BAGHDAD
— As Shiite militiamen began streaming toward Ramadi on Monday to try
to reverse the loss of the city to the Islamic State, the defeat has given new momentum to Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s rivals within his own Shiite political bloc.
At
the urging of American officials who sought to sideline the militias,
Mr. Abadi had, in effect, gambled that the combination of United States
airstrikes and local Sunni tribal fighters would be able to drive
Islamic State fighters out of the city as fighting intensified in recent
weeks. The hope was that a victory in Ramadi could also serve as a push
for a broader offensive to retake the Sunni heartland of Anbar
Province.
But
as the setback brought the Shiite militias, and their Iranian backers,
back into the picture in Anbar, intensified Shiite infighting appeared
to leave the prime minister more vulnerable than ever. And it presented a
new example of how developments on the Iraqi battlefield have sometimes
instantly shifted political currents in the country.
“Abadi does not have a strong challenge from Iraq’s Sunnis or Iraqi Kurds,” said Ahmed Ali, an Iraqi analyst in Washington with the Education for Peace in Iraq Center. “It’s from the Shia side.”
Mr. Abadi’s rivals within Iraq’s
Shiite political bloc have been accusing him for months of doing too
much to work with Sunnis rather than empowering the militias and fellow
Shiites.
He
became prime minister last year with strong backing from the United
States on the belief that he would be a more inclusive leader than his
predecessor, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki,
and would reach out to the country’s minority Sunni Arabs and Kurds.
Mr. Abadi has done so, by pushing for the arming of local Sunni
tribesmen and reaching a deal with the Kurds to share oil revenue.
But at every turn he has been thwarted by powerful Shiite leaders with links to Iran, including Mr. Maliki. Now, the latest setback in Ramadi has given Mr. Abadi’s rivals even more ammunition.
Some
Shiite politicians, including Mr. Maliki, and powerful militia leaders
linked to Iran, whose fighters are now preparing to fight in Anbar, have
become increasingly critical of Mr. Abadi. Either they have spoken out
themselves or news media outlets they control have taken aim at the
prime minister through distorted coverage that has highlighted security
failures in Anbar.
In
one instance, the television news channel Afaq, which is run by allies
of Mr. Maliki, gave running coverage to the supposed slaughter of 140
army soldiers last month at an outpost in Anbar, spurring public
criticism of Mr. Abadi. Western diplomats and military officials say the
story was untrue, and the Islamic State, notably, never claimed to have
killed that many.
The effect, though, was to undermine Mr. Abadi’s rule, analysts said. There were calls for Mr. Abadi to resign.
Flashing
uncharacteristic anger, Mr. Abadi appeared in front of Parliament and
essentially dared his rivals to remove him from power.
“Iran
is using Maliki against Abadi,” said a diplomat in Baghdad with close
ties to the Iranians who spoke on the condition of anonymity to maintain
relationships in the capital. “They don’t want Abadi to become
pro-Western. The Iranians want Abadi weak.”
An
official close to Mr. Abadi, who spoke anonymously to discuss private
conversations, related a joke that has been told among the prime
minister’s inner circle: “Even if two fish fight in the river, it is
Maliki stirring them up.”
The official added, of Mr. Abadi, “He is obsessed with Maliki.”
The
largely Shiite militias are grouped under an umbrella organization
called the Popular Mobilization Forces and, on paper at least, are under
Mr. Abadi’s command.
Some
of the newer units, formed last year after Shiite clerics called on
young men to take up arms and fight the Islamic State, also called ISIS
or ISIL, do answer to the prime minister. Some of the most powerful
groups, though, such as the Badr Organization, Asaib Ahl al-Haq and
Kataib Hezbollah, may answer to Mr. Abadi in individual cases — they did
not advance on Anbar until the prime minister gave orders, for example.
But those militias were trained and supported directly by Iran, and the
militias’ leaders have grown immensely in popularity with the Iraqi
public as they have won significant battles against the Islamic State.
This
has presented serious challenges to Mr. Abadi’s authority. For
instance, in March, at the beginning of an operation to retake the city
of Tikrit, north of Baghdad, the plans were drawn up by militia leaders,
and then Mr. Abadi was told it would happen. Once those fighters failed
to retake Tikrit decisively, Mr. Abadi asked them to withdraw and
called for help from American airstrikes, reasserting his authority for
the moment.
Now
that the militias have been called upon to fight in Anbar, Mr. Abadi’s
authority seems to be waning again, and the militias’ cachet has only
grown. One of the most popular pictures circulating on social media in
Iraq on Monday showed Hadi al-Ameri, the powerful head of the Badr
militia, examining a map and seemingly plotting out a new campaign in
Anbar.
Fanar
Haddad, an Iraqi analyst, recently wrote in an online column that the
militias have “provided a potent rallying point for a reinvigorated
sense of Iraqi nationalism, albeit one with distinctly Shiite
overtones.”
In
an interview, Mr. Haddad said Mr. Abadi was limited in his ability to
constrain the Popular Mobilization Forces — or Hashid in Arabic, as the
militias are known here. “If you want to be part of Iraq’s evolving
political game, you can’t go against the Hashid,” he said. “It’s just
too popular.”
The
militias’ growing popularity has coincided with an even more powerful
approval of Iran’s role in Iraq, at least among Shiite Iraqis.
Once,
even many Iraqi Shiites looked at Iran with some suspicion, partly
because of the legacy of the long and bloody war that Iraq fought with
Iran in the 1980s. A frequent gripe of the past was about low-quality
Iranian goods, such as cheese and yogurt, clogging the shelves of
grocery stories.
Now,
though, in the words of Ali Kareem Salman, a 31-year-old government
worker in the south, “Shiites think that Iran is the protector of the
Shiite sect.”
Hanan
Fatlawi, a Shiite lawmaker who is one of Mr. Abadi’s most vocal
critics, said: “Previously, you could divide the Shia into two sides:
those who hate Iran and those who love them. But after the entrance of ISIS, and with the situation we are in, many people are grateful to Iran. Their opinion changed.”
Of the militias, she said, “Without them, there would be no Baghdad.”
There
is an essential paradox to Mr. Abadi’s leadership thus far. In nearly
every way he has proved to be the inclusive leader mandated by the
United States, reaching out to Sunnis and Kurds and seeking consensus.
But within Iraq, he is increasingly viewed as weak and unable to
effectively shift Iraq’s tragic trajectory.
“This term ‘inclusive personality,’ I only hear from foreigners,” Ms. Fatlawi said. “He was weak from the start.”[source]
No comments:
Post a Comment