Posted on 04/25/2003 4:21:24 PM PDT by blam
Rumsfeld's rejection of Islamic state angers Shias
By Phil Reeves in Baghdad
26 April 2003
Donald Rumsfeld, the US Secretary of State, will have won plaudits from his zealous friends by declaring that an "Iranian-style" Islamic government "is not going to happen" in Iraq. But his words fell on stony ground outside the al-Muhsen mosque in Baghdad yesterday.
Members of the huge Shia crowd gathered for Friday prayers were quick to spot the contradiction in his position.
"I thought the Americans said they wanted a democracy in Iraq," said Kassem al-Sa'adi, a 41-year-old merchant. "If it is a democracy, why are they allowed to make the rules?"
About 13,000 people gathered outside the mosque where the imam, Jabal al-Khafji called for an Islamic state in Iraq. The cleric's view is widely shared by Iraq's Shia majority which is clamouring for the occupying forces to be removed.
Dr al-Khafji said that no political alliances should be formed by Shia groups unless it was with Islamic groups. Islam must dictate all policy-making, he added.
Any move to an Iranian-style Shia Islamic state would also be opposed by the Kurds, the Iraqi secular intelligentsia and the Sunni minority. Yet pressure is building. Iran is quietly at work in Iraq's Shia community, with intelligence agents reportedly active in the south. The Iranian-backed Badr militia has been asserting itself in border towns.
The millions of Shias who gathered this week in the holy city of Karbala served as a warning to the US that it must find some way of accommodating the clerics. A move in that direction was evident yesterday on the streets.
Patrolling the worshippers was a band of Iraqi policemen wearing freshly pressed uniforms, moustaches and nervous frowns. They are members of the old civil police force. They played a mundane walk-on part in the regime's apparatus but their appearance was enough to set off alarm bells.
These men had been re-packaged in an effort to ease their passage into one of the most sensitive parts of the new Iraq. It was also a tentative attempt to bring the Shias under the larger umbrella of the still-unformed government and its law enforcement agencies. Only a few carried pistols, and these were hidden.
All wore labels stating their rank and – in an effort to establish their legitimacy before the locals – a logo showing Mohammed Bakr al-Sadr, the Shia cleric whose murder by Saddam has made him a martyr. His stature is such that Saddam City – the Shia quarter of Baghdad – has been renamed after him.
While the crowd listened to the imam's address, police formed a line separating the media from the mullahs and their followers. But their authority was nothing compared to the other force supervising the occasion – young men with ammunition belts and Kalashnikovs, charged by their religious leaders with maintaining order. They directed the traffic and the crowds, and stood on the rooftops, guarding against attack. These are part of the Shia apparatus which currently runs the show in this part of the capital, just as they do in the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala and some of the border towns.
That is so true. These people are pathetic.
THis is why the US is not a democracy, and hopefully never will be. The US is supposed to be a Constitutional Republic. The difference is that in a Constitutional Republic certain rights are outside the reach of majority vote
The only transfer of power that exists in Rumsfeld's mind are your tax dollars to pay for all these world wars that Congress refuses to declare. Our nation is not innocent about the excitation of war in the ME... in fact, American government created much of it. Creating a democracy in Iraq is nothing more than making the claim that America will be involved for over 50 years in Iraq as America is involved with over one hundred other countries around the world ... all to the dismay of the American taxpayer.
"we are not going to work with the Iraqi people to put into place a government which offers thr people: one person, one vote, one time. It will be a representative state in which there are regular transfers of power from one group to another via the ballot box." -- jimkress
Wouldn't be the first time! Feel free to wake me up! LOL!
Whose shoes?
I was talking about ordinary folks, or innocent people under Islamofascist rule.
I appreciated Rumsfeld's comment the other day that he wouldn't let the country be ruled by a theocracy, because if we are risking life and limb to liberate a country, why should we turn it back over to Muslim Fascist Fanatics?
Best Regards. -DC3199
No s*it! To the victor goes the spoils.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.