dec. 21, Sadr's lieutenants were awarded eight of the 29 positions announced — a reflection of the fact that Maliki would not be premier without Sadr's support.

Read more: Iraq: Preparing for the Return of Moqtada al-Sadr - TIME

As al-Sadr gains more and more power and influence, we will meet a critical mass.

Remember Article 2 of the (US Backed and Promoted) Iraqi Constitution.

Most Respectfully,
R

[S2]

RoccoR Reply

"This is why Jalal Talabani was made President."

Window dressing.

"Neither the Central Government of Iraq or the Turkish Republic is thrilled with the idea of a Kurdish State; but for slightly different reasons."

That's obvious and understood.

"I don't think there will be an outbreak just yet, as long as the Kurds don't unilaterally declare independence. But there are strong separatists movements."
Remember,

"...volcano lies dormant..."

Should dissolution occur, it'll unfold before us. The crystal won't be shattered overnight.

"The fear of a civil war was always a concern; but, it was the risk that Washington took when it granted sovereignty."

It's a risk incurred by Iraq when accepting sovereign authority. It's a risk incurred by any multi-ethnic/multi-cultural society if integrative and representative governance is the ultimate objective.

Thanks.

[RoccoR]

S-2, et al,

This is why Jalal Talabani was made President.

This is about to go critical folks. Ol' S-2 has been saying a volcano lies dormant over Kurdish ethnic aspirations. Wait until we hit the trail. Just now America is the ONLY force for justice in the region. Literally everybody else has a deeply self-interested agenda that they'll be unfolding lickity-split-

Iraq's North Seen as Next Trouble Spot - WSJ.com Dec. 23, 2010

This isn't going to be pretty.

(COMMENT)

Neither the Central Government of Iraq or the Turkish Republic is thrilled with the idea of a Kurdish State; but for slightly different reasons.

I don't think there will be an outbreak just yet, as long as the Kurds don't unilaterally declare independence. But there are strong separatists movements.

The fear of a civil war was always a concern; but, it was the risk that Washington took when it granted sovereignty.

Most Respectfully,
R

[S2]

Kurdistan Braces For America's Departure

This is about to go critical folks. Ol' S-2 has been saying a volcano lies dormant over Kurdish ethnic aspirations. Wait until we hit the trail. Just now America is the ONLY force for justice in the region. Literally everybody else has a deeply self-interested agenda that they'll be unfolding lickity-split-

Iraq's North Seen as Next Trouble Spot - WSJ.com Dec. 23, 2010

This isn't going to be pretty.

[RoccoR]

S-2, JAD_333, et al,

It is important to note that the CJCS is suggesting that the GOI consider a follow-on security agreement; I suppose under Title 22 Authority.

I recall reading somewhere yesterday that Maliki doesn't have the political juice to request a stay-behind presence of even U.S. advisors. We won't stay without a formal request by the Iraqi government. If true, that means we'll be gone-lock, stock and barrel.

(COMMENT)

You are probably right. The majority of US Military will return to CONUS if the GOI does not make some formal arrangement.

Having said that, it is important look at two aspects.

• Prior to the 2003 Invasion, the level of indigenous discontent under Saddam Hussein's government generated about 12-to-15 internal security incidents per day. The current level of violence is approaching 10-to-13 security incidents.
  
• There is no question that the CJCS is publically giving his praise for the ISF and their achievements in security. And there have been, even most recently, some examples cited. There were 12 out of 15 VBIEDs intercepted and neutralized.

  Positive Link
  Iraq foils Al Qaida in first solo security operation

• What is not emphasized in this article is that the successful intervention was based on intelligence provided by the US, and that the interventions would not likely have occurred without that vital intelligence having been provided. This is a question of capacity and whether the ISF actually has it or can reasonably be expected to develop it in time to protect itself.

The question is what will happen in a post-US Exit environment? Will Iraq internal security descend into chaos?

One hears so many things. Once it's US winding down its military presence in Turkey with an eye toward relocating in Kurdistan. How is that possible unless Iraq fractures? And wouldn't aim like that be a sign that US doesn't consider a Iraq as it is now a viable nation? This is all probably analyst speculation.

(COMMENT)

I agree, that this might have been wishful thinking.

This might have been a possible consideration when a semi-permanent military basing structure was considered feasible in Iraq. But it is unlikely that the US will be granted anything of the sort. The US will gradually lose, what little influence it has, with the GOI. What will remain will probably become much more expensive to maintain than any equivalent military station anywhere in the world. Just as the Embassy, will become th Alamo, a fortified position in a hostile land.

Most Respectfully,
R

[JAD_333]

One hears so many things. Once it's US winding down its military presence in Turkey with an eye toward relocating in Kurdistan. How is that possible unless Iraq fractures? And wouldn't aim like that be a sign that US doesn't consider a Iraq as it is now a viable nation? This is all probably analyst speculation.

More to the point, I heard a report over the weekend that the Iraqi gov't had dropped its ban on the participation in the assembly of three Sunni politicians and that the sr. Sunni leadership was pleased. This may signal the willingness of the Shia faction to push for greater unity. Perhaps you all know more about this development.

[S2]

I recall reading somewhere yesterday that Maliki doesn't have the political juice to request a stay-behind presence of even U.S. advisors. We won't stay without a formal request by the Iraqi government. If true, that means we'll be gone-lock, stock and barrel.

My preference has always been partition into Shiastan, Sunnistan and Kurdistan with one or two U.S. AFBs located in Kurdistan. That's a long, long way from happening nor can even be a consideration unless, obviously, the country fractured AND the KRG took on the PKK successfully.

My guess, however, is should Iraq fracture, the PKK would be the least of the KRG's immediate worries. It needs, of course, to be foremost now whether Iraq fractures or otherwise. Relations between the KRG and Turkey need to be good in every case. That can only happen with a defeated PKK in Kurdistan. It's not an easy choice for the KRG but, still, correct.

[RoccoR]

S-2, Tantalus, et al,

I don't recall this, but it is interesting.

"...in the short term this seems unlikely to work, perhaps that is merely stating the blatantly obvious..."

Do you remember this-

(COMMENT)

Now the Bush administration, despite its profound strategic misjudgments in Iraq, has a similar opportunity. To seize it, however, America must get beyond the present false choice between "staying the course" and "bringing the troops home now" and choose a third way that would wind down our military presence responsibly while preventing chaos and preserving our key security goals.

This is the challenge of the "Third Way:"

• wind down our military presence
• preventing chaos
• preserving our key security goals

How do we do that?

In the four (4) years since that statement was made, look at what has happened and how.

I agree that it sounded both logical (valid and sound), yet - to me - it resembled "luck" that it didn't turn-out worse. Politically, it was a hard landing with sever damage done. At times, it was chaotic.

Who can forget Easter 2008, when the Embassy turned into a "Bed & Breakfast" with the staff taking cover from one of the most intense rocket barrages (lasting over a month) of the decade; compliments of Moqtodar al-Sadr. Yet today, from his reach out of Iran, he settled the government impasse and furthered the Regime of Nouri al-Maliki.

We are very lucky that Iraq is only under Iranian influence; and not control.

Sad --- really!

Again, we had our best minds focused on this, and still wound-up with the short end of the stick. I'm not even sure what we've learned from this.

Most Respectfully,
R