In a remarkable turn of events not only Sadr but now Hakim and even Sistani have come out against Iraqi government authorization for US forces to stay in Iraq past the end of this year when UN authorization ends. This is a blow to the US as Hakim has always been considered a US ally and Sistani has always stayed away from any position.
Combined with Iraqi army refusals to take part in the transformation of Sadr City into a walled "concentration camp," this bodes very badly for both the American future in Iraq and Maliki's government. No one had ever thought that anything could unite Sadr and Hakim or bring Sistani to take a position. Today's Washington Post:
Sadr's primary ambition has long been a U.S. troop withdrawal. In recent years, his fighters have fought pitched battles against U.S. forces and his followers have staged numerous demonstrations. When Maliki refused to demand a timetable last year for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, Sadr pulled his political bloc from the ruling coalition.
The proposed Iraqi-American agreement would provide a legal framework for U.S. troops to remain in Iraq after Dec. 31, when their U.N. mandate expires. Sadr views the pact as a blow to Iraq's sovereignty. His main Shiite rival, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who heads the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq -- an influential Shiite political party that is part of Maliki's ruling coalition -- has also denounced the plans. Aides to Iraq's most influential Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, have also expressed concern.
full story:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
As Bush seeks to negotiate a Status of Forces Agreement to keep troops in Iraq, it looks like the vast majority of Iraqi leaders who are Shia will be uniting against US presence. Neither does it bode well for Maliki's coalition in the upcoming October elections in which Sadr is already favored.