The question posed by the title of this article is more than just a political inquiry. At its core, it is a question about the nature of authority in Iraq, the limits of the state, and the role that a single cleric can play when domestic crises intersect with regional confrontation. Although the question borders on wishful thinking, many people inside and outside Iraq believe that the answer could be yes — if Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani chooses to act. However, this “yes” is neither simple, nor guaranteed, nor risk-free.

Today, Iraq is at the centre of an open confrontation between the United States and Iran, with its territory serving as a convenient arena for this conflict. Iran-aligned armed factions target US positions, Washington responds with strikes inside Iraq, and Iran launches attacks under the pretext of hitting ‘US interests’. The same factions also target Iraqi state institutions. It is an absurd situation: a country under attack from both outside and within, with armed groups operating on its soil that do not answer to its government yet claim to speak in its name.

In this context, turning to Sistani seems like an attempt to return to the last remaining source of national legitimacy. The man whose portrait is displayed more frequently than that of any president on Iraqi streets has become the figure successive governments invoke whenever they face an existential crisis. However, the key question is not whether Sistani could issue a binding religious edict calling for the dissolution of armed factions, but whether such an edict would be obeyed. A fatwa that........

© Middle East Monitor