Obama Dithers, Sistani Acts, the Gray Lady Blames Maliki

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani has issued the call to arms. According to "Iraqi Shiite Cleric Issues Call to Arms," by Alissa Rubin, Suadad al-Salhy and Alan Cowell:

In a statement during Friday prayers from the representative of the most senior Shiite cleric in the country, the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, said it was “the legal and national responsibility of whoever can hold a weapon, to hold it to defend the country, the citizens and the holy sites.” 

The representative of Mr. Sistani, Sheikh Abdul Mehdi al-Karbalaie, speaking in Karbala, one of Iraq’s holiest cities for Shiites, said the numbers of fighters and volunteers “must fill the gaps within the security forces,” but he cautioned they should not do more that, stopping short of calling for a general armed response to the rebellion led by the Sunni jihadi group, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

He emphasized that all Iraqis, not only Shias should join the fight, underscoring that everyone needed to pull together or the country could fall into sectarian warfare. However, it seemed unlikely that many Sunnis would be moved to do so, especially in an atmosphere of deepening distrust between the sects. And many Sunnis feel squeezed as well because they have little sympathy for the extremist militants from ISIS. 

The call came as the militants had fanned out to the east, at least temporarily seizing two towns near the Iranian border, Saadiyah and Jalawla. But, several hours after the capture of the towns, security officials in Baghdad said that government troops, backed by Kurdish forces, had counterattacked, forcing the insurgents to withdraw in a rare victory.

The capture of the towns of Saadiyah and Jalawla came a day after Kurdish forces further north seized on the accelerating rout of government troops to take over the oil city of Kirkuk, long contested between Iraqi Kurds and the country’s Arab leaders in Baghdad.

If Syria is any indication, expect the Shiite militias to triumph over the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) jihadis. ISIS is by and large a mercenary force, albeit a very successful one. The Shias have proven to be more motivated. Their holy places are under assault.

Sistani is stepping up while the Obama administration dithers. The position of the United States is a difficult one. Publicly, the USG is opposed to terror groups like ISIS, Obama said as much in his West Point commencement address; plus, the U.S. created the current state of Iraq out of the ashes of its 2003 invasion. So we must be mindful here of Colin Powell's "You break it, you own it" pre-invasion warning to W. But in private, the U.S. is not opposed to the actions of ISIS. ISIS operates with the support of Saudi Arabia. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel, our two most important allies in the Middle East, are obsessed with Iran and preoccupied by fears of Iranian regional hegemony. ISIS is a cat's-paw.

The U.S. is a pay-to-play political system that the Israelis and Saudis have wired for a long time. The problem for U.S. leaders is how to get a population that has been indoctrinated for decades to fear and hate jihadi terrorists to suddenly accept them as allies. The answer? Go back to the tried and true personal demonization playbook (see Milosevic, Saddam, Gaddafi, Putin, Assad for prior lessons). Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is now the target.

According to a lengthy Gray Lady editorial, "Iraq in Peril: Prime Minister Maliki Panics as Insurgents Gain," it is all Maliki's fault. He ruled like an autocrat and kept the Sunnis from power.

Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki is said to be in a panic. It is hard to be surprised by that, because more than anyone he is to blame for the catastrophe. Mr. Maliki has been central to the political disorder that has poisoned Iraq, as he wielded authoritarian power in favor of the Shiite majority at the expense of the minority Sunnis, stoked sectarian conflict and enabled a climate in which militants could gain traction. 

Never mind that Maliki was a U.S. favorite during the occupation. Also, never mind that it was the profligate funding and assistance of all things jihadi by the the Gulf Sheikhdoms and Turkey in their failed crusade to crack Syria that led to ISIS control of Anbar, which allowed the current march-on-Baghdad offensive. Nothing is as important as Maliki's refusal to dole out patronage to Sunnis. The Gray Lady took the exact same position when Fallujah fell under the black flag earlier. It is not credible, unless of course it is code for "Give the Sheikhs what they want."

David Brooks chimes in with "The Big Burn," reiterating the blame Maliki theme. But Brooks holds Obama to account for pulling out U.S. troops too soon. See, according to Brooks, the Iraqi Army was almost ready when Obama pulled the plug on the U.S. occupation. Yes, that's right. If U.S. soldiers and trainers would have been allowed to stay a little longer, we might not be debating what to do about ISIS in Mosul now. Brooks' prescription going forward? Federalization of Iraq. Federalization is not to be trusted to Russian-speaking residents of eastern Ukraine, but bin Laden worshipers erecting a caliphate in Iraq and Syria have made Brooks see the light.