Spencer Ackerman of the New Republic‘s Iraq’d weblog hits the nail on the head:
Congratulations, President Bush. You have turned a marginal enemy, the thuggish and anti-democratic cleric Moqtada Al Sadr, into a symbol of Shia aspirations in a free Iraq. . . . on March 28, we shut down Sadr’s inflammatory newspaper, which despite its fiery rhetoric has reportedly not led to any attacks on U.S. forces or rival Iraqis, and gave Sadr the image he has desired: the mighty United States squaring off against a defiant Iraqi and pious Muslim.
Even better for al-Sadr’s posturing purposes, he’s got the field all to himself, as
Reuters reports:
Radical Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has turned down an appeal by Iraq’s powerful Shi’ite Muslim establishment to renounce violence, an aide to a leading cleric said on Monday.
An aide to Mohammad Bahr al-Uloum, a member of the U.S.-installed Iraqi Governing Council, told Reuters Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, regarded as Iraq’s most powerful cleric and a rival of Sadr’s, supported the appeal.
Sistani has made declarations in the past calling on Iraqis to respect state institutions and public order. He has not spoken directly on the violence involving Sadr’s supporters, but he is expected to make a statement in the next few days.
“The Hawza (seminary) is unanimous on this,” the aide said.
“We asked Moqtada (al-Sadr) to stop resorting to violence, occupying public buildings and other actions that make him an outlaw. He insists on staying on the same course that could destroy the nation.”
With the established ayatollahs (like Sistani) staying on the fence, al-Sadr is by default the sole spokesman for Shiites who are angry at the United States. As a result, even those who might otherwise merely think of Moqtada as a thug and a gangster (which he is, to a large extent) find them sympathizing with or even supporting him.
Col Lounsbury, a businessman in Amman who deals with Iraqis and keeps up with Arab satellite TV coverage, confirms this:
. . . (a) my sense from speaking with Iraqi shi’a is there is a certain respect for his cojones and [that] like the idea of standing up to the Americans, even as Sistani’s more subtle game is appreciated, (b) there is a significant percentage that support Sadr on a gut level.
Jeffrey Gettleman in the
New York Times strikes a similar note:
Though Mr. Sadr is not an ayatollah, or top cleric, he has a devoted following. Part of his appeal is his youth. The other part is his militancy. While other Shiite clerics have pressed for moderation, Mr. Sadr has openly rejected the occupation. His newspaper, Al Hawza, was closed last week after American authorities accused it of printing lies that incited violence. That began a cycle of demonstrations that culminated in widespread bloodshed on Sunday.
“He is one of the only who is not afraid,” said Falah Hussein, a laborer. “He refuses the occupation. Totally. That’s why we like him.”
Does the tone of that last comment sound familiar? Wasn’t there another case recently of someone inspiring fervent support by standing up in opposition to Bush when others seemed intimidated into moderation and restraint?
Moqtada al-Sadr is the Howard Dean of Iraq.
And that, in fact, may explain what Grand Ayatollah Sistani’s position is on all this. He’s angling to play the John Kerry role, waiting patiently to take advantage of the passion that al-Sadr has inspired after Moqtada himself has flamed out.
