by Ghassan and Intibah Kadi for The Saker Blog
The recent developments following the 12th of May 2018 elections in Iraq put the country on a potential new course. What nature and direction of this course is the big question.
The now 44 years old, Muqtada Al-Sadr was only 25 years old when his father Ayatollah Mohammad Mohammad Sadeq Al-Sadr was ambushed and killed together with two of his sons, Muqtada’s brothers, and the legacy that young Muqtada inherited was huge for a young man of his age. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mohammad_Sadeq_al-Sadr , but nearly two decades on, seems to be learning how to fill his father’s shoes; and his current status requires of him more.
Al-Sadr’s party ‘Sairoon’ (which literally means “we are walking”; ie moving forward) has won a big stake in the Iraqi Parliament May 2018 elections, enough to give Al-Sadr the title of “King Maker” as some analysts did. https://www.rt.com/news/427266-iraq-elections-sadr-kingmaker-us-iran/
That win certainly did not give him the power to form a majority government in his own right, but his recently announced alliance with Al-Abadi’s Party on the 22nd of June, some forty days after the elections, sees an alliance now poised to form Iraq’s new government, and to put it mildly, this is likely to result in a revision of Iraqi-American relationships.
The formation of the alliance was inevitable, but it seems that both Abadi and Muqtada had to first give each other some reality checks.
Not much transpired from the negotiations between the two leaders leading up to the announcement of the formation of the alliance, but the more seasoned diplomat Abadi must have had a thing or two to say to his new partner about the role of Russia and the untouchable position of President Assad. Reciprocally, the leader and founder of Al-Mehdi Army, ie Muqtada, would have also said a thing or two about what position should the new Iraqi government-to-be take vis-à-vis the American presence in Iraq.
The most likely congruencies that both men would have agreed to are a tougher stand on the part of Abadi towards America, and a softer stand on the part of Muqtada towards Russia and President Assad. In reality, any other arrangement will not get much support base from the public and is doomed to fail.
In saying the above, and for fairness to Abadi, as Prime Minister “Take I”, he has clearly revealed his mild anti-American stance on a number of occasions, and this is not the time and place to discuss them. The new Al-Sadr-Al-Abadi alliance is likely to return the latter as a Prime Minister, but Al-Abadi Prime Minister “Take II” will have a larger political support base and a stronger mandate to act tough and resolutely with America.
The least that this new government-to-be will do is to formally request an American withdrawal from Iraq. This request will require a formal American response, and the question is what will happen if this withdrawal is not accepted peacefully by American consent?
With this said, one cannot separate American military presence in Iraq from its military presence in Syria. After all, there are no barriers at the borders between the two neighbouring states, and secondly and most importantly, America is using Iraq as a gate to enter Syria illegally. This is needless to say that should America respond positively to the highly likely request of the new Iraqi government to leave Iraq, it will need to reconsider its presence in Syria; at least logistically.
If America leaves the entire region completely, it will spare a lot of bloodshed on many sides; including its own. However, should America refuse an Iraqi request to leave Iraq, or should it leave Iraq and stay in Syria alone, American forces may find themselves wedged in between many adversaries, two of which are the governments of Syria and Iraq and potentially their respective armies, as well as other volunteers who will undoubtedly be coordinating efforts.
On the other hand, for as long as there is no real and present threat to create an independent Kurdish state, Turkey will be inclined to sit back and watch without escalating its current interventions and incursions; at least until further notice. However, should America respond positively to an Iraqi request and leave Iraqi soil, and as it loses the Iraqi gate into Syria, Trump may play the Kurdish trump card and lure Erdogan to allow America to use Turkey as new gate; under the pretense of trying to foil the creation of a Kurdish state, and which will be in total contradiction with America’s initial objective of wanting to create one. How will Erdogan perceive such a potential trick, if it eventuates, remains to be seen.
But with this above speculative scenario, we are jumping ahead a bit. The first political battle lines will not likely involve Turkey. They will be drawn between the USA on one hand, and Iraq and Syria and their supporters combined on the other hand.
The previous political hostilities between the Syrian and Iraqi Baath party factions are no more. After all, there is no such thing left as a functioning and legal Baath party in Iraq. Syria and Iraq are now joined at the hips in their struggle against ISIS and such, and the desire to make America leave.
If the US does not leave both Iraq and Syria either by its own volition or as a result of a formal Iraqi government request, it will probably ultimately face a new armed resistance and guerilla warfare. This has the potential of another military quagmire, akin to Vietnam’s; as an Iranian official has recently announced.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/top-iranian-official-syria-will-be-americas-second-vietnam/
How does Iran fit into this picture?
Muqtada Al-Sadr is “technically” a Shiite cleric, but he is fiercely independently Iraqi in his outlook. A nationalist? Perhaps not, but definitely a patriot. His party is therefore independent from Iran; even though the hierarchy of the Shiite Twelver faith, to which he belongs, is represented and headed by Iran’s Supreme Leader Khomenei. This doesn’t make Muqtada anti-Iranian either, and undoubtedly, if he finds himself having to choose between an alliance with either America or Iran, one would assume that he would choose the latter, but he is not an “Iranian puppet” as other Shiite leaders are purported to be by their political and religious adversaries.
As a matter of fact, Muqtada Al-Sadr worries Iran for a number of reasons, least of which is the fact that he recently made a visit to Saudi Arabia to meet with Crown Prince Muhamed Bin Salman. http://www.mei.edu/content/article/io/influential-iraqi-cleric-sadr-s-saudi-visit-triggers-worries-tehran
Back to troops on the ground.
Unlike American presence in Syria, Iranian presence, at whatever capacity, is upon the demand of the Syrian Government; ie legal. The more America asks for an Iranian withdrawal from Syria, the more it inadvertently puts pressure on its own presence and turns the Iranian presence into a bargaining chip for the Syrian, Russian, Iranian and potentially Iraqi side, thus bringing to the negotiating table a possible agreement based on a concurrent withdrawal of both Iran and America.
There has been pressure put on Syria throughout the war to relinquish its ties with Iran as a condition for the cessation of Saudi-led hostilities, and President Assad has spoken about this in a recent interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OghUmbc_i3I . However, a trade-off that sees Iran withdrawing its presence in Syria in exchange of American withdrawal is not something that has been discussed, not yet and at least not overtly.
The American presence on Iraqi and Syrian soils creates a very complicated dilemma even for America itself, not only because America does not know what to do next, but also because it does not know how to score a resounding victory, not even a humble one, let alone with whom to negotiate any face-saving and inexpensive exit.
The prospects of the War on Syria entering a whole new phase are becoming more dangerous, and as Hezbollah Chief Nasrallah put it recently, instead of the enemies of Syria depending on proxies to fight on their behalf, an option they tried and failed, they are now poised to use their own troops.
A pessimistic, but realistic outlook is for a war spiraling out of control and drawing in more parties and having them getting bogged down. This scenario can only begin with American obstinacy and refusal to leave Iraq and Syria. Once again, this scenario opens a big window for guerilla attacks on American troops, and there are unconfirmed reports that allege that such attacks have already begun. This time, such attacks will target American bases in both Iraq and Syria and the parties involved will not be restricted to what was formerly referred to as the mainly Sunni “insurgents” that followed the 2003 invasion of Iraq. As history reveals, once such attacks begin, they only tend to escalate and as they escalate, they will have the potential to involve more parties, and as greater Iranian involvement is likely to ensue, we can only expect more direct Israeli involvement.
This does not mean that Israel will not become the first party to escalate. Israel’s military history has been by-and-large based on taking military initiatives. This is what military powers with the upper hand have historically done over the centuries. But even though Israel’s military does not have the needed upper hand any longer, its policy makers seem to continue to live in the fantasy of the post Six-Day War euphoria. And even though most of the military gambles they have taken since have failed, the lesson has not been strong enough to teach them that times have changed.
Either way, any crescendo-like scenario can potentially lead to an upscale in direct Iranian involvement to assist war-ravaged Yemen and a direct confrontation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Iran and Israel, not to forget Hezbollah, with enormous consequences for all parties involved, even if any end up victorious.
And when it comes to America’s involvement, a pertinent question to ask here is whether or not America can actually financially afford a new big war. And if it does start a small fire that grows and soars out of control, intentionally or otherwise, will such a big and expensive war hasten its economic demise?
The bottom line here is that unless all parties decide to go into a war of mutual self-destruction and annihilation, they will need a mediator, and Russia is the only entity that is on “talking terms” with all stakeholders; Iraq, Syria, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel and the United States.
Back to Muqtada Al-Sadr; his stance as a “fundamentalist” Shiite leader who is not aligned with Iran on one hand, and has some ties with Saudi Arabia on the other hand, among other things, puts him in a very unique and peculiar demographic position. He is perhaps to Iraq what Russia is to the regional and international powers involved in the Middle East deadlock. Just like Russia is on talking terms with all parties involved, Muqtada is on reasonable talking terms with all different parties in Iraq; except the separatist Kurds of course.
It ought to be remembered that it is not just Shiite Iraqis who want the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of America from their country. All Iraqis, with the exception of some Kurdish collaborators, want America out, but they have not yet found an Iraqi banner to unite them.
Muqtada is definitely no saint, and the fact that he started his “career” based on a Hamlet-like quest to avenge his father’s death is quite ominous. This is not to mention the stigma of his photos that portray him as an angry man with a frowning face, and they are quite easy to Google. But the man, who is still young at 44 years of age, is not a demon either. He had many challenges very early in his adult life. He was catapulted into his father’s leadership role in his mid-twenties, had to find a way to deal with the 2003 American invasion of Iraq without turning himself into an American target as Saddam had become, and last but not least, be able to survive and flourish in the aftermath of it all.
Perhaps Muqtada Al-Sadr will be the leader to carry that banner that will unite Iraqis, and even though he is a cleric, realistically he is possibly the closest thing one can hope for today in the quest to find an Iraqi secular leader who has any clout and potential. Note the irony.
Muqtada seems to have what it takes to inspire recruits to join troops for battle. But he managed to portray himself as the defender of the poor and the man to embark on reform https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/muqtada-al-sadr-iraq-militia-leader-turned-champion-poor-180517053738881.html . With an agenda of this nature and caliber, if he plays his cards properly, and if he manages to prove to the diverse Iraqi masses that he is genuine and sincere, he has a fairly good opportunity to surmount the stigma of the robes he wears, the sect they identify him with, and be able to rally up a broadly-based support from Iraqis of different religions, sects, and ethnicities.
Whether or not he can achieve this remains to be seen.
The literal meaning of his party’s name “Sairoon” is perhaps to be perceived auspiciously as Iraq stands at a historic fulcrum toiling with the dilemma of how to move forward, and where to.
What is equally interesting is that now, that he is Iraq’s elected “King Maker”, he has earned his side a formal position on the negotiating table with America. This undoubtedly will be giving him a negotiation position with an olive branch in one hand and a rifle in the other; as Yasser Arafat described his stance when he addressed the UNGA back in 1974.
Once again, the key to peace or more war in the region is in the hands of America. Will America heed the warning signs and save itself and the Middle East another needless disaster?
A refreshingly optimistic analysis based on subtle signs, and I agree with the author. The opposite interpretation of this political alliance is, that two glove puppets have come together like right hand and left hand of the U$ occupation forces in Iraq. That the Bush regime and its 2003 Coalition of the Killing can now really declare Mission Accomplished. I hazard to guess that the author’s drift is right: the time is ripe for the U$ Coalition to leave Iraq; which means leaving Syria; which means leaving the ME — except for a few traditional Anglo-American oil companies such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and some of the Gulf sheikdoms.
” … the key to peace or more war in the region is in the hands of America. Will America heed the warning signs and save itself and the Middle East another needless disaster?”
In my humble opinion, no, no they will not ” … heed the warning signs … “. What *DO* they heed? Certainly not international law, they do not stand by the treaties, deals or various pacts they enter into. What they heed *only* is the pursuit of power, money, and influence. These are the three pillars of Empire. Amerikkka will resort to what it has always resorted to, to ‘solve’ it’s problems with maintaining it’s empire.
Additionally, and likely more to the point, Israel and the US have invested exceptionally in the Greater Israel idea. They are not about to give it up without a fight.
“whether or not America can actually financially afford a new big war”
While perpetual chaos on a low boil is a preferable rationale for the US, in order to keep the MIC and lobbyists well oiled and to support that small ME country that control it, any war is a good war. Without perpetual war the USA would crumble -it may anyway but war will delay that. Right to control, dominate, subdue and plunder is the mission statement. Make others pay for the USA’s wars.
This is an excellent and very useful tour of the theater and its potential promise. Thank you, Ghassan and Intibah Kadi.
To those of us, like me, who were not paying close attention, Iraq seems to have surged in importance in the last year or so, as it has defeated ISIS and restored control of its borders. The nation has come from what seemed to me – in my superficial view – to be a failed and occupied state, to be now a key player in the Resistance axis. Whatever happens, it is wonderful to see Iraq choosing its own destiny, and marshaling the force to do this against any opposition.
There is much that Iraq can do to break the US hold on the region, if only because it has already suffered so much at the hands of the US. No one would blame it for any posture it took against the US. I think Iraq can show the entire region how to kill the occupier.
And I think the US is capable of learning, at least in the sense that it would be afraid of the damage it could sustain if it lingers for much longer in this land where it is not welcome.
Excellent. Thank you
I can’t understand any country except corrupted being in alliance of any kind with Saudi Arabia – except I suppose the population there – which is, I know, all important to people like Hassan Nasrallah – but the new Iraqi PM ? A dangerous sign me thinks.
Ghassan
Excellent analysis, but something that always tend to taint your piece is your not too hidden bias against religion and politics mixing together. Did you deliberately avoid the announced alliance between Hadi Ameri and Sadr and its impact on Iraqi yet to be formed government? Or is it an attempt to belittle Iran contribution and influence as in your past pieces which I repeat is not so hidden?
Ghassan will you deny the fact that Iran Islamic Republic is doing better than so many of the secular system we have around and the fact about what they could have achieved if the western opposition is removed? What other system had and is still supporting the Palestinian course with so much cost for so little benefits like Islamic Republic?
You are a good writer and I take it that you have the right not to like the infusion of religion and politics, but you as a writer need to be objective in your analysis which has always surcharge your final presentation.
Meanwhile, Russia launches a major attack against America-backed jihadists in SW Syria:
Russia Officially Enters Southwest Syria Offensive Despite US Warnings
https://syria360.wordpress.com/2018/06/25/russia-officially-enters-southwest-syria-offensive-despite-us-warnings/
The U.S. military heads, including Mattis ( ‘ the butcher of Fallujah’) want Trump to pull out as they see strategically, the U.S. cannot sustain itself hegemonically in the wider Middle – East.
The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff informed Obama that the U.S. was not in a position to fight a sustained, regional (or small hot intensity) war until at least 2022. The U.S. armed forces learned a big , punishing, and brutal lesson in its counter-insurgency war against essentially Iraqi tribes, especially around the Anbar. The U.S. Army had deployed 14 out of its 16 armored battalions in Iraq, and they were all bogged down, being shredded by IED’s as they chased small highly mobile insurgents among the local populations, where the U.S, was not liked, but hated with a passion. Just like they are today in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Iran etc.
Soon the Americans found themselves garrisoned on isolated islands away from population centers, and huddled down. It was checkmate. So the U.S. made a deal, using the Saudis to pay off the insurgents in the tune of billions of dollars, what came to popularly known as ‘ the Surge’. A face saving way for the U.S. to disengage and retreat the vast bulk of their army, and give up much politically.
So the author is right, the U.S. is at an impasse in the Middle- East. Doubledown, and end up worn and torn, with losses unacceptable, and possible Israeli serious loss of territory, or do the right thing and try fair diplomacy a chance. A ‘ win-win ‘ as the Chinese like to say. The ‘ Deal of the Century’ proposed by Trump, Kushner and the Jewish-Zionist lobby to be imposed on the Arab-Muslim states is a non-starter, a rotten deal to the core. It must be revisited , and discarded. The path of resistance is the only way forward for the regions people, because a low-level war of annihilation is being waged on them by international Jews-Khazar ‘Zionists’, by way of using the U.S., British and French, but mostly the U.S., as a bludgeoning tool used on the Arabs in particular, and an enormous effort to defame Islam, is being waged by these said nefarious folks.
And they happen to control essentially the foreign, internal, financial, media/entertainment, education, the Senate, Congress and State Representatives etc, all under their sway, and influence. These people are a diabolical lot, and have been warmongers since they waged their massacres, wars and pillaging on the ‘Russ’ in the Caucuses, southern steppes of Russia and Crimea. Not until the Muslim Mongolian Golden Horde came by and defeated them and scattered them to the winds, where for centuries self-isolated themselves in ‘ghettos’ all across Europe and Russia. Later they would be called Bolsheviks, and we all know first hand the horror of the Jewish Bolshevik Red Terror that swept up to 100 million dead. Incedently, the man who coined the term ‘ you eat as much as you work’, the Head Chief of all the Gulags, Al Frankel , was himself a Jew, and his new rule accelerated the already staggering death toll.
These former Khazars-turned Talmudic Rabbinical Jews-then Bolsheviks while they could get away with their worldly plans-turned neo-cons.
They control the U.S., lock, stock and barrel, and they will stop at nothing to achieve their inherently racist and supremacist dictates of the Talmud, a volume of rantings and ravings of diseased minds, that have brought man nothing but death, destruction and unnecessary human suffering.
So this thing is going to reach critical mass sooner rather than later, and the U.S., Britian, France will end up forcibly being evicted from the Middle East, and the whole Zionist project in shambles. Will they result to using unconventional weapons or not is debatable. But one thing for sure is their is an impressive array of forces across the region bearing down on Israels borders. And effectively surround Coalition bases all around the place, btw, perfect target practice for the Syrian Arab Army and auxiliaries, IRGC, Hasd Al- Shaabi, NDF, Hezbollah to artillery and missile attack at any given moment, all stopped at the present time from instantly attacking and destroying U.S. assets in the region s only because Mr. Khamenei doesn’t want to serve up the master disaster he has in store for the Coalition/Israel.
It will be conventional, as Israel has nukes, and Iran has ballistic missiles in the hundreds of thousands, of various uses, types, ranges, and warhead type, for example ‘incendiary’ warheads would play havoc a massive forest fires would erupt. Because the Israeli’s, looking to past fond memories of pine trees when they were in Europe, when they usurped the original inhabitants, the Palestinians, they embarked on a massive pine tree forest planting, encompassing large swaths of Israel. Pine trees turn into scrubs, very dry and dense, thus cause infernos like the ones that occasionally we see on international news. Iran has high explosive warheads, in numbers that every square foot/meter of Israel is marked for sustained ballistic missile bombardment in redundancy. So its mutually assured destruction.
The IDF soy boys, queers, and exchange students were taught a bitter lesson by Hezbollah in 2006, where 4500 Hezbollah ‘regulars’ routed 75,000 IDF soldiers and two armored battalions. Israel having total control of the skies and temporarily the seas, before Hezbollah almost sank the Israeli Navies flagship with a Chinese anti-ship missile that probably costed almost nothing to produce, or buy. Same for the ATGM Hezbollah shredded all those Merkava’s. Again, cheap to assemble, and easy to deploy. And Iran is setting up factories that make all these weapon systems all over the region. And the missiles are getting more and more accurate.
Recently Iran, Arabs and a large part of the Muslim world marked ‘ Al-Quds Day’. Where we have our dear hearts, and determination that Jerusalem is liberated and also, importantly, an injustice against humanity has been stopped.
China will build the weapons, the Russians provide the intel, technology, the Muslims , by way of the apparent leader of the Muslim world at present, that fully stands up to oppression, as commanded by our faith as Muslims, and has a good civilizational model for Muslims world wide, by resisting the U.S. hegemonic model and adapting to relying on themselves and forging major trade, cultural, and financial cooperation with China, who has never, in her history ever disrespected Islam, Muslims, waged war or atrocities on Muslim majority countries, like the west, at the behest of international Talmud Jews.
The future is with China, and its high time the Muslim world start leaning in that direction. Pakistan is, they got the very lucrative CPEC Chinese-Pakistan Economic Corridor, an ambitious 50 billion dollar link up of China and Pakistan, as the BRI heads west. Just early this month, the first China – Iran rail express/cargo tain left China, a trip thaqt will take 14 days, instead of thrice as long by water. Poor Jew lead , cash-strapped India is just looking on with envy. Still mired in entrenched poverty of 1 billion people, while China has lifted 850 million people out of poverty since 1980’s.
Anyways, peace, and justice. A Sunni Muslim. Arab American.
Another fine article!
“This is not to mention the stigma of his photos that portray him as an angry man with a frowning face, and they are quite easy to Google.”
I was working for Radio France International and writing an internet story on al-Sadr. A posh English journalist laughingly insisted that I use one of those scowling photos of him. I told him that is totally racist, Islamophobic and biased (but in a typical guy way of speaking), and used a photo of Sunni-Shiite collaboration instead. There are not many journalists wiling, and far more who are not even inclined, to do that.
So you are right about this “stigma” – this journalist clown had no idea about Al-Sadr or what he stood for or certainly about his father. All he knew was a scowling photo in the middle of shouting…and that’s what people have been ingrained to believe about Al-Sadr.
The point is: everybody can look terrible in a number of photos, but the bias against Al-Sadr has always been total. From what I can see he seems like the charismatic leader who can unify Iraq, and the fact that he’s even close to being such a figure makes me amazed he has hasn’t been assassinated by the US.