Sadr, Maliki, and Powell … oh my

November 29, 2006

And here I thought Iraq couldn’t get any less stable. It can.

A bloc of Iraqi lawmakers and cabinet ministers allied with militia leader Moqtada al-Sadr launched a boycott of their government duties Wednesday to protest Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s decision to attend a summit in Jordan with President Bush.

“We announce the suspension of our participation in government and parliament,” said Nasar al-Rubaie, the leader of Sadr’s parliamentary bloc. “We gave a promise last Friday that we will suspend our participation if the Prime Minister met with Bush and today [Wednesday] we are doing it as a Sadrist bloc.”

In an earlier statement, the 30 lawmakers and five cabinet ministers loyal to Sadr said their action was necessary because the Amman summit constituted a “provocation to the feelings of the Iraqi people and a violation of their constitutional rights.”

Two quick points: one, al-Rubaie said al-Sadr loyalists were not officially pulling out of the government, which would all but guarantee the collapse of Iraq’s unity government, but have instead “suspended” their participation in the government. Presumably, they could come back, though it’s not entirely clear what they might request in return.

And two, if Maliki’s meeting with the president was the problem, al-Sadr loyalists might as well have waited a bit before launching their boycott — Bush and Maliki did not meet today. (thanks to G.D. for the tip)

President Bush’s high-stakes summit with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was put off Wednesday after public disclosure of U.S. doubts about his capacity to control sectarian warfare. The White House said the two leaders would meet on Thursday.

The postponement was announced shortly after Bush arrived here for talks with Jordan’s King Abdullah II and al-Maliki. Bush’s meeting with the king was to proceed on schedule.

White House counselor Dan Bartlett denied that the move was a snub by al-Maliki or was related to the leak of a White House memo questioning the prime minister’s capacity for controlling violence in Iraq.

And since the White House is always forthcoming in explaining unexpected Middle Eastern developments, I’m sure everyone will take Bartlett at this word. Well, almost everyone.

As for the Bush gang’s political pushback against the “civil war” label, Colin Powell entered the fray today. Not surprisingly, he didn’t back the White House.

Speaking with CNN reporter Hala Gorani in Dubai today, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Iraq’s violence meets the standard of a civil war and thinks President Bush needs to acknowledge that. According to Gorani’s report, Powell said if he were heading the State Department right now, he would recommend that the Bush administration adopt that language “in order to come to terms with the reality on the ground.”

I’m delighted that Powell has the courage of his convictions. If he’d had them four years ago, Powell might have been able to make a difference.

As for Iraq’s neighbors, Iran continues to fill the leadership vacuum in ways that won’t make the White House at all happy.

It’s just another day in the Mess O’ Potamia.

I doubt this will put a dent in al-Sadr’s campaign of kidnapping and murder. He won’t have all those official duties to get in his way.

Sometimes I get so fed up with Bush that I forget that there are some real shitheels vying for power in Iraq.

  • You know I really didn’t think Sadr was going to “pull-out” of the Iraqi Government with 20,000 American troops in Baghdad just waiting to level the Sadr militia 😉

    And don’t forget what al-Maliki loses from support from Sadr he could make up with support from other parties in the parliament.

    The Sunnis say?

  • Way to support an embattled leader. Publicly leak documents making him look like a fool and put him in a position where is own government is split against him. Then downplay the whole meeting as a social visit. I can hear Bush now … “Hey Nouri, how’s your family doing? Anyone blowed up lately?”

  • And don’t forget what al-Maliki loses from support from Sadr he could make up with support from other parties in the parliament.

    The Sunnis say?

    Much easier said than done.

  • “If he’d had them four years ago, Powell might have been able to make a difference.”

    He might also have been called President Powell in 2008.

    What a maroon.

  • Maybe this is a warning flare for al-Maliki.

    It would be nice to know if this was declared before or after the meeting was pushed back.

    Either way, this is really making Bush look bad and then Powell right behind him.

    Powell is like one of the non-Nazi’s who decided to come out after the Nazi’s lost power. Well except for the fact that they would not have shot him for being a traitor.

    I am torn because on one hand I am glad he is finally speaking out, but on the other he is as guilty as the rest of them for pushing their rhetoric. He is going to get a pass because he had some sort of epiphany a couple of months ago. That is a text book definition of coward. Ranks right up their with the Justice Department. A 1000 days late and a half trillion dollars short.

    “History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.” – MLK

  • “Much easier said than done.” – Erik K

    Even easier to type on a liberal blog that al-Maliki is never going to see 😉

    I still believe that Boy George II is waiting for one thing before he cuts and runs from Iraq (he calls it that if we do it, I’ll call it that when he does it). And that is for the execution of Saddam. Once that is done, the fall of the al-Maliki government would just be an excuse for leaving…

    … which he will also do very badly, of course.

  • Well Prime Minister it’s nice of you to take a moment while being snubbed by the President of the United States to drop by TheCarpetbaggerReport and submit a comment. But I’ve got to say you seem to be doing a piss poor job of keeping that country together.

    Might it not be easier to just let the thing fly apart?

  • Muqtada al Sadr is a particularly vile little thug who should have been dealt with – with extreme prejudice, as they say – a long time ago. I don’t believe there is any chance for anything resembling a settlement as long as he remains alive and his army remains intact.

  • A favorite time for a coup is when the leader is out of the country. Maybe al-Maliki put off his meeting with Bush to see if something like that happened while he was gone. Then he could use the meeting to ask for asylum.

    The sad part is I’m not 100% joking. Al-Maliki may indeed be waiting a day to see just how far al-Sadr will go in his absence.

  • Walking out is a standard tactic in Iraqi negotiation. You storm out of the room to make your point and a few days later you come back with some coaxing. I would read too much into it at this point.

  • Moqtada al-Sadr is only doing what the majority of Iraqis want. They want us out, and they want order restored. The ironic part is that no matter how bad he is, if he takes over it will be an improvement over the current level of carnage.

    Colin Powell had his chance at greatness, and he sold his chance for a vial of boogie-man powder, which he waved around to scare us with because he was the only Bush hack with any credibility left. Later he told us he had all kinds of qualms about the evidence, but kept it to himself for years. Because he was the “good soldier” we have lost almost 3,000 kids and the Iraqis lost untold tens of thousands. I wonder if he just recently realized it’s a civil war, or if he’s been holding back on that too?

    Sorry Colin, no credibility for you unless you come up with some tapes of Bush laughing about the WMDs… (oh wait, we already have those).

    Nevermind. Go to hell.

  • If the White House is seeking to pit moderate Shias, Kurds and Sunnis against the Sadr faction in hopes of somehow salvaging the situation in Iraq, the civil war there will only get worse. If U.S. forces in Baghdad crack down on militias in Sadr City, all hell will break loose across the country. It is in Iraq’s best interest to keep the Sadr faction in the government, instead of turning them into enemies.

  • Indeed, CB, it is another daily mess in Mess-‘O-Potamia. I wish Powell had asked Hanoi George about Maliki (“How’s you boy?”).

    I doubt many Americans are following the Maliki-Sadr soap opera closely, but I suspect the impression of Bush-as-Idiot is being reinforced every day.

  • “Looks like Rush Limpballs posts here using ‘Susan’ as his nom de plume.” – bubba

    Harsh Bubba!

    al Sadr is a thug but he is also about the only form of social service his ‘clients’ get, and they are the poorest and most disposessed of Iraqis. His army is also their only protection. Take him and his army out the Shia in Sadr City are Dead. Of course one could argue they deserve it for backing the effing death squads.

  • According to the teevee, Sadr’s army now numbers about 60,000 men, and they are armed to the teeth because Rummy the Genius decided to leave all of Saddam’s ammo dumps unguarded for weeks if not months after the invasion. So any thoughts that “taking him out” might be practical are pretty foolish. We might be able to kill him, but his army will go ballistic if we do. Since they have the home field advantage and Iranian backing, they probably have the ability to chase us out of the Green zone.

  • “in order to come to terms with the reality on the ground.”

    Why would they want to deal with reality now?

  • I recall that the U.S. was of a mind to grease Sadr a year or so ago, and that they even printed up broadsides claiming he had — wait for it — died trying to escape. Don’t know if that’s true, but the story was in a “respected” publication.

    What Rumsfeld and the neocons missed was Vietnam and the American Revolution. In the former, the VC learned how to get up close to fight. In the latter, Washington understood that, against one of the world’s most powerful armies, he had to fight a war of attrition. The same things happened in Afghanistan vs. the Ruskis and won. Did Rumsfeld and the Bushies notice? Hell, no!

  • I’d say the Maliki stategy sounds pretty solid……..Some of you folks need to ease up a bit………….Hate is bad for your health………………..

    • Comments are closed.