IRAQ:Rival clerics Muqtada al-Sadr and Abdel Aziz al-Hakim agreed to a truce on Saturday with the aim of ending months of violence between Iraq's two largest Shia factions, writes Michael Jansen.
The Sadrists and Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council pledged to halt bloodletting, unify media and cultural efforts, and create joint committees to keep order in the provinces. In the south, the Sadrist Mahdi Army militia and the council's Badr Corps have been battling in the streets and assassinating each other's leaders.
The truce is intended to improve "relations between the two groups and to promote the Islamic and national interest," Mr al-Hakim stated.
Although the accord may end clashes and killings, it is unlikely to boost the beleaguered Maliki government or revive the faltering Shia alliance, both backed by the council. The Sadrists said their six ministers will not return to the cabinet or their 32 deputies to the alliance, which now has only 83 seats in the 275-member parliament. This means political rivalry between the factions is likely to persist. It has roots in the long-standing competition for ascendancy in the Shia hierarchy between the Sadr and Hakim clans.
The Sadrist faction is heir to a Shia populist movement created by the revered cleric Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Sadeq al-Sadr, father of Muqtada. The Sadrists are Iraqi nationalist, anti-US occupation and oppose Iranian interference in Iraq's internal affairs.
The 50,000-strong Mahdi Army earned its nationalist credentials by fighting US forces in the Shia holy city of Najaf and Baghdad during the summer of 2004. Since then, the Sadrists have both co-operated with Washington and attacked its troops.
The council, formerly the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, was founded in 1982 by Tehran and the Badr Corps militia was recruited, trained, armed and financed by Iran.
Mr al-Hakim, former corps commander, succeeded his assassinated brother as head of the faction, which in spite of its close relations with Tehran, cultivated ties with Washington ahead of the war. However, growing US antagonism toward Tehran and threats to bomb its nuclear and military sites could rupture relations between Washington and the council.