Sadr and Jaysh al-Mahdi

[cmetcalf82]

My guess is it's to lie low, giving the American's a chance to claim "progress" and begin withdrawing. After that's in motion (once started, it won't be stopped), he'll make his move take over the government.

I believe Kit is quite right. The positive impacts of the current "surge" include the increased targeting of both AQ and Shia militia's. Thus by freezing the Mahdi Militia Sadr likely hopes to prevent further targeting and attrition of his militia. The likely long-term intent for Sadr is to retain a measure of military power in the event the U.S. Congress or Presidential elections force the U.S. to significantly or completely withdraw U.S. forces. If this happens Sadr and others must be prepared to contend with increased ethnic conflict as the Sunni and Shia continue to struggle for control. My guess is right now Sadr is betting on that drawdown as a consequence of reporting on political events in the U.S. Bottom line is Sadr must retain his military power to retain his influence.

[kit]

Bottom line is Sadr must retain his military power to retain his influence.

Which is just another way of saying Iranian influence.

In future, if we conduct similar operations in another country, we should just find the local equivalent of al Sadr, put him on the payroll and leave. That's a whole lot cheaper, faster and more effective than wrapping ourselves in ideologies and trying to "help" them into the 21st century.

[Ken White]

using them -- and they him -- but very few things in the ME are as they seem.

Most Iraqis are pretty xenophobic (as are the Iraniha), the schism between Persians and Arabs is deep and I suspect that if he hews too much to the Irani, his Mahdi Army will dump him -- and he knows it. He can use but not cleave to...