Divergence
As noted before, the Iranians are finding out that their influence in Iraq isn’t quite what some have made it out to be.
Relations between Iraq’s Shiite-led government and the rulers in neighboring Iran have come under unprecedented strains as Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki moves against rivals and negotiates long-term pacts with Washington.
…
On Monday, the hard-line Iranian newspaper Jomhuri-e-Eslami accused al-Maliki of lacking backbone in alks with Washington, which include the long-range status of U.S. military operations in Iraq. The daily, which is considered close to Iran’s ruling clerics, claimed Washington wants a “full-fledged colony” in Iraq.It was a rare public jab at al-Maliki, a Shiite. But it was mild compared with the closed-door recriminations during the high-level Iraqi visit, according to accounts by Shiite politicians close to Iraq’s prime minister.
But wait, the whining gets better:
At one point, a key leader within Iran’s Revolutionary Guards accused the Iraqi delegation and their leaders of being tools of Washington and showing ingratitude for years of Iranian support to Iraqi’s majority Shiites, who suffered attacks and persecution under Saddam, the politicians said.
Awwwww, poor Iran. Those Iraqi ingrates, wanting to rule their own country without having Iranian rockets sprayed all over their capital.
And I wonder what Kevin “The current government is, after all, more pro-Iran than Sadr has ever been” Drum thinks of this:
Iraqi authorities are less specific and suggest that al-Sadr’s entire movement is drifting more into Iran’s orbit.
…
Then at the recent meetings, Iranian authorities said they opposed al-Maliki’s goal to crush the Mahdi Army, arguing it would rob Tehran of a key ally, the Iraqi politicians told the AP.
Subscribe to Dean's World by Email
4 comments
"showing ingratitude for years of Iranian support to Iraqi’s majority Shiites, who suffered attacks and persecution under Saddam"
Does anyone know what good Iran did for Iraqi Shiites under Saddam?
Remember how popular that line about "an Islamic republic in the orbit of Iran" was a few years ago? Yeesh. It was always obvious that A) Shia are no more a monolithic bloc than "protestants" are, and B) Iran is a nation of completely different race, ethnicity, language, and tradition from most of Iraq’s Shia. Why would more than a sliver of Iraqis give two bits what the Iranian government wants or says? It’s like expecting Lebanese Maronites (Arab Orthodox/Catholics) to slavishly follow whatever Assyrian Christians nearby say. Having some sympathy for one another, maybe, but…
A few years ago, Dean? People — commenters on this blog, even — have been touting that line throughout the entire surge. I’m pretty sure a driveby ignoramus used it within the last two weeks.
And I expect them to continue. Evidence has never been a hindrance to their preconceptions.
One question: Have Iraq and Iran EVER been friends in the last 30 years? (Maybe they have, please enlighten me if so).
I thought they were not what you could call ‘bosom buddies’ in any stretch of the imagination. Despite the support of the Shia population, it is doubtful that they would just kowtow to Iran now that they have power. "Islamic Republic in the orbit of Iran"? It is an interesting theory but history does not back it.
You must log in to post a comment.