Iraqi Leader Takes the Cake!
Shiite Muslim leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim wants to have his cake and eat it too. In talks with President Bush yesterday, the leader of the largest Shiite bloc in the Iraqi parliament decreed that Iraq's problems must be solved by Iraqis alone, not by its neighbors or the international community, according to a story in the Los Angeles Times. Days before release of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group report, al-Hakim rejected its suspected recommendation that an international effort include Iran and Syria to help solve Iraq's problems.
While some analysts believe al-Hakim's statements provide unexpected and much needed support for Bush's efforts to keep Iran and Syria from gaining power in Iraq, let us remember that al-Hakim has spend the last 20 years in exile in Iran as leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq. Established in 1982, the Supreme Council provided a political home for Iraqi Shiite exiles during Saddam Hussein's rule. With such strong ties to Iran, what makes Bush think that al-Hakim's statement vetoing international interference in Iraq doesn't include the U.S.? Perhaps because later that day al-Hakim called for increased international assistance in Iraq to defeat terrorism and stiffer U.S. military response to militia violence.
Al-Hakim wants to have it both ways. From one side of his mouth he implores, "give us weapons, protect us," but from the other side he barks, "stay out, don't tell us what to do." Seems to me that al-Hakim just wants to use the U.S., but for what personal scheme it's not quite clear. Is he just milking the U.S. for every dollar and rifle he can before the inevitable pull out to solidify his own position? After all, the Badr Brigade, the military arm of his Supreme Council, is running amok all over Iraq, cloaking its criminal activity under the guise of official Iraqi security forces. That would seem to make al-Hakim's sentiments more than a little suspect. Or is al-Hakim running interference for his old buddy Iran by getting rid of the competition so Iran can swoop in once the international community is banished?
I have to question al-Hakim's motives, but I wonder if the White House is. He certainly knows how to play to the Washington crowd. It's even been intimated by denizens of Bush's inner circle that al-Hakim might be used as a go-between should the U.S. approach Iran about the Iraq situation. Wouldn't that be cozy? I guess some people can have their cake and eat it too!
"We reject any attempts to have a regional or international role in solving the Iraqi issue," al-Hakim said after his meeting with President Bush. "Iraq should be in a position to solve Iraqi problems."
While some analysts believe al-Hakim's statements provide unexpected and much needed support for Bush's efforts to keep Iran and Syria from gaining power in Iraq, let us remember that al-Hakim has spend the last 20 years in exile in Iran as leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq. Established in 1982, the Supreme Council provided a political home for Iraqi Shiite exiles during Saddam Hussein's rule. With such strong ties to Iran, what makes Bush think that al-Hakim's statement vetoing international interference in Iraq doesn't include the U.S.? Perhaps because later that day al-Hakim called for increased international assistance in Iraq to defeat terrorism and stiffer U.S. military response to militia violence.
Al-Hakim wants to have it both ways. From one side of his mouth he implores, "give us weapons, protect us," but from the other side he barks, "stay out, don't tell us what to do." Seems to me that al-Hakim just wants to use the U.S., but for what personal scheme it's not quite clear. Is he just milking the U.S. for every dollar and rifle he can before the inevitable pull out to solidify his own position? After all, the Badr Brigade, the military arm of his Supreme Council, is running amok all over Iraq, cloaking its criminal activity under the guise of official Iraqi security forces. That would seem to make al-Hakim's sentiments more than a little suspect. Or is al-Hakim running interference for his old buddy Iran by getting rid of the competition so Iran can swoop in once the international community is banished?
I have to question al-Hakim's motives, but I wonder if the White House is. He certainly knows how to play to the Washington crowd. It's even been intimated by denizens of Bush's inner circle that al-Hakim might be used as a go-between should the U.S. approach Iran about the Iraq situation. Wouldn't that be cozy? I guess some people can have their cake and eat it too!
