Now that Operation Was Kerry in Cambodia seems to be dying down, it's worth paying attention to something that actually matters: the future of Iraq.
As we all know, U.S. forces are currently engaged in what was intended to be the final showdown with radical Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and his militia, the al-Mahdi army.
Sadr draws his support from what his ideological lodestar, Ayatollah Khomenei, liked to call the
mustadafeen or the "disinherited." These are poor Shi'ite residents of Sadr City, which absorbed many of the marsh Arabs who were uprooted by Saddam -- who interpreted "draining the swamp" rather literally. Sadr, by seizing control of the Imam Ali Mosque and defiantly facing off against the United States and its allies in the Allawi government, has symbolically aligned himself with Hussayn, the martyr revered in Shi'ism for fighting a losing battle against a ruler perceived to be unjust. Moreover, he's positioned himself as waging a defensive
jihad - theologically the duty of all true Muslims - against invaders who wish to "destroy Islam."
To many hawks, no doubt informed by their reading of military history, the simple solution to this problem is to crush the uprising no matter what. Were we charged with, say, putting down the revolt of the sepoys in 19th-century India, that would be a great strategy.
But we're not: this is the year 2004 and we're fighting against those we came ostensibly to liberate. They're liberated all right: the al-Mahdi army has been liberated to bomb liquor stores, rob, carjack, and generally create havoc. By all accounts, they're a bunch of thugs.
Yet on their side, roughly speaking, are the Arab satellite networks that just happen to be based in Gulf countries with a decided interest in high oil prices (now over $46/barrel). If the rulers in Qatar and Dubai had any interest whatsoever in a stable Iraq, they'd ask their reporters to tone down the coverage a notch or two. Moreover, the sensationalist coverage offered by al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya is no doubt popular for a reason: it reflects the views of most Arabs.
Al-Jazeera has turned the siege of Najaf into the cause-celebre of the Arab world - buoyed by quotes like this one:
"It is a conspiracy to commit a big massacre," al-Sadr's top negotiator, Sheik Ali Smeisim, told the pan-Arab Al-Jazeera television station.
This is clearly ludicrous, but it doesn't matter what the reality of the situation is. Perception is reality, and the symbolism is not on our side.
On our side are the government (although not everybody), secular elites in Baghdad and the silent people of Najaf and their clergy, who just want to get rid of this troublesome rabble so they can rebuild their seminary in peace and collect revenues from the hundreds of thousands of pilgrims who visit Najaf every year.
But we're faced with a series of conundrums, as laid out here by Matt Yglesias:
As the United States faces off yet again against Muqtada al-Sadr, we are faced with a maddening situation. Most Iraqi Shiites don't seem to support him, but a non-trivial minority does, and a non-trivial portion of that non-trivial minority is willing to take up arms on his behalf. From our perspective, letting a non-trivial armed portion of a non-trivial minority of one of Iraq's three ethnic groups seize power is an intolerable development, thus we must fight the Sadrists. But a large number -- most, if we assume that Sistani and Jafari [sic] speak for the mainstream, which they seem to -- of Iraqi Shiites don't want us to fight this armed minority, or at least don't want us to fight them in any way that involves, as fighting always does, killing people (including civilians) and blowing shit up. At the same time, many Sunni Iraqis would be happy to see us kill Sadrists, but they would also like to kill our soldiers. Kurdish Iraqis hold no brief for Sadrists or Sunni insurgents, but don't believe in the concept of a unitary Iraq.
When your staunchest allies--secular professional elites like Zeyad (a dentist most recently from London)--launch morose broadsides like
this, it's time to wonder just what we're actually capable of accomplishing here:
Allawi's 'emergency laws' are a joke. They might look good on paper, but who is to enforce them? Allwai says it's not time yet to implement them. Not when IP and ING's desert and swear allegiance to Al-Mahdi in Ammara and Basrah. Not when Al-Mahdi have taken over governmental offices and IP stations in Nasiriya and Diwaniya. Not when they have checkpoints and patrols using IP vehicles in Sadr city. Not when they declare their own emergency laws and a curfew in Baghdad. Not when they are lobbing mortars daily at Iraqi ministries and residential areas. Not when they can hold anyone hostage and force Iraqi officials to resign. Not when they can control the flow of oil through pipelines from the south. Not when Muqtada is al-sayyed al-qa'id. And certainly not when Allawi is just the local mayor of the Green Zone.
When even Iraqi-Americans in Michigan--who
ardently supported the invasion--are
screaming "Get out of Najaf, get out of Iraq" in angry protest, it's time to wonder if this is what Reuel Marc Gerecht of AEI meant when he said,
rather clearly: "[F]irst and foremost, don't attack Najaf ... if we go into Najaf in force, we will lose Grand Ayatollah Sistani, who is the guardian of the holy city. We lose him, we lose the country." As long as we have Sistani,
he thinks, we'll be okay. On Thursday, Najaf's Grand Ayatollah Sistani issued a rather permissive fatwa from his hospital bed in London, but has been silent since. He's not likely to remain so if we violate the Imam Ali shrine.
So when 10,000 Shi'ites are bused in to Najaf to act as human shields, it's probably time to figure out a way to climb down gracefully. Judging by this photo, the Imam Ali shrine has plenty of room for more potential martyrs.
We're Americans, so we're optimists by nature. We're trained from birth to believe in happy endings. But in the real world, sometimes there are none to be found.
As Allawi, having broken off negotiations in the face of seemingly impossible demands, sends in the shaky, Kurdish-stocked and Ba'athist-led New Iraqi Army for what appears to be the final showdown, I'm hoping for some kind of peaceful surrender or negotiated solution that leaves the government somewhat on top and the US with a shred of credibility with the Shi'ite community.
But I'm not optimistic.