The Times story, titled Top Shiite Cleric Is Said to Favor a Coalition for Iraq, has this to say:
Iraq’s most venerated Shiite cleric has tentatively approved an American-backed coalition of Shiite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish parties that aims to isolate extremists, particularly the powerful Shiite militia leader Moktada al-Sadr, Iraqi and Western officials say.
Since the fall of Saddam Hussein the cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, has been the spiritual custodian of Shiite political dominance in Iraq, corralling the fractious Shiite parties into an alliance to rule the country.
But Ayatollah Sistani has grown increasingly distressed as the Shiite-led government has proved incapable of taming the violence and improving public services, Shiite officials say. He now appears to be backing away from his demand that the Shiite bloc play the dominant political role and that it hold together at all costs, Iraqi and Western officials say.
The crucial question in Iraq has always been whether Iraqis of different ethnic and sectarian backgrounds could work together, or whether they would opt for civil war by sticking to their own tribe or creed. Critically, mainstream Shiites may be signalling a willingness to do just that--work together with similarly-minded Sunnis and Kurds in an effort to isolating the violent whackadoodles who are spilling so much blood.
This is extraordinary (or would be extraordinary)--it would mean that Sistani and his followers would place national unity over Shiite unity.
A principal demand, Mr. Hamoudi said, was that any political realignment "preserve the unity" of the 130-member Shiite parliamentary bloc, the United Iraqi Alliance.
But officials say that stipulation can be interpreted broadly to mean that the Shiite bloc be preserved in name only, with its various parties forming their own coalitions with Sunni Arabs or with Kurds. The new coalition could lead to the effective fragmentation of the ruling Shiite bloc because it is unlikely that Mr. Sadr, the militia leader, will sign on, Iraqi officials say.
Such an open split would weaken Shiite control over the government and increase tensions between rival Shiite militias, which have periodically clashed.
Of course, there are significant barriers to such a deal.
Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and his Shiite party, Islamic Dawa, are hesitant about signing on to the coalition. Dawa members say they are concerned that rival Shiite parties are trying to oust Mr. Maliki. They also suspect the Sunni Arabs’ real goal is to erode Shiite power.
"I think it’s a leap into the unknown," said Sami al-Askari, a Shiite legislator who advises Mr. Maliki. "The negative things are clear, but no one can explain exactly what the positive things are."
That last quote pretty much sums up the saga of post-invasion Iraq.
Talk of "one last chance" has been overused to the point of cliche. But, it may be spot-on in this case. This is a desperation measure, whose motivation is evident.
The idea of a coalition bridging the major sects and ethnicities first arose in the spring during a weeks-long crisis surrounding the selection of a prime minister. As the discussions dragged on, the leader of the Supreme Council, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, approached Kurdish and Sunni Arab politicians about supporting a single candidate, according to Iraqi and Western officials.
But Ayatollah Sistani blocked the proposal in favor of preserving the Shiite bloc, the officials said. "The word from Najaf then was, ‘Thou shalt not do that,’ " said an American official familiar with the discussions.
The idea of the coalition was revisited in recent weeks as a way to revive the political process and perhaps move the country beyond the vicious sectarian politics reflected in the relentless violence in the streets. "It’s a light of hope in a sky filled with clouds," Mr. Hamoudi said.
There will be no military victory for the United States. One does not win an occupation. The question is whether Iraqis are willing to pull together as a nation.
I can't pretend to know whether this will work, or whether it's risking American lives to see if it will work.
But, it is something worth discussing.
Comments are closed on this story.