Friends in Need

A reclusive Shia cleric reintroduces Washington to the virtues of the U.N.

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


What the international community and the anti-war movement failed to do, the Shias of Iraq and their reclusive leader seem to be doing — that is, reacquainting the Bush administration with the virtues of the United Nations.

On Monday American, British and Iraqi officials met with Kofi Annan to negotiate a U.N. role in turning over authority over to the Iraqis. The U.N. has not had a presence in Iraq since a deadly bombing attack killed 16 staff members, including the head of the U.N. mission, at their headquarters last fall.

The U.S. plea for help comes as Iraq’s most influential Shiite cleric, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, has come out against the U.S. plan for a transitional government by way of regional caucuses. Instead, Al-Sistani, and the tens of thousands marching under his banner, argue that direct elections need to be held by early summer. The ayatollah’s representative, Hashem al-Awad, argues that Iraqis deserve the right to plan their own government.

“The sons of the Iraqi people demand a political system based on direct elections and a constitution that realizes justice and equality for everyone…Anything other than that will prompt people to have their own say.”

Although the U.N., at Washington’s request, is preparing to investigate the transition possibilities in Iraq, the New York Times reports that Annan has previously said that holding direct elections by June 30 is probably not viable. Annan fears that instability in the country could lead to unsafe and illegitimate elections. Despite that Al-Sistani has accused Annan of acting under pressure from the U.S., one of his representatives said that the ayatollah would accept the decision of U.N. delegation, which is being dispatched to Iraq to survey the possibilities.

While the Shiites, the largest group in Iraq, are pushing for quick elections, which are likely to favor them, others, namely the minority Kurds and Sunnis, are less enthusiastic. If the U.S. bends to the Shiite demand for early elections, the Kurds and Sunnis are likely to feel alienated. The Kurds are already agitating for an autonomous region in a federal Iraq, and this development might harden them in this resolve.
Jonathan Steele of the Guardian writes that this has become the moment of truth not only for the U.S., but also for the U.N..

“Now the whole thing is in ruins. Ayatollah Al-Sistani refuses to drop his opposition, and people were out on the street in Basra last week to support his line. Protests may spread to other Shia cities. The latest allegations of US and British torture of detainees will only inflame passions. Worst of all for Washington, Al-Sistani has made it clear that no government which is undemocratically appointed will have the right to ask American troops to stay.

Washington is trying to argue that if there are to be direct elections, the transfer of power will have to be delayed. Al-Sistani rejects that. His supporters say the oil-for-food ration-card lists which covered the whole Iraqi population can easily be used in place of the poll cards which Washington says would take at least a year to prepare. Unlike Afghanistan, with its remote villages and months of snow which make polling stations hard to deploy and staff, Iraq’s geography is no obstacle to quick elections.”

But Fareed Zakaria of the Washington Post writes that ultimately this moment is about legitimacy — what Al-Sistani has and what the U.S. never did.

“So the administration has decided that the United Nations has legitimacy after all. Along with its allies on the Governing Council, Washington is asking Kofi Annan to give the United Nations’ blessings to its plan, explain that elections cannot be held precipitously and get involved in the entire political process. Columnist William Safire, who has long ridiculed the need for a U.N. role, is now sheepishly asking whether Annan could do us a favor, please. The foreigners are being invited in. It may be too little, too late.

U.S. policymakers made two grave mistakes after the war. The first was to occupy the country with too few troops, creating a security vacuum. This image of weakness was reinforced when Washington caved to Al-Sistani’s objections last June, junked its original transition plan and sped things up to coincide with the U.S. elections. The second mistake was to dismiss from the start the need for allies and international institutions. As it turns out, Washington now has the worst of both worlds. It has neither enough power nor enough legitimacy.”

THE TRUTH IS...

what drives Mother Jones' team of 50-plus journalists. The truth is powerful, as evidenced by how hard those with something to hide, or profit to gain, seek to discredit it. The truth, stated boldly and reported meticulously, is what draws so many readers to Mother Jones.

And the truth is, going into the final 4 days of the year we still needed to raise $TK to hit our $350,000 goal and start 2021 on track. It's nerve-wracking, wondering if the big spike we normally see at the end of December is going to be another thing that doesn't go as planned in 2020, or worse, if, now that Donald Trump is set to leave the White House (for longer than a taxpayer-funded golf trip to a property he owns), folks might be pulling back from fighting for the truth and a democracy and think the hard work is done.

It's not, and if you can right now, please consider a year-end donation to support our team's fearless nonprofit journalism so we can close that big fundraising gap and finish the year strong, ready for all that's ahead in 2021. Whether you can give $5 or $500, it all matters in keeping us charging hard, and we'd be grateful.

payment methods

THE TRUTH IS...

what drives Mother Jones' team of 50-plus journalists. The truth is powerful, as evidenced by how hard those with something to hide, or profit to gain, seek to discredit it. The truth, stated boldly and reported meticulously, is what draws so many readers to Mother Jones.

And the truth is, going into the final 4 days of the year we still needed to raise $TK to hit our $350,000 goal and start 2021 on track. It's nerve-wracking, wondering if the big spike we normally see at the end of December is going to be another thing that doesn't go as planned in 2020, or worse, if, now that Donald Trump is set to leave the White House (for longer than a taxpayer-funded golf trip to a property he owns), folks might be pulling back from fighting for the truth and a democracy and think the hard work is done.

It's not, and if you can right now, please consider a year-end donation to support our team's fearless nonprofit journalism so we can close that big fundraising gap and finish the year strong, ready for all that's ahead in 2021. Whether you can give $5 or $500, it all matters in keeping us charging hard, and we'd be grateful.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate