Al-Sadr opposes al-Hakim's federalism plan
"Moqtada al-Sadr, the powerful Shiite Muslim cleric, remains adamantly opposed to a controversial plan to partition Iraq into a federation of three largely independent regions, a top Sadr aide said Monday.
'Iraq must not be divided,' said Riyadh Nouri, the aide to Sadr, who has opposed the U.S. presence in Iraq.
Sadr's objection to the plan remains steadfast despite a meeting Sunday night in Najaf between Sadr and his intermittent rival Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the prominent Shiite political party that is leading the push for federalism.
. . . The Sunnis fear the creation of a predominantly Shiite region in the south of Iraq that would resemble the largely independent zone controlled by the Kurds in the north. The Sunnis would be left with swaths of the country devoid of the oil reserves in the other regions." [1]
"Baha al-Araji, a Shiite member of Parliament from Mr. Sadr’s political movement, which controls about 30 seats in Parliament, said the movement would not support the bill or its reading next week.
'We believe that this draft does not serve the interest of Iraq now,' he said in an interview on Monday afternoon.
'It is better to discuss it after the withdrawal of the occupation,' he added, referring to the 138,000 American troops in Iraq. 'Discussing this subject will increase disharmony with our Sunni brothers, so we should have more time so that Iraqi people can understand the real meaning of federalism.'
But other Shiite members of Parliament, mostly from the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a powerful party with close ties to Iran, said they would press a reading of the bill next week regardless of whether other Shiite political parties supported it." [2]
So is it the lack of oil for the Sunnis or federalism itself that al-Sadr and the Sunnis oppose? If it's lack of oil, then that seems like something that could be negotiated. If it's federalism itself, then that could be more complicated.
I support federalism, based largely as a potential solution to the ongoing sectarian violence between Sunnis and reportedly renegade forces of al-Sadr's militia. The Kurds with their semi-autonomous region in the north have relative peace and prosperity and the rest of the country could possibly follow a similar path if given the opportunity.
sources
[1] The Washington Post. Sadr Holds Out Against Plan to Divide Iraq: Cleric's Bloc Breaks With Other Shiite Groups to Back Sunnis in Parliamentary Boycott. September 12, 2006.
[2] The New York Times. Hussein Trial Resumes; Sectarian Attacks Continue in Streets. September 12, 2006.
related postings
[1] Lebanese Christians support decentralization . . . for Lebanon. (September 11, 2006)
[2] Al-Sadr party member does not object to federalism, but not for awhile. (September 09, 2006)
posted: tuesday, september 12, 2006, 6:01 AM ET
'Iraq must not be divided,' said Riyadh Nouri, the aide to Sadr, who has opposed the U.S. presence in Iraq.
Sadr's objection to the plan remains steadfast despite a meeting Sunday night in Najaf between Sadr and his intermittent rival Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the prominent Shiite political party that is leading the push for federalism.
. . . The Sunnis fear the creation of a predominantly Shiite region in the south of Iraq that would resemble the largely independent zone controlled by the Kurds in the north. The Sunnis would be left with swaths of the country devoid of the oil reserves in the other regions." [1]
"Baha al-Araji, a Shiite member of Parliament from Mr. Sadr’s political movement, which controls about 30 seats in Parliament, said the movement would not support the bill or its reading next week.
'We believe that this draft does not serve the interest of Iraq now,' he said in an interview on Monday afternoon.
'It is better to discuss it after the withdrawal of the occupation,' he added, referring to the 138,000 American troops in Iraq. 'Discussing this subject will increase disharmony with our Sunni brothers, so we should have more time so that Iraqi people can understand the real meaning of federalism.'
But other Shiite members of Parliament, mostly from the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a powerful party with close ties to Iran, said they would press a reading of the bill next week regardless of whether other Shiite political parties supported it." [2]
So is it the lack of oil for the Sunnis or federalism itself that al-Sadr and the Sunnis oppose? If it's lack of oil, then that seems like something that could be negotiated. If it's federalism itself, then that could be more complicated.
I support federalism, based largely as a potential solution to the ongoing sectarian violence between Sunnis and reportedly renegade forces of al-Sadr's militia. The Kurds with their semi-autonomous region in the north have relative peace and prosperity and the rest of the country could possibly follow a similar path if given the opportunity.
sources
[1] The Washington Post. Sadr Holds Out Against Plan to Divide Iraq: Cleric's Bloc Breaks With Other Shiite Groups to Back Sunnis in Parliamentary Boycott. September 12, 2006.
[2] The New York Times. Hussein Trial Resumes; Sectarian Attacks Continue in Streets. September 12, 2006.
related postings
[1] Lebanese Christians support decentralization . . . for Lebanon. (September 11, 2006)
[2] Al-Sadr party member does not object to federalism, but not for awhile. (September 09, 2006)
posted: tuesday, september 12, 2006, 6:01 AM ET
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home