SHIITES VS. SUNNIS IN IRAQ
With all the news coming out of Iraq, it can be hard for casual observers to follow the who's who in the political arena. For example, there's a lot of talk about the Sunnis and Shiites (or sometimes Shias or Shi`as) -- the country's two largest religious factions. But how much do you really know about the relationship between these two groups? Here is a crash course in Islamic history and current Iraqi politics.
Starting at the beginning, the original schism between the Sunnis and the Shiites--the two largest sects of Islam--came after the Prophet Muhammad's death in 632 AD. Because he died childless a power struggle ensued, with the Sunnis arguing that a caliph, or leader, should be selected from among his followers. The Shiites on the other hand thought leadership should come from within the prophet's family. As a result, they lined up behind Ali, the prophet's cousin and son-in-law; hence the name Shiite which translates into "follower of Ali."
Unfortunately for the Shiites, the Sunnis prevailed which explains why only 10-20% of the world's Muslims are Shiites.
What started as a political discrepancy has turned into a religious quarrel as well: Shiites believe that their religious leader, or Imam, is directly appointed by God; much like the Catholic Pope. Consequently, the decrees--or
fatwa--the Imam issues are to be followed without question. Hence the Imams are often not just religious but political leaders as well.
The Sunnis, in contrast, could be compared to Protestants. They believe that clerics are merely advisors and that the individual's relationship with God is direct. This softer view of things, and a corresponding tendency to be more tolerant of other sects, is one of the keys to the Sunni's greater political success, even in the few countries where Shiites are in the majority.
In fact, Sunnis hold the majority in most Islamic nations--which number about 50 out of the 180 nations in the world. The only Islamic countries with Shiite majorities are Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Iran and Iraq, and only in Iran do the Shiites rule.
Back to Iraq
Shiites make up 60% of Iraq's 25 million people, and the Sunnis around 35%. Saddam and most of the members of his Baathist regime were Sunnis and didn't treat the Shiites well. By taking Saddam out of the picture, the U.S. risked triggering a civil war between the two groups and, based on history, a religious war as well.
That this outcome so far has been avoided is largely due to the calming influence of moderate 73-year-old Iraqi Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, arguably the most influential Islamic jurist in the world today. Despite refusing to meet with Paul Bremer, the head of the U.S. occupation, he has nonetheless been very helpful to the U.S.--counseling his followers to cooperate with the occupiers, but finishing each interaction with American soldiers with the question "when are you leaving?"
The U.S. answer to that question is found in its current plan to transfer authority to an interim Iraqi government, selected by regional caucuses, on June 30. The administration's plan is to divvy things up in a way that keeps the Shiites from gaining complete control and that allows other groups, notably the Sunnis and Kurds, to be represented as well. The U.S. plan calls for the interim, caucus-selected administration to preside over the country
while a constitution is written, with democratic elections being held in 2005.
In November, however, Sistani tossed a wrench into U.S. plans by issuing a fatwa calling for the country to skip the caucuses and go straight for an American-style direct election. If Sistani and his many followers prevail, Iraq
could soon become the world's second nation with a Shiite leadership.
The Sunni minority would very much like to avoid this and are likely to bitterly oppose direct elections, especially considering the potential for payback thanks to their brutal, decades-long oppression of the Shiites. Should it become clear that a Shiite government is in the cards, we can expect to see even more resistance from the Sunnis who are the primary participants in the ongoing attacks against occupation forces. If the Sunnis can succeed in chasing out the occupation forces before a Shiite government can solidify control, they would have a very good chance of
regaining power. That's because, due to their long reign, the Sunnis have a lot more experience in military matters... and know how to get their hands on more weapons.
The idea of a Shiite government is also giving the U.S. administration heartburn: If a Shiite Iraq was to cozy up to neighbor Iran, it could dramatically heighten tensions in the region, the exact opposite of what the U.S. and its allies hoped for.
Although the U.S. has an occupying army on the ground in Iraq, it is in a very delicate position and may have no acceptable way to deny Shiite ambitions to rule Iraq. If the U.S. pushes forward with the plan to select a government by caucus, it risks triggering active resistance from the heretofore peaceful, albeit increasingly vocal, Shiite community. And that could lead quickly to the much feared civil war between the two Muslim sects, with occupation troops trapped in the middle.
To monitor the direction of things, watch for new proclamations by Ayatollah Sistani and for new maneuvers by the U.S. to try and get him to soften his stance on elections. You'll also want to watch the news for the name of Muqtada al-Sadr: he's a well-credentialed 30-year-old firebrand and Sistani's far more radical opponent for the Shiite religious leadership of Iraq. If al-Sadr had his way, the Shiite community would already be joined in the battle for Baghdad and for the nation.
This is from a mailing list I am on from : wwnk@investorsinsight.com |
