12 May 2010 By Tariq Alhomayed
Following the announcement in Iraq of the alliance
between the two Shia coalitions, the State of Law
Coalition and the National Iraqi Alliance, it was
revealed that the two blocs agreed that any dispute
between them would be settled by the Shia Marja
[religious reference] Sayyed Ali al Sistani and that
he would have the final word. However, a source close
to the office of Sayyed al Sistani told the Associated
Press that “the Shia Marja had not been consulted
about that,” and that “the agreement was made between
the two blocs and we had no knowledge about it before
it was announced.” The Associated Press asked the
source a very important and specific question: did al
Sistani accept this role or not? Of course the source
refused to answer the question! The
importance of the question refers to two significant
issues: firstly, the danger of Iraq going down the
same path as Iran in terms of the Wilayat al Faqih
system in some form or another, and not necessarily in
the exact same way as the Iranian model. The second
issue here is: what is the value of the constitution,
in fact what is the value of the democratic process as
a whole in Iraq? The danger of the situation here,
above everything else, is that it will drag the
Marjaiya into the world of politics, as there is no
immunity for those who enter that arena in any way
whatsoever because the meat of politicians of any kind
is Halal [religiously permissible]. Meanwhile, the
Marjaiya in Iraq succeeded at gaining immunity for
itself and reaching important status, especially among
the rational minded because the Marjaiyah, especially
since the fall of the former Saddam Hussein regime,
has been keen to show [that it wants to] preserve Iraq
and to keep the same distance from everyone there,
avoiding anything that could push Iraq towards the
hell of sectarianism and conflict. As a
result, the mere silence of the Marjaiya and its
failure to openly reject the idea that it would act as
an arbiter in any dispute between the two allied Shia
coalitions will be equivalent to acceptance or even
approval of the coalition that is aiming to alienate
the Iraqiya List that emerged as the winner of the
recent elections, which would mean alienating half of
the Iraqi nation. This is where the danger lies for
the Marjaiya, Iraq and the Iraqis. It is assumed that
the pillars of the new political contract in Iraq
today are the constitution and the state institutions,
i.e. the comprehensive political democratic process;
political activity in Iraq is not meant to be based on
the approval of the Marjaiyas or religious figures,
whether they are Sunni or Shia, and not even on the
approval of the church but [is meant to be] in
accordance with the constitution. What’s important is
the people’s vote not the vote of religious figures.
Therefore, the question still stands and it deserves
to be raised until the answer is given clearly by the
office of Sayyed Ali al Sistani; will the Marjaiya
agree to be the arbiter between the State of Law
coalition and the National Iraqi Alliance? And would
the Marjaiya have approved of the alliance as a
result? The mere acceptance of this issue would mean
that the rules of the game in Iraq have changed and
that the Marjaiya has become a player in this
political arena. Approving of this alliance is
different to approving of former alliances because the
goals of this alliance are clear and what it wants to
do is to exclude half of the Iraqi nation, and even go
back on the will of the Iraqis [that was demonstrated]
when they went to cast their votes in the recent
elections.
Comments 💬 التعليقات |