Who's ruling Iraq then?

[Adrian II]

From the New York Times yesterday:

BAGHDAD, April 2 — The most powerful Shiite cleric in Iraq has rejected an American-backed proposal to allow thousands of former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party to return to government service, an aide to the cleric said Monday.

The rejection by the cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, appears certain to fuel hostility between the majority Shiites and the former ruling Sunni Arabs, since many Sunni Arabs say they were unfairly purged from the government in the clampdown on the Baath Party.

The Americans say a partial reversal of the de-Baathification process, which began in 2003, is one of the most crucial steps the Iraqi government can take in wooing back disaffected Sunni Arabs and draining the Sunni-led insurgency of its zealotry. The White House has repeatedly told the Iraqi government that the process must be changed.

The latest proposal was announced by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and President Jalal Talabani on March 26 at the strong urging of Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, the senior American envoy to Iraq, who left his job the same day. American officials oversaw the drafting of the proposal.

So the issue is hotly debated between the non-elected American representatives in Iraq, an equally non-elected ayatollah and (if you look further down in the article) a non-elected go-between called Mr Chalabi.

Whoever is running that country, it is not the government.

[Soulforged]

Whoever is running that country, it is not the government.

At least not a democratic one...

[Odin]

From the New York Times yesterday:

BAGHDAD, April 2 — The most powerful Shiite cleric in Iraq has rejected an American-backed proposal to allow thousands of former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party to return to government service, an aide to the cleric said Monday.

The rejection by the cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, appears certain to fuel hostility between the majority Shiites and the former ruling Sunni Arabs, since many Sunni Arabs say they were unfairly purged from the government in the clampdown on the Baath Party.

The Americans say a partial reversal of the de-Baathification process, which began in 2003, is one of the most crucial steps the Iraqi government can take in wooing back disaffected Sunni Arabs and draining the Sunni-led insurgency of its zealotry. The White House has repeatedly told the Iraqi government that the process must be changed.

The latest proposal was announced by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and President Jalal Talabani on March 26 at the strong urging of Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, the senior American envoy to Iraq, who left his job the same day. American officials oversaw the drafting of the proposal.

So the issue is hotly debated between the non-elected American representatives in Iraq, an equally non-elected ayatollah and (if you look further down in the article) a non-elected go-between called Mr Chalabi.

Whoever is running that country, it is not the government.

The sadest part is this situation was created primarily from American ignorance of muslim society. There is very little seperation of mosque and state and to have attempted to create it with elections of non secular candidates was a big mistake.

No one is ruling Iraq as a whole, certain sections are ruled by seperate parties and to be honest thats how it looks like its going to shake out. longterm.