THE QUICKER AND DIRTIER THE BETTER:

A Shiite challenge divides Iraqis: US backs elections by March 2005; a key Shiite wants them by July 2004. (Nicholas Blanford, 12/03/03, CS Monitor)

The pace - and nature - of a democratic reform plan announced just two weeks ago is being challenged by arguably the most powerful figure in Iraq today.

Ayatollah Ali Sistani, a key leader of the country's Muslim Shiite community, wants direct national elections to create a provisional government. [...]

"You can shoot holes in the idea," says Mowafak al-Rubaie, a British educated former member of the Shiite Dawa party, "but it's better to have an election, even if its quick and dirty, than to have no election at all. If we have another body, this time the Transitional National Assembly, and it does not have the legitimacy of public support, then we might as well continue with the Governing Council." [...]

More than three decades of brutal Baathist rule destroyed Iraq's political diversity, although the Shiite religious structure remained in place, vastly weakened by Saddam Hussein's rule. The downfall of Hussein's regime has provided an opportunity for the Shiites to flex their political muscles for the first time.

While that has led to the emergence of firebrand clerics, notably Moqtada al-Sadr, son of Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr, a cleric murdered by the old regime, it has also allowed more moderate Shiite authorities, primarily Sistani, to play an influential role in helping shape the country's future.

"The problem for the US at the moment is that it cannot afford to alienate the Shiite majority, since many Sunni Arabs are already so alienated," says Juan Cole, professor of history at the University of Michigan and an authority on Shiism. "At some point the CPA and the Governing Council will have to decide whether they can meet Sistani's demands, or risk going against him." Mr. Jafaari says he will meet Sistani in the next three days to assess the cleric's flexibility.

"I think he will stick to the principle of elections," he says. "I am not sure he will accept a compromise and I am not sure what compromise there can be. Either you have elections or you don't."

It's their country; let them take responsibility for it.

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 2, 2003 07:56 PM