Monday May 28, 2012

Sadr says he'll dissolve militia if U.S. withdraws from Iraq

NAJAF, Iraq —

Radical Shiite leader Moqtada Sadr has ordered his Mahdi Army militia to lay down its arms if a security pact between Baghdad and Washington provides for a withdrawal from Iraq, his spokesman said on Friday.

“We want to see whether the provisions of the agreement are serious. We will be satisfied if the agreement contains the withdrawal of U.S. forces,” Salah al-Obeidi, chief spokesman for the Sadr movement, said.

“If so, we will complete the reorganization of the Mahdi Army which aims to transform it into a social organization,” he said in the Shiite stronghold of Najaf, about 160 kilometers south of Baghdad.

But he also warned that if the withdrawal terms were not written into the agreement then Sadr’s forces would remain armed.

“We will be forced to await the decision of withdrawal of American forces.”

Baghdad and Washington are still negotiating an agreement that would govern U.S. troop levels and allow them to operate after a U.N. mandate expires at the end of the year.

U.S. President George W Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki agreed in principle last November to sign a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in Iraq by the end of July, but controversy has delayed the arrangement.

The proposed pact has drawn sharp criticism from Iraq’s various political factions, especially from the deeply anti-American Sadr.

He announced in June that he would replace the 60,000-strong Mahdi Army with a leaner and meaner fighting force to target the U.S.-led occupation.

Other members of the militia will refocus on cultural and religious issues in the poverty-stricken slums of central and southern Iraq, Sadr’s main power base.

A ceasefire drawn up a year ago has been a key factor in violence levels dropping to four-year lows.

The reform of the Mahdi Army could eventually lead to the emergence of a movement modeled on the Palestinian movement Hamas or Lebanese Hezbollah, experts have said.

Maliki said last month that he was negotiating for the deal to set a timetable for a withdrawal of foreign forces.

Iraqi politicians have bristled at the idea of a continuing defense pact with the United States, but have also said they are on track to concluding an arrangement.

They have also expressed reservations about how many bases Washington should retain, what powers the U.S. military should continue to hold to detain Iraqi civilians, and what immunity U.S. troops should have from Iraqi law.

The White House has so far refused to be locked into a fixed date for withdrawing U.S. combat troops, but has suggested a series of target dates for giving Iraqis control over security in different parts of the war-torn country.

With about 142,500 American troops still Iraq, the issue is politically sensitive in Washington as the November U.S. presidential election draws nearer.

Meanwhile, in an indication that violence remains a problem in the north of Iraq, 18 people were killed and more than 50 wounded in a car bomb attack on market in the northern town of Tal Afar, a hospital official said.

A U.S. army spokesperson, Sam Smith, put the death toll at 20.

Tal Afar is located just west of the flashpoint city of Mosul, capital of Niniveh province and seen by the U.S. army as the last urban holdhout of the terror network al-Qaida in Iraq.

The United States a few years back hailed Tal Afar as a model of improved security but the town has since become one of the most dangerous in the country. In March 2007, 152 people were killed in a bomb attack in Tal Afar.

Wire reports

  • 0

    LIBERTAS

    Let's see if Rice, Crocker & Petraeus miss this golden chance to miss a golden chance!

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    "Sadr says he'll dissolve militia if U.S. withdraws from Iraq"

    He's got U.S. high command in the corner.

    This could be America's last chance for an honorable withdrawl, or are Bush and co. going to totally stuff this one up, too?

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Mahdi Army with a leaner and meaner fighting force to target the U.S.-led occupation."

    Ok, so what happens to the 60k force after it is supposed be dissolved? They just go and look for regular jobs?

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Skip - is that an affair the US should be involved in?

    The US has already got involved in one affair too many by invading Iraq without justification.

    Q: Why do so many Americans seem to think it's their "right" to stick their noses into other countries' affairs??

  • 0

    undecidedbout08

    He's got U.S. high command in the corner.

    Yeah. They must be pretty worried. The way ol Mookie stopped that knockout punch, with his whole face. Impressive.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    There you go, then, if they bring the troops home as Dems have been asking for a long time, and Obama promises, the war will be over. On the contrary, if they stay in Iraq for up to 100 years, and McCain vows (against the "free and democratic" government of Iraq wishes!), the war will rage on.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    Undecided: "The way ol Mookie stopped that knockout punch, with his whole face. Impressive"

    Glad to see I was correct in assuming whose new handle this was. Welcome back... try not to get banned so quickly this time.

  • 0

    SuperLib

    Sadr has no more militia. And the US will be out of Iran sooner than later. Sadr's statement is meaningless.

  • 0

    undecidedbout08

    if they stay in Iraq for up to 100 years, and McCain vows

    Did McCain vow this? Cuz this is what I recall -

    Last month, at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, a crowd member asked McCain about a Bush statement that troops could stay in Iraq for 50 years.

    "Maybe 100," McCain replied. "As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, it's fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where al Qaeda is training, recruiting, equipping and motivating people every single day."

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/14/mccain.king/

  • 0

    sailwind

    The reform of the Mahdi Army could eventually lead to the emergence of a movement modeled on the Palestinian movement Hamas or Lebanese Hezbollah, experts have said.

    Ain't going to happen. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and the Iraqi central government are the ones exerting control now and Sadr and is just trying to keep himself somehow relevant in the new Iraq that is now emerging. The Iraq that has pretty much rejected his brand and model of government based an Iranian style theocracy.

    The central Government is strong enough now where it doesn't need to compromise with him anymore. He can talk all wants but if he takes any real action agaisn't the government he's going to get a whole lot of Iraqi troops sweeping his strongholds again. Superlib is right it's just bluster on his part.

  • 0

    JoeBigs

    How nice he will disarm and go back to just being a good guy. Wow I dont know about the rest of you but I think he is telling the truth. Ok let us end it all right now and go home.

    Yeah right the minute the US pulls out its support from Iraq this putz will make a move to seize control of the government. Please give me a break, we should of not gone after Saddam and instead gone after real terrorist like this guy.

    He needs to go night night and not bother or kill any more.

    I wonder if he is going to go to a wedding any time soon? Would be nice...

  • 0

    skipthesong

    sushi: I was asking a question as to what happens to those fighters after the fact - do they just lay low. Not anything at all for the US to be involved with. Nothing like. Just that is a large force of well armed people. Was just curioius.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    Undecided: You'll notice, even in your cut and paste, that I said '...UP TO 100 years...', I never said that he claims the US would be there for the full 100.

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    JoeBigs - "this putz will make a move to seize control of the government."

    His party already has 10% of the seats in parliament.

  • 0

    JoeBigs

    His party already has 10% of the seats in parliament.

    But 10% in parliament is better than 100% via a coup.

  • 0

    Sarge

    "Radical Shiite leader Moqtada Sadr"

    I'll bet he disagrees with being labeled "radical."

  • 0

    Triumvere

    Sadr is toast. Maliki will break him.

  • 0

    Sarge

    "Sadr is toast"

    Heck, Sadr should be prime minister of Iraq! After all, he's so popular with the Iraqis! You would think he would be gratefl to the U.S. for deposing his No.1 enemy, that Sunni scumbag Saddam...

  • 0

    Nippon5

    Q: Why do so many Americans seem to think it's their "right" to stick their noses into other countries' affairs??

    Q: Why do so many non-Americans seem to think it's their "right" to stick their noses into Americas affairs??

  • 0

    Wolfpack

    This is a nice sentiment but I wouldn't trust Sadr to keep his word about anything. However, such overtures are concrete evidence that the brilliant surge strategy of Bush and Petreus continues to pay dividends. The US and Maliki are better off dealing with Sadr from a position of strength instead of weakness as the political Left prefers. The tide was turned when it appeared that all was certain to be lost. It is startling how unpredictable war can be. It's a shame that Obama was ready to give up before the war was over. Ironically, the US the option to withdrawl on Obama's schedule - but on our terms and not those of the Sadr, Iran, and Al Qaeda.

  • 0

    adaydream

    Another outstanding reason to bring the troops home. < :-)

  • 0

    rjd_jr

    Good question SushiSake, why DO so many Americans think they have a right to stick their noses in other countrie's business, when these very same people then get upset when people of other countrie's dare criticize American policies, America, or any combination thereof. Pure hypocrisy.

    At any rate, I wish some would stop giving Bush and company any ounce of credit for the "brilliant surge" strategy. Going back to a concept first proposed by a now retired general (and whose name was drug through mud for it), in order to cover up and correct your monumentally catastrophic screw ups and misjudgements, is hardly "brilliant."

  • 0

    undecidedbout08

    Saddam gone, Mookie defanged. Guess that leaves Ahmadhinejhad all alone as the international Left's big Sugar Daddy.

  • 0

    yabits

    Q: Why do so many Americans seem to think it's their "right" to stick their noses into other countries' affairs??

    Because a lot of Americans ultimately hate genuine freedom.

    Respecting the freedom of others means respecting their right to tell us to buzz off. Especially when we richly deserve it. (But look at the attitudes of American policy-makers over the years towards countries that have declared themselves to be "non-aligned.")

    The US attitude over the decades has been to consider much of the rest of the planet as "America's backyard." Well, I own a home with a backyard, and its limit stops at my property line. Likewise, what so many Amercans call their backyard is in reality someone else's backyard. That fact does nothing to curtail American hubris, as with Iraq.

  • 0

    Sarge

    "Another outstanding reason to bring the troops home"

    Incredibly, adaydream actually believes what Sadr says.

  • 0

    Betzee

    At any rate, I wish some would stop giving Bush and company any ounce of credit for the "brilliant surge" strategy. Going back to a concept first proposed by a now retired general (and whose name was drug through mud for it), in order to cover up and correct your monumentally catastrophic screw ups and misjudgements, is hardly "brilliant."

    Good point. Morever, as long as the USA remains the dominant player in the country, doling out money to groups like the Sunni Awakening Councils we can get them to work with us. But there's no indication they will work with each other. Case in point: the elected Green Zone govt just took off for an extended summer vacation after failing to agree on how the provincial elections which would increase Sunni representation would be carried out. Originally scheduled for October, a new date has not been set.

    Bottom line: As long as the USA continues to hang around, at great expense since the Iraqi oil revenues are not being pumped into reconstruction as we were assured they would be back in 2003, they have no incentive to work together. In short, our presence is delaying, not facilitating, agreement between representatives of the various Iraqi groups. Therefore, we should instead set a near-term date for US withdrawal as an incentive for them to get down to business.

Login to leave a comment

OR

Follow us

More in World

View all

View all