Many diaries have been posted focusing on the daily loss of life US soldiers and Iraqi civilians in the war.
I am no pacifist. Like Obama, I'm against this war, but not all wars. I supported the Afghan War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War.
But look where we are headed: We are on the inevitable course of putting our soldiers in peril for the purpose of electing a self described Islamic Revolutionary, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim.
The only solace we might take is that it would be an even worse course of action to try and rig the election to keep Alawi in power, which would require the indefinite continuation of our military presence under the insurgency.
From the
CS Monitor:
MSNBC reported that the strongest campaign alliance, or group of parties operating as a bloc, is headed by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the son of the late Grand Ayatollah Muhsin al-Hakim who was the worldwide spiritual leader of Shiites from 1955-1970.
...
Hakim, the head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, spent 25 years in exile in Iran and actually founded the group that he heads there. Hakim has the blessing of arguably the most influential figure in Iraq, the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. MSNBC reported that Hakim is expected to do very well among the dominant Shiite majority, particularly in the south of the country.
The New York Times reported last week that Hakim is likely to emerge from the election as one of, if not the, dominant political figure in Iraq. Some experts fear that if pro-Iranian Shiite clerics dominate the new government, Iraq's Sunni Muslims will grow even more desperate, leading to civil war, the Times reported.
In a December 2003 interview with PBS, Hakim attempted to allay fears of an Islamic Republic, asserting that he did not call for an Islamic Government, but one that "respected Islam".
One of the fears that Ambassador Bremer and this U.S. administration have is the establishment of an Islamic government in Iraq. What is the nature of the Islamic government you are calling for?
I think this is a question to be asked to Ambassador Bremer.
As regards [to] the government that we want, we don't want an Islamic government. We want a constitutional government that preserves the rights of everybody and a government that believes in the public rights; a government that works for the interest of the Iraqi people, and believes that the people are the source to derive all the important decisions that concern the future of the Iraqi people.
You have, though, called for a government that holds Islam supreme, where Islam would be the guiding force behind the government, without real separation of church and state. Am I incorrect?
The conference in London was attended by all the sects of the Iraqi people including the Shiites and the Kurds, and the Sunnis, and the secular people. They all agree that the major religion of the state should be Islam. But to respect Islam is one thing, and to establish an Islamic government is something else.
Other comments in this interview indicate that Hakim is dancing a line to try not to offend US forces on one hand while placating Moqtadr al Sadr's sympathizers on the other.
Once he no longer needs US military strength to facilitate his election to power, will his respect for Sunnis and Kurds remain?