Tom Friedman writes in todays NYTimes:
"It was Mr. Sistani who insisted that there had to be a direct national election in Iraq, rejecting the original goofy U.S. proposal for regional caucuses. It was Mr. Sistani who insisted that the elections not be postponed in the face of the Baathist-fascist insurgency. And it was Mr. Sistani who ordered Shiites not to retaliate for the Sunni Baathist and jihadist attempts to drag them into a civil war by attacking Shiite mosques and massacring Shiite civilians."
Friedman's notion, apparently serious, that Sistani be given the Nobel Peace Prize is interesting because there is a tradition of giving the prize to questionable people "in hopes" that it will make them "behave."
Most of these "angels" to American/Western foreign policy have been people who have accepted the American ideal of "how things should be" in their respective countries.
The US pushed for reform in South Africa, and Mandela was there for them when the old elite fell. So too in Russia, the US cold war was all about "regime change" in the USSR.....and someone rose to the occasion to fill the power vacuum thus created.
Now, with Sistani we have a old "holy man" who has played Dubya & Chums for fools right from the very beginning.
Sistani wanted "national elections," not regional caucuses, because he knew the Shia would win big...and they did. Now there is a so-called "government" in Iraq that can not, and will never govern!
The Sunni are almost completely out of the loop....or fighting an insurgency against the US backed "new elite."
South Africa and Russia are not Iraq. South Africa and Russia were not invaded by "The Great Satan." Reform by peaceful means is one thing...Reform by a violent "illegal" and hamfisted invasion is something else......
Sistani is patient and wise old man...he knows what he wants and he knows how to get it...... I wish I could say the same about Bush and the Neocons.
