I'm taking four classes this semester, and thought I might as well post my collected reading lists for them in lieu of more detailed commentary at this time since it's getting on rather late. If there's an Amazon account you'd like me to link through, I'll go back and edit this entry tomorrow with the appropriate links, but for now here's the list...   more »

The article below on Sistani was posted originally on Tacitus in late August as the events in Najaf were reaching their denouement. I am reposting it here as a partial response to two of praktike's recent articles: Shi'ite Islamists for Democracy! and to Blast from the Past, about the problems of lack of foresight and serious pre-invasion planning by the crowd in charge at the Pentagon.

My prior post gives some background on Sistani, which is the source of my intuition that the non-sectarian sentiments, recently expressed by one of his close associates, are in fact a reflection of Sistani's thinking. That thinking, which stresses the legitimacy that can only come from direct participation by Iraqis in the selection of their government, put him at direct odds with the "political philosphy" underlying the Bush Admin's adventure in -- as they saw it -- creating a country from scratch.

The philosophical assumptions underlying the behavior of those responsible for setting the initial direction of the civil side of the occupation was a rather bizarre mix. One element could be kindly described as the attitude of "control freaks:" total top-down control by the US and US-friendly elites, which implied that it would take years to proceed through an orderly sequence of stabilization, reconstruction and democratization. The other element was a remarkable laisser faire laisser passer attitude about how the petty details (and the funding) would all work out that, as more and more is disclosed of the CPA's activities, appears to have been frighteningly cavalier. But maybe it shouldn't seem so bizarre -- "the market knows best," just as long as the "power centers" are in our control (guns and oil). A case could be made that it pretty much sums up the stated philosophy of the current Administration's domestic policy (although on the spending side, honored more in the breach).

There's a further manner in which Sistani can be seen as more of a true democratic reformer than the Bush Administration. As I mentioned in a comment to your article, there seems to have been an undercurrent of concern among the Shi'a that the US bargaining approach with the different groups -- and allocating Council and government positions by groups -- has created divisions that didn't have to exist, and I have the impression that Sistani is among those who want to be "sectarian-blind" when it comes to the political system. There seems to be a wide-spread assumption, among both Bush Admin officials and commenters who oppose Admin policy, that a "culturally-appropriate" governance solution is a Lebanese division of the spoils. Obviously, he fear of all-out civil war is reinforcing many of these perspectives. And things may indeed reach the point of a Lebanon "division for unity's sake" governing arrangement. But that certainly isn't consistent with Sistani's original vision.    more »