Not to burst any delusional bubbles at the US Dept of State.but Shi'ites ARE aligned with Hizballah. And so are most Sunnis. Bruce http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-menon9aug09,0,1714310.story?coll=l a-opinion-rightrail >From the Los Angeles Times
Kiss Iraq Goodbye if Shiites Align With Hezbollah How fallout from Lebanon could choke a fragile U.S.-Muslim alliance. By Rajan Menon RAJAN MENON is a professor of international relations at Lehigh University and a fellow at the New America Foundation. August 9, 2006 AS ISRAEL and Hezbollah continue to trade deadly blows, the Bush administration may have to brace itself for the possibility that the shock waves from the war in Lebanon could wreck its partnership with Iraq's Shiites and make Iraq's fragmentation well-nigh unavoidable. Anger over Israel's bombing of Lebanon has reached Iraq, whose population is roughly two-thirds Shiite. Muqtada Sadr, the firebrand Shiite cleric who heads the Al Mahdi militia, was first to rail against the Israeli bombardment and Washington's fulsome support of it. He continues to do so. On Friday, thousands (estimates range from 14,000 to 100,000) of pro-Sadr Shiites flooded Baghdad's streets, chanting slogans of solidarity with Hezbollah and denouncing Israel and the United States. Sadr is driven by more than religious solidarity with Hezbollah. He also seeks to outflank moderate Shiite leaders, particularly Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, perhaps even Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, and he knows that the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon could boost his already substantial political stock. Maliki and Sistani are well aware of this, of course, and they are not about to let that happen. They view Sadr as a dangerous demagogue and, unlike him, favor a continued American military presence in Iraq. But Sadr's rabble-rousing gambit has left them no choice but to follow his script. Not surprisingly, then, Maliki was quick to condemn Israeli attacks in the wake of Sadr's statements. Other senior Shiite clerics and Iraq's main Shiite parties, Dawa and the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, weighed in, expressing solidarity with Lebanon and lambasting Israel. After some delay, Sistani, by far the most influential Shiite leader, also pilloried Israel's "flagrant aggression" and "outrageous oppression" and, while not specifically naming the United States, accused the world of "turning a blind eye" to Lebanese suffering. After Israel's July 30 attack on a residential building in Qana, which killed at least 28 people (half of whom were said to be children), Sistani issued a fatwa condemning the "dastardly crime" by the "Israeli enemy." He called for an immediate cease-fire and warned that Muslims "will not excuse parties that put obstacles in the way of this." (What he left unsaid, but that was nevertheless clear to all who read the fatwa, was that it is the United States that opposed the cease-fire for several weeks in hopes of giving Israel time to destroy Hezbollah's bastions in southern Lebanon.) What remains unclear is whether a competitive process will begin, with Shiite leaders each ratcheting up anti-Israeli statements. That could produce a breach with the United States - one that could have lasting consequences. Shiite leaders cannot continue condemning Israel's war in Lebanon without coming out against the United States. That's because, in Arab eyes, American arms supplies and political backing are what enable Israel to persist with its military campaign. AN OPEN RIFT between the Shiites and the United States is hardly inevitable. But it's certainly possible if the war in Lebanon drags on and if Iran starts stirring the pot, which it can, given its substantial sway with Iraqi Shiite parties. With Gen. John P. Abizaid testifying before the Senate last week that Iraq's sectarian violence is getting worse, the United States can ill afford to forfeit Shiite support. It is one thing for the United States to have Sadr as an enemy; it's altogether different to lose the support of moderate Shiite leaders such as Maliki and Sistani, without whom the U.S. will be unable to hold Iraq together. U.S. forces may still remain in Iraq, but their nation-building assignment, already near-impossible, will have become truly impossible. What's worse, an unraveling of the U.S.-Shiite partnership would inevitably affect the calculus of Iraq's Kurds, possibly prompting them to declare independence. Turkey might well intervene, turning an Iraqi civil war into a regional war that would make Washington's problems, hard as it is to imagine, much worse. Bush administration rhetoric notwithstanding, the U.S. would be forced to fold its tent and go home. The good news is that there's still time to avoid this scenario by implementing a cease-fire in Lebanon. That would end the carnage and prevent Hezbollah from attaining heroic status among Iraqi Shiites. FAIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with "Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976. The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
