Maliki Speaks

The McClatchey newspapers Iraq team did a lengthy interview with Nouri al-Maliki. You can see their writeup here. Not surprisingly, he doesn't agree with his critics in the US and also doesn't think he should be removed by a coup. Near the end, though, comes something a bit more interesting as Leila Fadel is asking him why he doesn't meet with Muqtada al-Sadr anymore:

FADEL: Why not, at this time, when there are troubled relations, and the Mahdi Army is being accused of killing governors and running astray?

MALIKI: I have no problem with meeting him. But he withdrew from the challenges to a large degree and he has big problems within the movement. That is why I have meetings with leaders from the movement but not with Muqtada and I have many efforts for reform and to bridge the mistakes through bilateral or more dialogue. Perhaps what is holding back our talks is my firm rejection of the policies adopted by the movement. And I believe some leaders have begun to understand my position and accept it as the correct position in spite of my firmness. Indeed now is the time for meetings but I believe that meeting the leaders who actually represent the movement is more to the point and more effective in quelling the situation and in isolating the gangs from the good elements and cadres in the movement.

If I read him right, Maliki is contending that Sadr himself doesn't really control the movement at this point, so there's no reason to meet with him and Maliki can just meet with faction leaders instead.

Comments

> If I read him right, Maliki is contending that
> Sadr himself doesn't really control the movement

Posters to the reasonably sane milblogs (e.g. Intel-Dump) who appear to actually have been on the ground in Iraq have been saying consistently for 2 years that al-Sadr's degree of control of his movement and army ranges from 40%-60% depending on the situation at any given time. But that this doesn't matter too much since (a) it is not different from most political movements around the world (b) IF al-Sadr were to call for jihad he would get 100% response - although he might not control the outcome.

Cranky

Posted by Cranky Observer | August 29, 2007 9:30 AM

All factions in Iraq have proved to be criminal magnets. If there ever is to be negotiation among parties in Iraq, the most pressing immediate issue is self-policing. All militias and the army and the poliice have to expel and deal with the free-riding gangster element. The mechanism for doing so, however, is non-existent. It would help enormously if the U.S. took the destitution of much of the Iraqi population seriously, and shifted from expending money vainly on military programs to targeting money to aid in the growth of state companies - a masssive, make work program would give unemployed men a stake in living within the law. At the moment, living within the law is a rather foolish risk.

Posted by roger | August 29, 2007 10:04 AM

This A.P. report might shed some light on the Sadr/Mahdi Army situation for you: Al-Sadr Suspends Militia Activity in Iraq.

That article gives the impression that the recent Karbala fiasco wasn't ordered by Sadr and has embarrassed him. Another relevant point is that, in the last few months, Maliki has given Coalition troops the green light to engage JAM in Sadr City. Was that because Maliki thought that troublesome JAM elements weren't under Sadr's control, or because he didn't care either way, and wanted them reined in?

Posted by Fred | August 29, 2007 10:10 AM

Hello fatboy

just wondering if you have any plans to comment on, or even acknowledge, the recent political progress in iraq.

Posted by pimp hand strikes! | August 29, 2007 10:13 AM

he doesn't agree with his critics in the US and also doesn't think he should be removed by a coup.

You made me spit tea on my keyboard. I'm sending the bill to The Atlantic.

Posted by NonyNony | August 29, 2007 10:40 AM

Fadel was on NPR talking about this about 40 minutes ago - she seemed unsure whether Maliki was being honest, or was just posturing a bit.

Posted by Henry Farrell | August 29, 2007 11:01 AM

Does anyone have any way of verifying if he's correct or not?

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | August 29, 2007 11:07 AM

Does anyone have any way of verifying if he's correct or not?

Don't you think our entire military has been trying to figure out for the last several years whether its true?

Posted by Al | August 29, 2007 11:29 AM

I take it it is implicit in your analysis Matt that Maliki's answers are self serving and hardly to be taken at face value.

Not to compare Maliki to Petraeus, but the same can and should be said about his analysis of the situation in Iraq. I've said it many times and was pleased to see you say it recently as well.

Posted by Armando | August 29, 2007 12:27 PM

Don't you think our entire military has been trying to figure out for the last several years whether its true?

And, according to Petraues, in 10 years we might just figure it out.

Posted by Rambuncle | August 29, 2007 12:33 PM

As per CNN, Medhi Army Hazem al-Araji stated:

"For the sake of public interest, we have decided to issue the following: Suspend the Mehdi Army, with no exception, for a maximum of six months starting from the date of this release, to restructure it in a way that would preserve its ideological principles," al-Araji said.

If this is genuine, it lends a lot of credence to the theory that Sadr isn't fully in control.

Posted by Shawn | August 29, 2007 4:44 PM