| |
Why the US should stick with the
Shi'ites
By Erich Marquardt
In an effort to limit the perception that the
United States is occupying Iraq, Washington plans on
transferring power to an Iraqi provisional government by
mid-2004. As part of the Bush administration's power
transfer plan, US and Iraqi Governing Council (IGC)
officials will choose caucus members from each of Iraq's
18 provinces, who would then be responsible for electing
individuals to sit in the country's new national
assembly.
The national assembly will elect a
provisional government to take power from the US-led
coalition on July 1. This provisional government will
then draft a new constitution to be ready for national
elections some time in 2005. This plan virtually ensures
that US officials and their handpicked IGC members will
be able to shape future political developments in Iraq
by having input on the makeup of the national assembly
and the provisional government. However, in recent
weeks, Washington's plans for the future transfer of
power in Iraq have encountered a wave of resistance.
The most significant resistance to this plan was
offered in a recent edict delivered by Grand Ayatollah
Ali al-Sistani, the most prominent Shi'ite religious
leader in Iraq. Al-Sistani does not accept the
proposition that US and IGC members should have such a
strong influence over the makeup of the national
assembly. Al-Sistani said: "No one has the right to
appoint the members of the constitutional assembly. We
see no alternative but to go back to the people for
choosing their representatives."
Much to the
dismay of US officials, al-Sistani's demand for
democratic elections to decide who will sit on the
national assembly is an effort to give more power to
Iraq's large Shi'ite Muslim community and less power to
the US-led coalition. Iraqi Shi'ites make up 60 percent
of the country's population, yet they have always been
marginalized by Iraq's Sunni population who have
functioned historically as the ruling class.
Al-Sistani is certainly aware that the best
possible outcome for Iraq's Shi'ite majority would be if
general elections were held to decide major political
issues, such as the makeup of the national assembly;
this would ensure significant Shi'ite influence over
substantive content of Iraq's constitution. Abdul Aziz
al-Hakim, a Shi'ite cleric and member of the IGC, agreed
with al-Sistani's concerns, arguing that current US
plans diminish "the role of the Iraqi people in the
process of transferring authority to Iraqis".
Al-Sistani's disagreement over US plans is
causing a serious dilemma for Bush administration
policymakers. The difficulty with complying with
al-Sistani's demands is that if Iraq were allowed to
follow a thoroughly democratic path, it is likely that
the new government would run counter to US interests. On
the other hand, al-Sistani is too influential of a
figure to ignore. Since he is the religious leader of
most of Iraq's 15 million Shi'ites, he has the ability
to completely disrupt civil society by simply calling
his religious community to action.
Al-Sistani
also has the support of other influential Shi'ite
leaders in Iraq; in addition to al-Hakim, Grand
Ayatollah Mohammed Taqi al-Modaresi, who is based in
Karbala, argued on Tuesday that the national assembly
should be elected through national elections rather than
through regional caucuses. Al-Modaresi gave a strong
message to the US-led coalition: "I am concerned about
increasing frustration among Iraqis and I am telling
everyone that they are a peaceful people. But it will be
a different story if they run out of patience. I fear
sedition."
Al-Modaresi's warning should be
heeded. Iraqi Shi'ites have largely accepted the US-led
occupation thus far. Their acceptance stems from the
fact that if Iraq were to have democratic elections,
Shi'ite leaders would take power simply because of their
majority status. If US officials try to avoid this
outcome - such as by rejecting al-Sistani and other
Shi'ite leaders' recent demands - the Shi'ite community
could quickly resort to violence, fearing a return to
political disenfranchisement. Needless to say, if the
huge Iraqi Shi'ite population were to revolt, it would
cause the situation on the ground to deteriorate rapidly
for US-led forces.
It seems then that Washington
must acquiesce, or at least seriously consider
al-Sistani's demands. Washington really has no
alternative Shi'ite leader to turn to. The Shi'ite
leader seemingly most in line with Washington's desires
was the head of the Supreme Council for Islamic
Revolution in Iraq, Muhammad Baqir al-Hakim, who was
killed in a bombing in Najaf on August 29.
Another powerful Shi'ite leader in Iraq is
Moqtada al-Sadr, an outspoken critic of the US
occupation and son of Ayatollah Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr,
a highly venerated cleric assassinated in 1999. Moqtada
al-Sadr, whose base is the al-Kufa mosque in Najaf, has
been urging the creation of a Shi'ite guerrilla army. If
the Americans are faced with a decision of choosing to
support either al-Sistani or al-Sadr, they will have to
turn to the former.
Yet if Washington is willing
to support al-Sistani's calls for democratic elections,
it could lead to a constitution with strong religious
undertones, possibly threatening the secularism of Iraqi
society. Shi'ite leaders may also ease diplomatic
relations with neighboring Iran, a country ruled and
populated by Shi'ites. If Iraq and Iran were to greatly
improve relations, it could threaten to destabilize the
current balance of power in the Middle East. The Bush
administration may consider this result inexpiable.
William Beeman, the director of Middle East Studies at
Brown University in Rhode Island, recently warned:
"Washington may consider it untenable, but Washington
will be unable to prevent such a development if they
support true democracy in Iraq."
There still is
hope in Washington that al-Sistani will remain an
acceptable figurehead. Al-Sistani recently assured
Washington that his proposed version of a new government
in Iraq would not model the theocracy found in
neighboring Iran, but that "authority [in Iraq] will be
for the people who will get the majority of votes". If
the Bush administration wants to create an Iraqi
government in line with US interests, it will have to
work with al-Sistani and consider his demands.
Published with permission of the Power and
Interest News Report, an analysis-based
publication that seeks to provide insight into various
conflicts, regions and points of interest around the
globe. All comments should be directed to
content@pinr.com
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
