What we are seeing is the "old guard" Sunni and Shiia coming together to wrest power away from the "new guard" ... how the Iraqi people will feel about this I do not know.

I just found an article, archived unfortunately, from the Boston Herald ...

Former Iraqi premier said to be seeking to oust al-Maliki

By Associated Press

Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - Updated: 09:28 AM EST

BAGHDAD - Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki faces a revolt within his party by factions that want him out as Iraqi leader, according to officials in his office and the political party he leads.

Abrahim al-Jaafari, al-Maliki’s predecessor, leads the challenge and already has approached leaders of...

irl: http://news.bostonherald.com/international/middleEast/view.bg?articleid=1014417

=========================================================

The al-Sistani rebuke was reported thus:

Al-Quds al-`Arabi [pdf] reports in Arabic that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is "disgusted" with the al-Maliki government. He complains that it has 'filled his heart with pus' by donning his robes and then neglecting to establish security or provide services to the people.

which now, to me, seems more vague than it did originally ...

Sistani has been lying low ... it's hard to know if his lack of visibility is due to a decline in influence or if "the real work" is going on behind closed doors (he's also had a few close aides assasinated while in his vicinity) But he was, imho, forced to moderate his overt and mocking distain of Al-Sadr as Al-Sadr's influence grew.

I keep being made aware the degree to which **everything** we read from Iraq originates with a "slant" depending on what "team" the source is from ... too many parties to keep them straight even if they were identified ... so reports Al-Sadr has fled to Iran (frequent, always denies and often refuted by people who have met with him in Iraq) are being spread by god-knows-how-many factions attempting to smear Al-Sadr. Maliki has a "kick me" sign on his back. .... obviously.

This IHT story (very short from 08/19/2007) indicates a few other possible "contenders"

irl: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/19/news/maliki.php

again, the old-guard fat-cats want their country back ... will "democracy" be "scuttled" and will "the people" stand for it?

what is so unseemly about Allawi's lobbying effort** is that we have soldiers -- OSTENSIBLY -- working hard to STABILIZE the country and some of them are being wounded and killed daily in that effort ...

"Our" efforts (which may be multifocal and many headed) to influence elections in other countries -- the Ukraine and Israel come to mind -- bears much greater scrutiny and consideration.

It seems that despite the obvious difference between bankrolling progressive anti-establishment candidates in foreign countries in PEACE TIME as opposed to BOOTS ON THE GROUND WAR TIME, this is all seen as open-season business as usual and I'm not sure this isn't -- ultimately -- anti-democratic.

We, certainly, get hot and bothered at the notion of "foreign nationals" making significant campaign contributions to candidaes in our elections, and yet, we seem to assume the right to do it elsewhere ... and how we prevent our "contributions" from becoming "bribes" or "undue influence" in countries with even fewer safeguards against corruption.

The line between "official" and "non-offical" when it comes to lobbying -- particularly with this government/private sector revolving door -- is dangerously blurred. Domestic corruption and undue influence is one thing, ad hoc influence on or "privatization" foreign policy is another.

** (yes we do need to know all those nasty lobbying details beyond who is not payign the bills, but also whose "letter of reference" are being bandied about, whose cocktail parties and golf trips have been commandeers -- shades of Challabi -- and things like who's meeting with whom on government property, etc.)

but the academicians proved themselves impressively biased in many cases leading up to the invasion of Iraq ... and anyway who's taking bets on history? ...

Like too many things, policy discussions have become over/under, winner/loser, enter your favorite sports betting analogy ... Irrc, Bush has said that he likes the people under him to be in a competitive mode ... from my experience working under a similar CEO, this leads to fierce backstabbing, simplitic "solutions" built on unkeepable promises made in an effort to outshine the "competition" rather than cooperation and sharing of intelligence and resources to find the best solution, however that might be defined.

America may have already reached it's saturation point with all these self-appointed experts ... There's not much left to hang onto when prize winning historians are accused of plagery and corporate annual reports are discovered to be fiction. The great maw that is cable news and "news" in general -- all the newspapers, magazine, web sites etc. all clamoring for a sound bite -- helped create this industry for "experts."

Hopefully Zelikow's "plight" like O'Hanlon's will encourage greater transparency and humility and honesty by these "talking heads" from whom we get our information as well as those who, by place them in our living rooms, give them both credibility and privilege ... If presented opinions were more diverse and discussions more free-wheeling, the networks might avoid the Pravda comparisons ... but they're not, it's all talking points all the time and their odds, their over/under and spread ...

The old "I'm much too important and too high up the food chain in my ivory tower to be bothered with such trivialities" dodge sort of falls apart then, doesn't it?

Like doctors and drug companies ... iow, you don't fuck up the franchise ... the time to part company is when the association hurts your credibility ... doctors insist that big pharma perks don't affect their prescribing habits .. everyone else just smirks.

I imagine in the "expert" business, the one-hand-washing-the-other brotherhood extends to passing on gigs, recommendations, book reviews, cover blubs, and cordiality "in the (talkshow) ring." This incestuous circle is vested in self-promotion ... in which the assistance of colleagues is invaluable ... ratings, book tours, speeches ...

Yes, there are too many real-life-job constraints on academics to make it big in show biz.