Security will remain the key issue for Iraq's new interim government, Omayma Abdel-Latif reports In a statement addressed to the new Iraqi interim government, Iraq's most prominent religious authority Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani cautiously welcomed the government yet insisted it did not enjoy "the required electoral legitimacy" nor was it "representative of the Iraqi people". Despite the debasing language, Al-Sistani put forward demands that he expects the new government to adhere to. High on the agenda was, "the need to bring back security to all corners of Iraq" and "put an end to organised crime". This week, Iraq's new prime minister, Iyad Allawi, seemed intent on putting those words into action. In a press conference held on Monday, Allawi outlined a new security strategy to regain control over the security apparatuses. Allawi, who is no stranger to the security structure, chairing as he did the security affairs committee of the recently dissolved Interim Governing Council (IGC), announced that nine Iraqi parties have agreed to dissolve their armed militia. The announcement was viewed as "a major achievement" for Allawi's government. The disarmament agreement included the militia of the two main Kurdish parties -- the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Unionist Party (PUK) -- the Badr Brigade, the armed wing of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), the Iraqi National Accord (INA), Allawi's own party, the Iraqi Islamic Party, the Iraqi Hizbullah Party as well as Al-Daawa Party and Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress (INC). The decision will lead to the integration of at least 100,000 fighters in the police and army forces as well as other state civil forces. The disarmament was in line with the interim constitution, adopted in March, which stated that armed groups outside government control were to be banned as of 30 June. While some militias, such as Badr Brigade, had already disbanded and transformed into political organisations, others, like the Kurdish Beshmerge, kept their arms. Iraqi observers, however, were surprised by the fact that the ban on arms did not include the young Shia leader Moqtada Al-Sadr's Al-Mahdi militia. Al-Sadr's spokesperson, Hossam Al- Husseini, told reporters Tuesday that the decision to dissolve the armed militia was of no concern to Al-Sadr supporters. It primarily aimed, he explained, at dissolving the Kurdish Beshmerge, the INC and Badr Brigade. "The Sadrist movement is a popular movement which seeks no positions of power and Al-Mahdi army is not a militia," Al- Husseini said. There was no immediate explanation on the part of Allawi's government as to why Al-Mahdi militia was excluded from the ban. But sources close to Al-Bayt Al-Shi'i (the Shia house), an umbrella organisation of 20 Shia political parties, told Al- Ahram Weekly that during last week's cease-fire negotiations with Al-Sadr, it was agreed that his militia will dissolve and most of them will be integrated within state security apparatuses. There was, however, no confirmation of this news by Al-Sadr's spokesperson. The integration of Al- Mahdi militia is seen as a crucial step in Allawi's new security strategy. Allawi's decision came at a time when violence continued to claim more Iraqi lives. One day after Allawi's announcement, a surge in violence was witnessed in different Iraqi cities. The biggest was in Mosul on Tuesday when three cars exploded in an apparent suicide bombing, killing at least 14 Iraqis, one American soldier and wounding 126, including 10 American soldiers. Such violence is likely to further complicate the task of the new government. The Muslim Ulemma Association, a Sunni organisation, cautioned that "a wave of violence" might hit the country during the coming few months. Association Spokesperson Bashar Al-Faidi said on Tuesday that violence was likely to continue due to the fact that the majority of Iraqis "don't accept the interim government". This point was further confirmed by events during the week. While initially most Iraqi forces welcomed the interim government with guarded optimism, several figures voiced concern this week over the ways in which appointments to the interim government were made. Among those who poured scorn on the interim government was Al-Sadr. In his Friday sermon, Al-Sadr's deputy told followers that "America" has appointed both the prime minister and the president under the cover of the UN. "He -- the prime minister -- claims to be a Shia but he is devoutly secular and I distance myself from this government because the people reject it and will not accept any government except through elections." He continued, "our government should be an elected one in order to gain the legitimacy it deserves." Al-Sadr's words were also echoed by Sunni clerics. Sheikh Ahmed Al-Samaraei, the imam of Abi Hanifa Mosque, denounced the new government as reflecting "the hegemony of the US". "Where is Iraqi sovereignty if all the decisions concerning security issues are vetoed by the Americans?" asked Al-Samaraei. There is no sovereignty, he added, when both security and oil are kept in the hands of the Americans. What form the relationship between the interim government and foreign troops will take after the power handover is likely to prove crucial to how Iraqis perceive the interim government. This relationship will be mostly shaped by the US-UK co-sponsored draft resolution which has been unanimously adopted by the council late on Tuesday. The Security Council's 15-0 vote came after nearly two weeks of haggling over the needed amendements. The UN resolution will accordingly transform the occupation of Iraq into a "strategic partnership" with the US-led foreign forces. The resolution, however, stated that "the interim government will ultimately assume full responsibility for the maintenance of security and stability." But the language of the resolution was rather vague when it dealt with the role of the multi-national force (MNF). "The security council decides that the MNF shall have the authority to take all necessary measures to contribute to the maintainence of security and stability in Iraq, in accordance with the letters annexed to the resoultion," said the resolution. Both France and Germany wanted to ensure that the new interim government has the right to veto major operations by US-led security forces. Franco-German efforts, however, were dealt a blow when both the US and Allawi's government submitted to the council two letters in which they outline a new military partnership. In his letter, Allawi outlined the rules of engagement and spoke of "strategic military partnership with the multinational force". While some Security Council members have called for the new government to have a veto power over what was dubbed "sensitive offensive operations", Allawi declined to ask for the right to veto, instead underlining that his government will work with the multinational force "to reach agreement on the full range of fundamental security and policy issues, including policy on sensitive offensive operations." While the draft resolution insisted that the interim government should have the right to ask the foreign force to leave, yet in his letter, Allawi said that the force ought stay at least until an elected government takes power. Such expressions are likely to further complicate the interim government's already difficult task of acquiring legitimacy. "The period of time allowed to this government to fulfil the hard tasks assigned to it is very limited," Al-Faidi said, "but the most difficult task is that it has to prove to the Iraqi people that it will disassociate itself from the occupation's sphere of influence." A UN resolution that clearly specifies a period after which foreign troops should leave Iraq will no doubt please Iraqis, Al-Faidi added. In the UN adopted resolution, however, there was no mention whatsoever of any such deadlines.
