A new approach ?

We have it on the excellent authority of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq itself (ISCI, formerly SCIRI, aka just the "Supreme Council") that its leader Abdulaziz al-Hakim took a phone call from President Bush yesterday afternoon, after receiving a visit from ambassador Crocker and special ambassador Satterfield. And following the meeting and the phone call he convened a meeting of United Iraqi Alliance (the Shiite bloc that once included Sadrists and Fadhila, but now includes only the Supreme Council and the Dawa Party), which he also heads. (As RoadstoIraq, which first called attention to these events, noted: "Bush-Hakim are up to something").

Then this morning the New York Times reports that a delegation of senior Dawa and Supreme Council people was sent yesterday to Tehran for talks. The delegation included Hadi al-Ameri, head of the Badr Organization, the military wing of the Supreme council. (Interestingly, the NYT didn't identify Hadi al-Ameri as head of the Badr Organization, merely calling him a "senior member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, a Shiite party in Mr Maliki's coalition.")

So: Bush calls Hakim; Hakim convenes the Shiite coalition; and a delegation including the Badr Organization head is sent to Tehran. And the NYT this morning, leaving out the Bush phone-call and the resulting UIA meeting, spins the events like this: "American officials supported the trip, but portrayed it as the brainchild of Mr Maliki."

The purpose of this obviously Bush-instigated delegation?

Naturally it would be hard to say, but here's the context. Recall yesterday's stunning press-conference remarks by Maliki (see previous post) about fighting the Mahdi Army until it is exterminated; and threatening the members of the multi-party opposition group--"whether they are members of Parliament or even members of the government"-- with charges of inciting to violence if they don't shut up about this, reported verbatim by AlJazeera and passed over in silence by the NYT this morning. It is as if Maliki had decided he was able to run his government without being too concerned about broad-based political support, relying rather on some other, perhaps more authoritarian, basis.

Then this morning, the pan-Arab paper AlHayat reports:

Informed sources that are not parties to the fight between Maliki and Sadr told AlHayat that "secret units attached to a well-known political party are launching a campaign that is parallel to the campaign of the government. And it [the parallel unit] is carrying out kidnappings and executions of members of the Mahdi Army, and pursues its leaders in Baghdad neighborhoods."

This is sandwiched between reports about the disappearing prospects of any peaceful solution. Later in the piece, the reporter comes back to this "parallel campaign", writing:

Observers expect that the coming stage will witness a broad security escalation, given the removal of the opportunity for a peaceful resolution of the crisis between the Sadr trend and the government. And informed sources referred yesterday to the implementation by a "an unknown armed unit having important capabilities, of a security campaign in parallel with the campaign being carried out by the government and the American forces against the Mahdi Army".

But a high-level security source [in the government] said the government is unaware of any other militia activities against the Mahdi Army.

The government security source reminded the reporter that Maliki is against any extra-legal militias, and if there was such a group as the reporter was asking about, it would be dealt with firmly.

It could be that Sadr spokesperson Saleh al-Obeidi has the overall picture right. He said a couple of days ago that Iran appears to be working hand in glove with the Americans for a "division of influence" in Iraq, and he said one proof of that is that Iran has declined to come out in opposition to the proposed US-Iraq long-term security agreement.