[lbo-talk] Sistani, Elections, and Sectarianism (was Poll: They really don't want us there)

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 8/28/06, Michael Pugliese <michael.098762001 at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-hassan100305.htm
> Iraq Elections And The Liberal Elites:
> A Response To Noam Chomsky
>
> By Ghali Hassan
>
> 10 March, 2005
> Countercurrents.org
>
> In a recent opinion piece, Naom Chomsky writes, "In Iraq, the January
> elections were successful and praiseworthy. However, the main success
> is being reported only marginally: The United States was compelled to
> allow them to take place. That is a real triumph, not of the
> bomb-throwers, but of
> non-violent resistance by the people, secular as well as Islamist, for
> whom Grand Ayatollah Al Sistani is a symbol" (Khaleej Times Online, 4
> March 2005). Mr. Chomsky is either completely out of touch with
> reality in Iraq, or simply ignorant of the legitimate rights of the
> Iraqi people to self-determination.
> <SNIP>
> Interviewer:
> Bernard Gwertzman, Consulting Editor
> Interviewee:
> Fouad Ajami, M. Khadduri Prof. of Middle Eastern Studies, Paul H.
> Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins
> University
> >...For our part, we Americans overcame the fear of the Shiite
> bogeyman that has paralyzed American policy ever since the Iranian
> revolution of 1979. Ever since we made the acquaintance of radical
> Shiism, we've been afraid of the Shiites, and we've held our politics
> hostage to that fear. But we had to slay that dragon and set that
> bogeyman aside. And we had to trust democracy in Iraq; we had to trust
> the Shiites.
>
> The United States was lucky to have Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in
> Najaf preaching the necessity of voting.
<snip>
> Recent book on the Sh'ia, by Y. Nakash,
> http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/releases/m8127.html
>http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20030701faessay15402/yitzhak-nakash/the-shi-ites-and-the-future-of-iraq.html
<snip>
>Juan Cole on Sistani,
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A64131-2004Aug13?language=printer
> ...Sistani believes that the Shiites made a strategic error in 1920
> when they revolted against British colonial rule after World War I.
> The British turned to the minority Sunnis for support, ensconcing them
> in power for the rest of the century. Sistani believes that by showing
> patience, the Shiite majority can come to power in Iraq through the
> ballot box if it avoids alienating the Americans.

Really, Sistani has got to go.  He's said to be about 76 years old, so
it's about time that he kicked the bucket.

I understand why Ajami and his ilk thought that US-supervised
elections that had ethnically and religiously sectarian parties
compete with one another would be a great idea, for Washington thought
that the main obstacle to the establishment of a pro-Washington Iraqi
government would be Sunnis, a minority in Iraq, who were said to be
the main group from whom guerrillas and terrorists came.

What is odd is that such liberals and leftists as Cole and Chomsky
couldn't see that competitive elections among sectarian parties would,
well, exacerbate sectarianism.

Now, the media's portrayal of Iraq has changed, in accordance with the
change in US strategy on the Middle East, and the main problem in Iraq
is made out to be not Sunni guerrillas and terrorists but Shi'i
militias.  The power elite of Tel Aviv and Washington think: to solve
our problem in Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine, we have to do "regime
change" in Iran.  Since they never think that their problem is of
their own making, their logic is impeccable in their mind.
-- 
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>