A 24-hour ‘civil war’ trial in Iraq

Hundreds of supporters of Sadr raided the Presidential and Government Palace in the Green Zone in the capital Baghdad yesterday, and nearly 30 people lost their lives in the clash with the militia. Activists entered the buildings of rival Shiite organizations, set fire to some of them, and detained militia forces until Sadr’s announcement to end the protest today.

Muqtada es-Sadr, who emerged as the first party in the October 2019 elections and obtained the majority of seats in the Assembly, challenged the ethnic and sectarian political system established by the US after the invasion, and he announced that he would establish a government of reconciliation that would include all national parties, Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish. No matter how many votes they received, they were, however, accustomed to being attached to the government according to the quota system, and some faced obstacles from other Shiite groups directly affiliated with Iran. Led by Nuri al-Maliki, the Coordination Framework, using its effectiveness in the judiciary, passed the “two-thirds” decision, which made it impossible for Sadr to form a government. The Sadr group, which refused to agree with the Coordination Framework, resigned from the Parliament and turned to street protests. Sadr supporters, who held a protest in front of the Federal Supreme Court, which discussed the sit-in action in the Green Zone, the raid of the Parliament and the Presidency and the latest application to dissolve the Parliament, did not back down on the following three issues:

• We will not agree to a compromise that includes the “evil trio” (Nuri al-Maliki, Qays al-Hazeli and Ammar al-Hakim).
• Parliament shall be dissolved.
• Early elections shall be held.

Why did Sadr withdraw from politics?

While awaiting the decision of the Federal Supreme Court’s Assembly, Sadr announced that he had withdrawn from the political arena with a sudden decision, within 24 hours of the call “Let’s build a new Iraq without militias, uncontrolled weapons, violence, war, sectarianism, tried parties and sectarian quotas”. So what prompted Sadr to make this statement, which led many cities, especially Baghdad, to turn into battlefields?

The fact that the Shiite Taklid Merci Kazim al-Hairi called for Sadr supporters to follow the Iranian religious leader Ali Khamenei while he was retiring, citing health problems, was undoubtedly the most important factor that prompted Sadr to make this statement. The statement by Hairi, who is the second-ranking religious leader, is not commonplace, as it is not only a sign of disrespect for the biggest Taklid Merci Ayatollah Sistani, but also different from the usual practice of his colleagues, who normally leave the matter to the conscience of the people. Hairi, who had a very limited following apart from the Sadr movement, aimed to undermine Sadr’s legitimacy with this statement he made under pressure from Iran, according to some commentators.

However, Sadr movement is a political and social formation rather than a religious movement in the classical sense, which will be resolved with a fatwa of Hairi, which they follow as a religious authority. Therefore, Hairi’s statement does not seem to have affected Sadrists, except Sadr, who is known to be emotional. Moreover, it is also a mystery whether Sadr took this decision “emotionally” or whether he was at any stage of a grand plan. If someone comes out and says that they watched the trailer of what Sadr can do as a show of strength, there wouldn’t be too much of an objection.

The country done through a 24-hour hell

As a matter of fact, about an hour after Sadr’s decision, yesterday, thousands of Sadr supporters entered the Green Zone and stormed the Presidential Palace. Upon the entry of the Sadr Movement’s armed force Seraya es-Selam (Peace Brigades) into the Green Zone with heavy weapons, Prime Minister Kazimi canceled its routine program, while the Joint Operations Command declared a nationwide curfew ‘until further notice’. Hashd al-Shaabi units within the Coordination Framework against the Peace Brigades, wearing the uniforms of the security forces, opened fire on the demonstrators. In the videos circulating on social media, it was seen that the demonstrators were targeted and killed by snipers. The clashes in which nearly 30 people, most of whom were pro-Sadr lost their lives and more than 150 were injured, continued today.

The Peace Brigades raided the offices and headquarters of the “evil trio” and especially Kays al-Hazeli, not only in Baghdad but also in many places such as Basra and Najaf. Sources close to Sadr said that around 300 headquarters and offices of Maliki’s Dawa Party, Kays al-Hazeli’s Asayib Ahl al-Haq Movement and Ammar al-Hakim’s National Wisdom Movement and their armed militias were raided and some set on fire.

Making a statement at noon today, Sadr asked his supporters, who were clashing on the street, to return to their homes within an hour. Sadr said, “I apologize to the Iraqi people for the conflicts. This revolution is not a revolution the very moment it ceases to be peaceful, thus I cannot call it a revolution. Down with such a revolution.” With Sadr’s call, the curfew in the country was lifted as his supporters returned to their homes.

On the other hand, it should be noted that while the country is going through a 24-hour hell, there has been no call for calm or any statement from the leaders of the Coordination Framework, who are candidates to form a government and run the country.

Why cannot Sadr get along with the “evil trio”?

Sadr’s animosity with Maliki, one of the leaders who formed the Coordination Framework, dates back to 2008. Maliki, together with the US troops, attacked the Iraqi army against Sadr’s Mahdi Army and smashed the Sadrists. Especially the massacres in Basra were engraved in the memory of the Sadr members.

The Asayib Ahl al-Haq Movement and its leader Hazeli, which was founded in 2006-07 by leaving the Mahdi Army, argued that Sadr’s resistance should be suppressed by force after the election. Asayib Ahl al-Haq, which is close to Iran and partially financed by Iran, also came to the fore as an organization that used disproportionate violence to the public in the protests in 2019.

Ammar al-Hakim, who has political weight, seems to be on Sadr’s list due to his inability and indecision to stand up to the Maliki-Hazeli duo, who advocated the use of harsh force against the Sardis.

Why is Sadr against Iran?

Sadr, who marked the recent history of Iraq with his anti-US sentiment, took part in the Shiite governments established after the occupation until 2018. Sadr, who had the most seats in the 2018 elections, which was similar to what happened in the October 2019 elections, could not form a government again due to the obstruction of other Shiite organizations. From the side of Sadr, who is also a Shiite, the picture was as follows: Shiite organizations, some of whom were directly led by Iran, and others close to Iran, blocked Sadr’s path.

While these were happening in the political arena, the economic crisis peaked in the country, which was struggling with problems after ISIS, and the names of politicians began to be mentioned with scandals such as corruption and bribery. All these developments led to the most extensive and widespread protest actions in Iraq after 2003. In addition to economic reasons such as unemployment, lack of basic infrastructure and lack of livelihood, the Iraqi people also took a stance against foreign interventions. The Sadr movement, which could not form a government in the parliament and went into opposition, rose to a position leading this popular movement from the grassroots, thanks to its power in the streets. Now, Sadr has developed a discourse that opposes not only the US intervention but also the total “foreign intervention”. However, the real “relation severing” development in Sadr was the US murder of Iranian Quds Force commander Major General Qassem Soleimani and Hashd al-Shaabi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis near Baghdad International Airport with a drone attack on January 3, 2020, and then a week later. Iran has also had missile attacks targeting the US presence in Iraq. In summary, Iraq, which is in political instability and economic bottleneck, has also become a piece of land where the USA and Iran openly share their trump cards.

When Sadr hosted Ismail Kaani, who replaced Qasem Soleimani as the leader of the Quds Force, he made his position clear by openly telling him, “Don’t interfere in Iraq.” After the 2021 elections, he refused to meet with the Quds Force commander, who came to Iraq to “mediate” between Sadr and the Coordination Framework.

Is Iran against Sadr?

Sadr’s opposition to foreign and therefore Iranian intervention is understandable. So, how much is Iran against Sadr? First of all, every country, if it has such an opportunity, wants political forces directly connected to it or closer to it to be in power. The same is true for Iran. However, it would not be the right approach to try to read Iran’s attitude through figures like Hazeli, who are close to Iran. Because in this case, it becomes impossible to explain the attitude of Hadi al Amiri, who is undoubtedly the closest name to Iran, towards Sadr. The leader of the Fatah Alliance, Amiri, the most important name of the Coordination Framework, is the name that broke the hard power insistence of the Maliki-Hazeli duo against Sadr. Amiri, who is also the leader of the Badr Organization, which was established directly by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards of Iran, is at the forefront of the policy based on reconciliation and dialogue towards the Sadr movement, and Sadr is careful to keep Amiri apart in his speeches where he criticizes the Coordination Framework. Putting all the facts at the bottom, Tehran’’s stance becomes even clearer: Putting up with Sadr rather than fighting Sadr. Tehran knows that a possible Shiite-Shiite conflict will cause great harm to itself along with Iraq.

But why?

It seems that Sadr, who refused reconciliation, is responsible for all these events, but the main reason is the freak system that the USA brought with the occupation. The insistence of the “corrupts”, who have been benefiting from this system for 20 years, to keep their lucrative positions. The fact that the faces whose corruption and failures are revealed deserve to rule. The endless love of armchairs for those who do not take the country a mile further, those who draw weapons against the people who object, those who leave the cities to terrorist organizations, and those who render the state apparatus inoperable…

Sadr is challenging this political order. However, his open-ended rhetoric, sudden decisions and his refusal to even sit at the table harm both Sadr himself, his movement and the Iraqi people. Sadr, who is an important and trusted figure not only for Shiites but also for Iraqis from other sects and ethnic backgrounds, can be successful not today, but in the near future, if he acts within the framework of a program, not with sudden decisions or sudden outbursts. Maybe Sadr should roll up his sleeves to overthrow the sectarian political system with a “non-sectarian political party”. The rule of a political party that includes Shiites, Sunnis, Turkmen and Kurds will automatically lift the system in which Sadr rebelled into the dusty pages of history. As Gandhi said, “If you want to change the world, start with yourself.”