After giv­ing a speech called “Iraq between real­ity and expec­ta­tion”, and in response to a ques­tion from Lebanese “NewTV” Chan­nel about the rea­son why Al-Hakim did not adopt the [armed] Iraqi resis­tance, his answer was:

We appre­ci­ate the resis­tance in Lebanon and Pales­tine, but the prob­lem in Iraq, there is no clear sym­bols of this resis­tance. In Lebanon, for exam­ple, we find a rep­re­sen­ta­tive who speaks on behalf of the resis­tance In Iraq, they are peo­ple who kill inno­cent peo­ple. We are not against the prin­ci­ple of resis­tance, but we did not find an entity that high­lights the role and asso­ci­ated with the resistance.

Irri­tated by this answer, Al-Sadr rep­re­sen­ta­tive in Lebanon Ali Al-Akili (who is busy these days with the Sadrists satel­lite TV chan­nel “Al-A’ahad”) asked Moqtada’s opin­ion on the above.

Muq­tada Al-Sadr gave an angry attak­ing Ammar Al-Hakim saying:

There are sev­eral answers [rea­sons], includ­ing:

- He [wanted to] show the injus­tice and crimes of Baathists, at the same time asks for their par­tic­i­pa­tion in the elec­tion, which is illog­i­cal and unacceptable.

- He wants the pres­ence of the occu­pa­tion forces, because he sees his inter­ests in this pres­ence, which is the rea­son that he don’t rec­og­nize the resistance.

- Yes, there are peo­ple who dam­aged the rep­u­ta­tion of the resis­tance from all sides, but we kill the occu­pa­tion forces only and we spare the blood of the Iraqis, which is a red line.

In real­ity, Muqtada’s irri­ta­tion came because Has­san Nas­ral­lah met with Ammar Al-Hakim while back in 2005 Nas­ral­lah refused to meet with Muq­tada Al-Sadr (despite Muq­tada and Nas­ral­lah are fam­ily — Has­san Nas­ral­lah mar­ried to Muqtada’s niece).

Also, this is not the first time Muq­tada Al-Sadr expresses his dis­pute with Ammar Al-Hakim agenda, even after both Shi­ite par­ties joined a coali­tion “Al-Sadr’s last offi­cial state­ment: Is this the end of the Shi­ite coali­tion?”