I assume you ask in relation to the recent execution of Sadam? It's somewhat ironic that the guards at Saddam's execution were Sadrites, The Sadrites effectively run the place, and that's why the problem is so intractable. I'd bet plenty of the Iraqis present were Sadrites.
We are talking about Iranian Poltics in the post Saddam vacuum. Iran's effectivaly has a takeover plan for Iraq via the SCIRI political party, under agreements brokered by Ambassador Khalilzad. Muqtada Al-Sadr's Mahdi Army are perhaps being coloured by the US as the good guys - They are the Sadrites - and thier new goodness comes from thier opposition to Iran.
Last June, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki declared a state of emergency in Basra because of clashes between rival Shiite militias like the Badr Brigades and Muqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi Army.
The Shiite fracas boils down to a tussle between mainstream forces -- represented by the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) and Hizb al-Dawah (HD) -- and al Fadhila, the No. 4 party in the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA).
Al-Sadr's movement, pursuing its own interests, cautiously backs al-Fadhila. This means the intra-Shiite rift will evolve into one between pro-Iranian Shia and Iraqi nationalist Shia.
Perhaps Iran's motive in stirring up trouble among the Iraqi Shia is to make it easier to manipulate them for Tehran's interests. Conversely, the perception that they are resisting Iran is a tool some of the Shia are using to advance their interests. There are limits to this approach because the Shia know they are not yet in a position to stand on their own.
The al-Sadrites, who have 32 parliamentary seats -- the largest share controlled by the Shiite bloc -- would love to exploit this melee between the central government and the Basra provincial government to their advantage. Al-Sadr knows that although
his group is very influential in its ability to steer decisions, it does not represent the mainstream of the Shiite political spectrum. After all, the al-Sadrites are latecomers to the alliance, which has long been dominated by SCIRI and HD.
The radical Shia leader would like to enhance his group's stature as a national group.
Then there is the intense rivalry between SCIRI and the al-Sadrites - for al-Sadr to consolidate his recent gains, he
must weaken the position of SCIRI, which controls the leadership of the Shiite alliance.
2006-12-31 14:16:54
·
answer #1
·
answered by DAVID C 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Unhappy Sardines.
2007-01-01 04:52:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sad people who always think they are right. Actually they are followers of Muqtada Al-Sadr.
2006-12-31 13:45:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by Birdman 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
David C said all I could think of, and then some.
Good show, David.
--That Cheeky Lad
2006-12-31 15:22:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Charles-CeeJay_UK_ USA/CheekyLad 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
no idea, never heard of the word, until now.
2006-12-31 13:45:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋