Method in Sistani's muscle
flexing By Ehsan Ahrari
Just as
the United States thought it was over a major hurdle
when the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) signed that
country's interim constitution on March 7, Grand
Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani threw a
wrench in the very
process of transfer of sovereignty due to take place on
June 30. In a letter to senior United Nations official
Lakhdar Brahimi sent last Friday, the Shi'ite leader
stated that the interim constitution - also known as the
transitional provisional law - was a recipe for the
breakup of the country, and that he would not
participate in upcoming meetings with UN officials if
the world body endorsed it. The Bush administration is
left, once again, to figure out its next move. This
muscle-flexing by the astute ayatollah is not without a
purpose, though.
The interim constitution
establishes a three-member presidency, one president and
two deputy presidents. The president is likely to be a
Shi'ite Arab, and the deputies will be a Sunni Arab and
a Kurd. At the time of the signing of the constitution,
Sistani made clear his disapproval of two clauses: one
that gives effective veto power over a permanent
constitution to Kurds, and one which enables deputy
presidents to reject the decisions of a president. In
fact, the Shiite members of the 25-member IGC stalled
the signing ceremony due to Sistani's opposition. In
addition, Sistani considers the three-member executive
arrangement as institutionalizing sectarianism and
ethnicity in the future political process of Iraq. Thus,
his conclusion is that the new constitution "will lead
to a dead end", that it will put the country "in an
unstable situation", and that it "could lead to
partition and division".
The United States'
backing of the interim constitution and Sistani's
opposition to it, in reality, represent two visions of
Iraq that are inherently contradictory and equally
incompatible. As a Western pluralistic democracy, the US
operates on the age-old principle of "unity of
diversity". In Sistani's view, the Coalition Provisional
Authority's promotion of diversity in Iraq inexorably
leads to diminution of the numerical strength of the
Shi'ites. To be precise, the three-member executive
branch, instead of guaranteeing the majority status of
the Shi'ites of Iraq in the future governmental
arrangement, assigns them a lesser status - ie, as
merely one among three major sects, even though Shi'ites
formulate over 60 percent of the population.
Whether the US wishes to lessen the status of
the Shi'ites or not, it is very likely that by
pluralizing the Iraqi presidency, Washington wants to
ensure that a Shi'ite-dominated Iraq would not become
another Islamic republic. So one cannot dismiss the
perspective of Sistani that the US's motives regarding
this issue are not exactly benign. Why else would it
elevate the status of the Sunni Arabs and the Kurds by
giving them one seat each in the deputy presidency? The
seeds of mistrust on both sides are about to give birth
to a bitter harvest of even more mistrust. Political
conditions seem to be ripe for the outbreak of major
Shi'ite violence in Iraq.
Iraqi leaders intend
to ask the UN to legitimize the transfer of sovereignty
by passing a resolution. Sistani is afraid that the Bush
administration will exploit that opportunity to insert
the endorsement of the interim constitution into such a
resolution. That is why he has made it clear that any UN
approval of the interim constitution would lead to his
boycotting a meeting with its officials, who are about
to arrive in Iraq to craft the interim authority that
will take over power from the Coalition Provision
Authority at the end of June.
While the UN
envoys are pondering the modalities of their response to
the ayatollah, the Bush administration is facing
increased complexities in its own endeavors to define
the future role of the international community in Iraq.
The electoral defeat of the Jose Maria Aznar's
government in Spain has increased the necessity of the
UN endorsement of the interim constitution so that
Spanish forces aren't withdrawn from Iraq. That was the
condition stipulated by the incoming socialist
government of Spain. As the Bush administration comes
under increased scrutiny and criticism over its handling
of the "war on terrorism" both inside and outside the
US, the continued presence of Spanish troops in Iraq has
become of considerable symbolic significance.
But don't expect any help from Sistani for the
Bush administration and its predicament related to Iraq
or the global "war on terrorism". He is fully focused on
using the US's own predilections for democracy to ensure
a legitimate and deserving dominant role for Iraq's
Shi'ites in a future democratic Iraq.
Ehsan Ahrari, PhD, is an Alexandria,
Virginia, US-based independent strategic analyst.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
wrench in the very
process of transfer of sovereignty due to take place on
June 30. In a letter to senior United Nations official
Lakhdar Brahimi sent last Friday, the Shi'ite leader
stated that the interim constitution - also known as the
transitional provisional law - was a recipe for the
breakup of the country, and that he would not
participate in upcoming meetings with UN officials if
the world body endorsed it. The Bush administration is
left, once again, to figure out its next move. This
muscle-flexing by the astute ayatollah is not without a
purpose, though. 
