Muqtada Al-Sadr vs. Hassan Nasrallah
As I explained before that last Al-Sadr’s statement is not about the “special forces” and contrary to the media focus on this issue, Muqtada Al-Sadr’s media and information advisor Al-Marwani wrote an article confirms what I said.
Sadrists do not attribute infallibility [‘isma an attribute particular to the prophet and Imams only] to their leader [Muqtada Al-Sadr], but they used to feel his media, politics, legislation role, and his control to calm or to escalate the situation at the appropriate time and place.
Recent statement issued by Mr. Muqtada al-Sadr, to contain the resistance’s arms at the hands of a selective team(s), from inside the Imam Mahdi Army - is in reality an important step on the road to focus on the resistance, and a smart move to take out foreign agendas from the honorable Iraqi national resistance.
Although most of the article celebrates Moqtada’s intelligence and wise-judgment, Iraqi intellectual and scholar in Shiites affairs Al-Ruba’i says that it wasn’t Muqtada’s decision to deactivate the Mahdi Army.
Considering the timing, this decision came with the Iraq - U.S. security agreement argument, the writer argues that the Iranian message to Maliki is that his silence and not commenting on Al-Sadr’s statement can gives him a space to maneuver under “Iraqi public-opinion” cover to reject the agreement.
The interesting thing about Al-Ruba’I article is in the last paragraph where he said that both ways, Al-Sadr is stepping ahead to power once again. In his last move, Maliki’s government understood that there is no other option only re-cooperates with Muqtada Al-Sadr.
Comparing Hassan Nasrallah’s strategy, tactics and policies to these of Muqtada Al-Sadr’s, Al-Sadr falls far away behind.
In an article called “Nasrallah’s victory in Lebanon and Al-Sadr’s defeat in Iraq“, the writer argues that although Muqtada scores more in the “advantages” such as the number of his supporters is double the residents of whole Lebanon, his country [Iraq] is occupied while Lebanon is not occupied, his family background, compared to Nasrallah’s, Al-Sadr failed and misused these privileges to advance his resistance project.
Hassan Nasrallah participated in the elections and in a free and independent Lebanon. When he entered the provincial and parliamentary elections, most of southern-Lebanon was under his control, or allied with Amal Movement.
Hassan Nasrallah did not allow any revelry-parties to run beside his party in his strongholds in the south.
Muqtada Al-Sadr ignored the security basic of his party when he allowed other parties - Al-Hakim Party in particular - his archenemy - to dominate the provincial councils. An incomprehensible move by the Sadr Trend, some people interpreted it as (not to deal with the occupation), but his parliament members and Sadrists ministers in the Green Zone are dealing with the occupation.
Hassan Nasrallah kept good relationships with all Lebanese parties and political blocs, according to Lebanese national interests and the interests. and this relationship built by Mr. Despite the seriousness of these relations, Nasrallah stayed caution, particularly with those who are supported by the Imperialist-powers and Saudi Arabia.
Muqtada al-Sadr - with the great difference between the two cases, Lebanon is not occupied- kept semi-normal relations with the occupation-collaborators parties and political blocs in the Green Zone. Al-Sadr received Ahmed Chalabi and Ibrahim al-Jaafari and other representatives of parties in the Green Zone.
No Comments, Comment or Ping
Reply to “Muqtada Al-Sadr vs. Hassan Nasrallah”