I am confused and frustrated by the pertinacity to equating the Sadr movement, and the Sadr movement only, with Iranian influence in Iraq. Why are Dawa, SCIRI and Sistani never mentioned?
Dawa was founded in the 1950's as a fundamentalist Shiite Islamic group opposed to secularism and Sunni influences in Iraq. By 1977 Dawa aligned itself with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. In 1983 Dawa bombed the American and French embassies in Kuwait. During this period they were considered a terrorist organization, I can't image why. Venomously opposed to Saddam and the Baathist, Dawa fought with the Iranians against Iraq during the 1980's war. Until the American invasion of Iraq, they LIVED in Iran. The current head of Dawa, Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, headed the party's Jihad Office in Syria in the 1980's. This bares repeating, he headed Dawa's Jihad Office in Syria when Hezbollah was formed.
SCIRI answers directly to the Iranian Ayatollahs and is founded on the tenet that the government should be controlled by the ulema. The ulema in this case refers to the Iranian Shiite scholars. The Badr Corps, the armed wing of the SCIRI, was formed by Iran and they lived there for twenty years before Bush's current adventure when they basically invaded Iraq. The current leader of both SCIRI and the Badr Corps is al-Hakim, whom, I am sure you will remember, the Decider invited to the White House for a little chat back in December.
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is not an Iranian agent, he IS an Iranian and even speaks with a heavy Persian accent.
But none of this is ever mentioned in the MSM. Even CNN’s Michael Ware talks about the Iranian influence in terms of Sunni insurgents and the Sadr movement and never (at least recently) even mentions Maliki, Hakim or Sistani. I admit I am being a bit disingenuous in my first sentence. I am frustrated but not all that confused. Sadr is openly opposed to his country being occupied by America and has fought pitched battles against the American army. He is a poisonous thorn in the side of the American occupation and Bush's plan for permanent base in Iraq. It is to the administration's benefit to demonize him as an Iranian agent. But why is everybody else just buying into this spin? There is a huge Iranian influence in Iraq and their agents are Maliki, Hakim and Sistani (ok, Sistani is not an Iranian agent he IS an Iranian).
I admit I am confused as to why America is backing a hand picked Iranian government in Iraq in what I view as a proxy war between the Sunni states of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt against Iran for control of the Persian gulf. Nothing about this war offers up a clear Occum's razor solution, but it does no good to view the current situation (sorry about the euphemism, please feel free to recommend a better word) with blinders on. The Iranian agent in Iraq are Maliki, Hakim and the Iranian Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistan.
e 's/Sadr/g' e 's/Maliki, Hakim and Sistani/g' file