csmonitor.com - The Christian Science Monitor Online

World>Terrorism & Security
posted December 16, 2004, updated 12:30 p.m.

Pro-Iran Shiite clerics likely to dominate Iraq election

Sen. Lugar: Iraqi democracy will have a 'heavy religious overload to it.'

by Tom Regan | csmonitor.com

As Iraq gets closer to elections in late January, US officials are increasingly saying that an Iran-friendly Shiite cleric group will dominate the elections. Senator Richard Lugar (R) of Indiana, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, appeared on NBC News' Meet the Press Sunday and said that Americans should prepare for a less-than-ideal outcome if elections go ahead.

I would just say, however, at the end of the day, the results of this election, the results of the constitution, the compromises that are made, may be very unsettling for many Americans who had anticipated democracy more of a Jeffersonian-Madison variety and are going to find an Iraqi form of democracy that has a heavy religious overload to it and a number of people not interested in so many checks and balances and human rights.


12/17/04 EU opens door to Turkish membership 12/16/04 FBI steps up AIPAC espionage probe 12/15/04 Athens hostage crisis unfolds

Sign up to be notified daily: Find out more.

The concern about the aftermath of possible elections intensified last week when the deadline for candidates to register for the January 30th general elections passed. Voters will pick 275 members for a National Assembly, which will then draft a constitution over the next year and appoint a government.

MSNBC reported that the strongest campaign alliance, or group of parties operating as a bloc, is headed by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the son of the late Grand Ayatollah Muhsin al-Hakim who was the worldwide spiritual leader of Shiites from 1955-1970. Iraq's interim Defense Minister Hazem Shaalan attacked Mr. Hakim last Wednesday, saying that Iran was "behind" his party.

Hakim, the head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, spent 25 years in exile in Iran and actually founded the group that he heads there. Hakim has the blessing of arguably the most influential figure in Iraq, the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. MSNBC reported that Hakim is expected to do very well among the dominant Shiite majority, particularly in the south of the country.

The New York Times reported last week that Hakim is likely to emerge from the election as one of, if not the, dominant political figure in Iraq. Some experts fear that if pro-Iranian Shiite clerics dominate the new government, Iraq's Sunni Muslims will grow even more desperate, leading to civil war, the Times reported.

But other Iraqi and American observers disagree with this view. They point out that Iraq's Shiites are Arabs, while Iran's are Persian, so while Iraqi Shiites want good relations with Iran, as Times columnist Tom Friedman writes, they don't want to be "ruled by them."

Iran is next door, and it has myriad economic and cultural links with Iraqi Shiites. Moreover, while the Iraqi Shiites are certain to emerge with the most seats in the new Iraqi parliament, and while some are pro-Iranian, the majority of Iraqi Shiites have no intention of being ruled from Tehran. The Iraqi Shiites are Arabs, not Persians, and they are aware of their Arabness. Any Iraqi leader who is depicted or presents himself as the cat's-paw of Tehran will face a backlash.

Columnist David Ignatius of The Washington Post, however, wrote Friday that the Bush administration is potentially facing the "worst possible political outcome following an American invasion of Iraq" with the strong candidacy of Hakim. Mr. Ignatius says Iran is about to " hit the jackpot" in Iraq, and that some Iranian leaders are actively engaged in making sure the outcome is one to their liking.

Wary of trusting Iraqi Shiites to manage the campaign, the Iranian intelligence service has been pumping millions of dollars and hundreds of operatives into the country. The Iranians have also recruited assassination squads to kill potential Iraqi rivals, according to several Iraqi officials. One Iraqi Shiite tells me the Iranians view the hit teams as a kind of "insurance policy" to make sure they prevail, even if the US-backed election process should fail.

Ignatius says the US needs to be playing more of a role in shaping the outcome of the election. But when he appeared on Meet the Press, Sen. Lugar pointed out that other "distinguished columnists" were writing the exact opposite, saying that the US was "deep in the weeds, that the CIA is manipulating the various parties and so forth." Lugar said the US can't be doing both.

Professor Juan Cole of the University of Michigan, writing in his " Informed Comment" blog last week, argues that "from the moment George W. Bush decided to overthrow Saddam [Hussein] and hold democratic elections", he "ensured" that Shiites would dominate any new government, and that Iraq and Iran would have "warm" relations.

The only way to stop that from happening now would be to have [Interim Iraqi Prime Minister] Allawi and his neo-Baathist clique make a coup, and then be willing to back them militarily against the subsequent Shiite uprising. I doubt it could succeed, and it would be politically impossible even for the Bush administration.

The Daily Times of Pakistan reports that Hakim has refused to be drawn into any war of words. "We expected these kinds of irresponsible and inaccurate statements and we don't want a polemic," Hakim said Saturday about the statements by Mr. Shaalan and others. "We trust the people to vote for those candidates who are supported by their religious leaders."