Al-Sadr’s last paper: Returning to Parliament to thwart the framework plans

Al-Sadr’s last paper: Returning to Parliament to thwart the framework plans


Al-Sadrs last paper - Returning to Parliament to thwart the framework plansThe “coordinating framework” stuck to the nomination of Muhammad Shia al-Sudani to head the government, and expectations that the Federal Court would reject the claim to dissolve parliament next Wednesday, left the leader of the Sadrist movement, Muqtada al-Sadr, one option, which is the return of his current deputies to resign from Parliament, and restore the “rights of the largest bloc.” It is a paper aimed at thwarting the efforts of the framework, whose officials plan to form a consensus government, or even a “majority government” if efforts to attract Kurdish and Sunni representatives fail.

Observers say that the Sadrist movement’s representatives can demand a return to their seats in parliament under the pretext that they were forced to resign, because of the “blocking third” created by the coordination framework groups, which prevented them from achieving what they were seeking to build a stable “national majority” government.

This step depends, in the first place, on whether the second call for dialogue by Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi will succeed next Monday in agreeing on a mechanism to implement the only issue on which there is consensus, which is the dissolution of Parliament and the call for early elections.

Parliament Speaker Muhammad al-Halbousi offered , among other conditions, that the planned dialogue would move to setting a date for early parliamentary elections and provincial council elections, no later than the end of next year.

He also offered to elect the President of the Republic, in addition to choosing a government with full authority, agreed upon, and trusted and reassured by the people and their political forces.

Al-Halbousi also demanded a reinterpretation of Article 76 of the constitution (related to defining the “largest bloc”) and the abolition of the shameful circumvention of manipulating the provision of this article, which occurred under political pressure after the 2010 elections.

This position is closer to the position of the coordination framework, which says that the correct mechanism is the parliament meeting, the assignment of a new prime minister, and the formation of a government that will manage the transitional phase until the elections are held. While the Sadrist movement demands the dissolution of Parliament first, and the survival of the current caretaker government until elections are held.

Observers believe that the hidden intentions are what create a rift between the two parties. While the framework groups want to establish a “national service government”, in order to use it to strengthen their electoral positions and ensure their survival in power, the “Sadr movement” wants to achieve a pre-victory by taking it to the elections to consolidate its positions. In order to say that he brought down the attempts of corruption groups to lead the government again.

Leaders in the Sadrist movement, such as Muhammad al-Aboudi, say, “The government of militias, parties and quotas is in the news.” The decision, from now on, is in the hands of the people who want to liberate state institutions from the domination of parties, especially the legislative, executive and judicial institutions.

So far, there is no agreed mechanism for dissolving Parliament. And when all mediation and dialogue initiatives failed, and pressures on Muqtada al-Sadr turned into regressions that pushed him to retire from politics, the only option left for him is the return of his deputies to Parliament, which involves more acceptable justifications, both among the other blocs that had previously allied with the current. Al-Sadr, or even by the Federal Court itself, if the Sadrist deputies wanted to resort to it to approve their return.

The expected rejection by this court of the lawsuit to dissolve Parliament puts in front of it more accusations against it that it is working in collusion with the other party. If the court refuses to approve the return of the Sadrist MPs to their seats, these accusations will receive a broader degree of understanding. It is a situation the Court may not wish to find itself in.

Al-Sadr may now feel that he has given his opponents a free opportunity to become the “largest bloc” to take the initiative in Iraq.

Observers confirm that al-Sadr may now feel that he has given his opponents a free opportunity to become the “largest bloc”, to take the initiative, instead of the negative, obstructive position they were in. And that, beyond that, they took advantage of their new position to increase pressure on him, and sought to use all available weapons to defeat him, including the coup of his spiritual guide Kazem Al-Hairi against him, and even condemning and denying his affiliation with the “Sadrs”, meaning his father Muhammad Muhammad al-Sadr and his uncle Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr. Which was like a bomb exploded under his seat.

And when al-Sadr moved the protests to the parliament building, the verse turned against him again, while he could easily win the call to dissolve parliament from within, rather than protests that turned into a new source of condemnation.

Observers believe that the prevailing perception among the framework groups is that the more they besiege al-Sadr and reject his demands, he will make more mistakes that will lead to him appearing as an arbitrary leader, who does not know how to achieve his demands, through the correct means.

As they advance to consolidate their positions by adhering to constitutional procedures and contexts, they appear as state forces, while their opponent appears as a man of turmoil and unrest, and perhaps as an unstable man as well.

The only victim, in this confrontation, is the just demands to combat corruption and dependency on Iran, as the centrist blocs, including the independents, and the deputies of the October movement, see that the legitimate demands are not fought for by offering free victories to the other party.

Leaders in the Sadrist movement are still betting on “peaceful demonstrations” as a way to confront the framework groups’ plans, but these demonstrations, as the experience of 2019 demonstrated, do not frighten the framework groups, nor their militias. Unless it leads to bloody confrontations, it will not push the framework government to abandon what it sees as its last chance to present a new image of itself, by providing services, instead of practicing corruption.

It is believed that resorting to the street, unless it is a cause of a major crisis, the Shiite authority in Najaf will not interfere between the two sides of the conflict. This reference believes that it is responsible for preventing the crisis from turning into an internal conflict, but it is not concerned with the solution that must be made by the parties to the crisis themselves.

The leader of the Sadrist movement appeared as a man of turmoil and unrest, and perhaps also as an unstable man
Al-Sadr will have to escalate in order to gain a position that calls for calm, but he will not gain a solution or support from this reference. And since he has become without the “reference” cover, which was provided by Al-Hairi, he has become in a defenseless position that cannot engage in adventures that are not guaranteed results. It may end up condemning him by the reference of Najaf, which will be another bomb even more explosive under his seat.

Al-Sadr faces a problem that he does not accept advice and does not consult even with his closest relatives, and acts as the one who has the first and last words, while the correct leadership is contentment with being the one with the last words, after he listens to all the other sayings.

Observers believe that al-Sadr rarely consulted, when preparing his steps, with Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi or President Barham Salih. And he sometimes ignored them, although they remained closer to him than his opponents. He failed to take advantage of their constitutional powers, or their ability to conduct dialogues and search for solutions.

Observers believe that reversing the resignation of the current MPs from Parliament is not Al-Sadr’s last card, but it is his only valid card.