two of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite leaders agreed on Saturday to end a bitter rivalry in a bid to end months of armed clashes and assassinations in the oil-rich south that have threatened to spread into a wider conflict.
seems that moqtada al-sadr, in addition to addition to the six month cease fire in southern iraq about the time the brits pulled out of basra…much to chimpys’ ire…announced saturday that he and his arch rival, and the chimps’ bff abdul aziz al-hakim have reached a peace agreement:
Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki welcomed on Sunday a pact to end violence between the country’s two most powerful Shiite leaders Moqtada al-Sadr and Abdel Aziz al-Hakim.
Sadr, the leader of Iraq’s most popular Shiite movement, and Hakim, the head of the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council (SIIC), a pillar of Maliki’s ruling coalition, announced their deal on Saturday.
“We received news of the signing of an agreement between the leaders of SIIC and the Sadr Movement with deep comfort,” Maliki said in a statement.
“This agreement came at the right time and expressed a high sense of religious and national responsibility,” added the statement from Maliki, himself a Shiite who leads the Dawa party at the head of the ruling coalition.
Sadr’s six ministers have boycotted Maliki’s government since April and his spokesman said Sunday the accord did not signify a turnaround on the political front…
additional reporting via the nyt, downplays [obviously] the significance for basra and the south, and pushes the meme that this is a sign of progress for malarki:
…The agreement was a positive sign for the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki because support from the political wings of both men’s organizations is seen as necessary to avoid a vote of no confidence in Parliament. Though both groups are in the government, violence between Mr. Sadr’s militia, the Mahdi Army, and the armed wing of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, led by Mr. Hakim, has simmered in southern Iraq for four years. It was not clear how far the agreement would go toward ending the fighting.
In the agreement, the two men signed off on three broadly worded points, Liwa Smeism, a political aide to Mr. Sadr, said in a telephone interview. They called for a cease-fire, an end to negative propaganda in the news media and the formation of joint committees in the provinces to mediate disputes, Mr. Smeism said.
it would appear, to me, that the sooner we leave and let the various factions get on with the business of sorting out their respective differences that there will likely be a reduction in the overall level of violence. it’s not inconceivable, imo, that it could well be significantly lower than many believe, especially if what appears to be happening is basra is any indication. not good news for BushCo™ and it’s apologists and enablers, especially those hawks who subscribe to the chaos theory.
we shall see.
lTMF’sA
tips, recs….whatever
lTMF’sA
I’m not sure what this means. It’s probably positive, but w/o the political aspect as a part of it I don’t see it having a far reaching effect.
l think the effects are likely to be very far reaching given the conditions on the ground, and the history of the area. l don’t think it’s as clear cut as saying there is no political component to this turn of events.
iraq is becoming, de facto, three separate and distinct areas, each with it’s own governing and military structure. the kurds are virtually autonomous, and have been relatively so since the clinton era and the no-fly zones, and they continue to negotiate oil deals and border agreements independent of, what purports to be. the centralized government. the south is now clearly in the control of sadr and hakim with the brits hunkered down on an air base, and the shia are trying to take control of the western and central area to which they have been forced to flee as the ethnic cleansing of baghdad is nearly complete.
perhaps l’m inferring too much, but this seem to me to put the us in an increasing smaller box. by agreeing to a truce, for lack of a better term, the south is now relatively peaceful, compared to the mayhem of the recent past. this does two major things:
the push back potential of this is quite far reaching, imo. once the ethnic, religious and tribal factions quit warring among themselves, the primary target becomes the occupying forces. with very high numbers of iraqis wanting them/us out, and believing that we are, indeed, legitimate targets, this development does not bode well for BushCo™’s long term plans.
nor is it particularly positive for the future of the existing government. the fact that hakim is a malarki supporter is significant, not because this is a positive sign for the government, as the nyt would like you to believe, but more importantly, imo, it’s a sign that what’s left of his support is crumbling further. this type of powerball, puts a great deal of pressure on him, and l can’t help but wonder how much this, and other things we may not be aware of, are influencing the hard line being taken on blackwater, and some rather confusing recent statements from president talabani about us forces being reduced by 100,000 by the end of 08.
things that make you go Hmmmmmm…
calling it tightening the noose that chimpy hung around his/our neck would not be a bad metaphor.
lTMF’sA
Hmmmmmm…indeed. this just off the AP wire:
lTMF’sA
politics iraqi style:
it’s all related.
later
lTMF’sA
What a concept. Peace starts to set foot on Iraqi soil, but it might not be PC.
We all keep hearing what a bloodbath it will be if the troops are withdrawn. After they`ve been wrong about everything from the beginning, killed hundreds of thousands of people in the process, they`re worried about a bloodbath.
The last thing this admin. wants is a united Iraq. That`s when the real shit starts.
Meanwhile there doesn`t seem to be much talk of reconcilliation in the news here. I guess it`s not important.