Neither FAL Vs Lebanese army, nor HZB Vs Israel.
But more resembles HZB Vs. the Lebanese state.
In both cases it is about a Shi’i entity, that feels it has too Little power regarding what it considers as a try to marginalize it’s influence.
It’s internal, it’s sectarian and it is about the awakening of Shi’ism.
.

Amir,
This is Shiaa Vs Shiaa. Your argument is not holding.

A close analogy could be Amal Vs Hezbollah during the war in Lebanon..

Amir is right Mus.

This is analogous to Lebanese government vs hezbos. You, like a typical Ayrab, see everything through the prism of religion. Al-Sadr is a militia group operating outside the official capacity of the government that happened to be shiaa.

Imad

Mus,
Maliki wants to preserve Iraq as one bloc, Arab and “national”. He wants to be perceived more as Arab, and less as Shi’i. I don’t understand his motives. notice that Shi’i Iran was represented in the Arab summit, but not Iraq.! So it is a Shi’i movement Vs the state.

And the Shia (as I understand it), is not monolithic; it is diverse, and has various sub-movements and doctrines.
.

Your quote, from the NY Times article:

Much of the reporting on this fighting in Basra and Baghdad [..] assumes that Mr. Sadr and his militia are the bad guys who are out to spoil the peace, and that the government forces are the legitimate side trying to bring order.

OK, so far so good…

This is a dangerous oversimplification

Or is it?

The current fighting, which the government portrays as a crackdown on criminality, is better seen as a power grab, an effort by Mr. Maliki and the most powerful Shiite political parties to establish their authority over Basra and the parts of Baghdad that have eluded their grasp.

Maliki is the Prime Minister of the lawfully and democratically elected government of Iraq, is he not? Is it not criminal for an armed militia to defy the government to the point that government forces, including police, can’t even go into areas where that militia is operating?

It seems the author of that article made for himself a false argument, and then defeated it with his own words.

Aren’t there large oilfields near Basra and isn’t it a gateway for handling oil shipments out of Iraq? Religion, militias, nationalism, power struggles, good guys vs. bad guys - maybe the root cause is simpler, like money.

Sorry about messing up the tags.

Bronx-man,

maybe the root cause is simpler, like money.

Of course, the oil revenues are very important. But who does the money belong to? The government of Iraq, or an armed militia? My understanding is that one of the major political roadblocks in Iraq right now is how the oil revenue should be shared, in a fair manner (the Sunni areas have no oil). How can the revenue be shared, if a Shia militia is siphoning it off at the source? And what right does the Mahdi Army (or any other non-governmental agency) have to do that?

Craig, I guess I wasn’t too good at making my point. Of course the oil belongs to the Iraqi government. One group is trying to steal it from the other. If it weren’t for the money factor the scene would be a lot quieter. On a larger scale, imagine the situation in the Middle East if all of the world’s oil were located in, say, Antartica.

I too am going to agree with Amir’s initial comment. This is a legitimate government against an illegal militia. Or at least, that’s how it SHOULD be framed.

In typical fashion, more importance is being given to the sectarian nature of it.

This is one of the reasons we, in Lebanon, will never be able to have a functional secular civil state (as long as such thought processes as this one continue to be the norm).

People have to stop equating a state institution (the army) with an armed gang. Period.

The hypocrisy of these statements and comments are beyond laughable: People get all excited and patriotic when the Lebanese army takes on a foreign group such as Fath Al Islam, one day. The next day, they put the Lebanese Army on the same footing as a Hizballah because the latter represents a portion of the Lebanese population. (at least, this discourse here about Iraq would lead me to believe the same rationale is being applied to Lebanese Army vs. Hizb).

When will people understand that the 2 are NOT on the same footing?

The reason so many Lebanese consider the Army, or the ISF as “militias” is because we continue to be incapable of distinguishing a legitimate state institution from an illegal militia. The two are not, and never will be, the same.