Juan Cole: Sistani Insists on Elections

[Barrett808]

Al-Zaman: Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani called on Wednesday for general elections to be held at the scheduled time (January 2005). He made the statement during a meeting of the Shiite leadership held in his office in Najaf. Present were Muhammad Said al-Hakim, Bashir Najafi, and Ishaq al-Fayyad in adition to Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq. Sistani underlined the necessity of "tossing out conflicts and emphasizing a closing of ranks, as well as intensifying efforts to create complete national unity in order to confront the danger that menaces the country." Sistani called on the caretaker Iraqi government to take measures to release prisoners whose guilt has not been established, and to work to rebuild the cities that were damaged by the acts of violence and clashes. He asked for compensation to be given to those harmed, especially in the city of Najaf. He also called on the government to "treat problems with calm and wisdom instead of resorting to violence." (All this according to Deutsche Press Agentur). Al-Hayat says Sistani called on Allawi to "stop the bloodbath." He further insisted on more popular participation and on "filling in the gaps in the laws governing elections and parties" that were enacted by US civil administrator Paul Bremer and his appointed Interim Governing Council.

There are rumors that PM Iyad Allawi had wanted to storm the shrine of Ali in late August, and had been displeased with Sistani's intervention to promote a non-violent end of the crisis.

In fact, the Iraqi government did let 750 prisoners go from Abu Ghuraib Prison as part of a commitment to process the prisoners there one way or another.

Sistani's quite resonable demand for elections is nevertheless among the greatest dangers facing the Allawi government and the Americans. It will be extremely difficult actually to hold the elections on time. But Sistani believes only such elections can produce a legitimate government, and he already accepted a six-month delay. If the elections are not held, and if Sistani begins to fear they won't be held soon, he may well call the masses into the streets. That could lead to an overthrow of Allawi and an expulsion of the Americans. Keep your eye on February and March of 2005.

(more)

http://www.juancole.com/2004_09_01_juancole_archive.html#109530515235243454

[burythehatchet]

1. Meet the new Shah

just like the old Shah

[Larkspur]

2. You mean Saddam not Shah

Shah was out puppet of Iran, not Iraq.

[burythehatchet]

4. no , I wrote what I meant

what's playing out in Iraq is similar in many ways to the overthrow of Mossadegh in favor of the Shah. Same relationaships with the CIA, same objectives, its a fuckin broken record.

[MrPrax]

6. Unintelligble...

The Shah was the Puppet...Iran actually had a democracy.
Saddam was a supported client...Bremer/Negroponte/Chambli/Alwarii were puppets...

But I get your point...since they were occupied British colonies that the US wants to assume control over...then Your Right on the similarities...

[Malikshah]

7. Just to clarify the Shah issue

Shah is Persian for King
Malik is Arabic for King

Sistani is Arab

As for the whole puppet thing

The Shah of Iran was not the US puppet--he used us as much as we used him.

Same goes for Saddam.

Same will go for whoever "rules" Iraq.

[daleo]

3. You can't postpone elections forever

It may be difficult to hold elections, but I don't know that constant postponements will improve the situation. I can only see that making things worse - without elections there can be no hope of a government with any kind of legitimacy, short of what comes out of a civil war. In that case, the legitimacy would simply be the legitimacy of "facts on the ground".

Sistani obviously thinks his side will do well in any elections, which makes sense as they are the largest group.

Hold elections, then get the hell out. That is the only solution I can see, even though it won't be pretty. But it can't be worse than the alternative of putting in a puppet government and sticking around to be killed, two per day for the next ten years. Or worse.

[bemildred]

5. I don't know that they have until January.

And if the idea that you can have meaningful elections
in the midst of chaos is stupid in Afghanistan, it is even
more stupid in Iraq. We need to end the occupation, and then
the Iraqis can decide if they want elections, maybe with some
form of peace-keeping help, or a civil war. But in any case
the emphasis will be off killing foreigners and kicking the
occupying forces out.

The Ayat stays on his message, in any case.