Al-Sadr Must be Eliminated

The Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism urges Arab and Muslim leaders to provide moral support to the new Iraqi government in its bid to defeat Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mehdi Army.

San Diego, CA (PRWEB) August 22, 2004 -- The Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism urges Arab and Muslim leaders to provide moral support to the new Iraqi government in its bid to defeat Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mehdi Army.

It has been more than a year since the invasion of Iraq. Some were for the war and some were against the war. However, continuing to argue about whether the war was justified is now moot and not constructive. No matter what is ones view about the invasion of Iraq, the Arab and Muslim world must now agree that a stable, prosperous Iraq is in everyones best interest.

The journey to stabilizing Iraq has been a difficult one and it is being made more difficult by terrorist infiltrations, Iranian sabatoge and ruthless private militias who have no purpose other than to destabilize Iraq.

The battle with Muqtada al-Sadr has continued for too long. There must come a time when negations must stop and decisive action taken. Al-Sadr has been given numerous opportunities to lay down his arms and join the government if he wants to influence government policy. In response, he has continued to play cat and mouse and continues to divide Iraq.

Some fear that waging a full assault against al-Sadr and his forces may enrage the Shia population. The Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism believes this is flawed reasoning. Those who support al-Sadr will be just as enraged with the Iraqi government and the Coalition forces if they continue to wage a low intensity battle that accomplishes no more than increase al-Sadrs popularity and recruits.

The Iraqi government and the Coalition forces must eliminate al-Sadr in a quick, decisive and overwhelming battle. The United States must also reaffirm to the Iraqi people that it has no intention of continuing to occupy Iraq. The United States must make it clear to the people of Iraq that it will leave Iraq one day after Iraq becomes stable. This approach will provide the Iraqi government with a credible argument against the militants who claim that they are fighting for the liberation of Iraq. With this approach, the Iraqi government may win the hearts and mind of the Iraqi people by arguing that if the militants want the U.S. to leave Iraq then the militants must put down their arms and contribute to the building of a prosperous and stable nation.

Having said this, no one should be naïve into believing that al-Sadr is fighting to end the occupation of Iraq. The battle with al-Sadr is about the future of Iraq. Iraq is now divided between those who want to build a democratic, secular nation and those, like al-Sadr, who want to build an Iran type theocracy. We must never allow Iraq to become another Iran.

In response to this message, FMCAT received a supportive response from Shia theologian Khaleel Mohammed:

I most certainly agree that the argument that fighting Sadr will inflame Shias is a flawed argument. In the first place, within the madhab of the ahl al-beyt (a.s), everyone knows that there is a hierarchy that must be observed, as there is one in any civilized society. Sadr has contemptuously dismissed the counsel of Ayatollah Sistani and other elders--thereby violating the principles of Shi'ism.

By holing up at the Imam Ali Mosque he has chosen to use the best of strategies. And again breaking Islamic law, in terms of a submaxim of the fiqh rule: "LA DARAR WA LAA DIRAR".

This may be functionally translated as "No incipient or retaliatory injury." Under this maxim comes a direct application to Sadr's "cause": Yutahammal al darar al khaas li daf' al darar al-aam". --The private tribulation is borne in order to avoid a more general tribulation." In Sadr's case, his position is a minority one, and by holding out, he is causing damage to (1) his followers (2) the physical structure of the shrine (3) indirectly allowing the desecration of the shrine (4) indirectly making himself liable for whatever collateral damage occurs in the assaults by the Iraqi administration and US forces (5) directly allowing for demonization of Muslims.

I fully understand that one does not always resort to the reasoning of Islamic law in matters; the reason I do so now is to let my fellow Muslims, many of whom, like me, opposed the war, nonetheless agree with Mr. Nawash--that such issue is now finished. To rebuild a new Iraq, we cannot let subversives derail us. Sadr must know that thinking Muslims object to his position, and that he is not a candidate for martyrdom, but rather a person who is guilty of causing the death of innocents. Let us make our voices heard.

Khaleel Mohammed, Ph.D (McGill)
Assistant Professor
Department of Religious Studies
San Diego State University

# # #