While millions of Iraqis and many observers were waiting for a statement from the religious authority in Najaf about the Shiite-Shiite fights in Iraq — between gunmen loyal to the Sadrist movement and their counterparts affiliated with the Coordination Framework — Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani was quietly seeking to stop the violence and clear the Green Zone and the rest of Iraq’s cities of the conflicting militias. A reliable source revealed the details, saying: “Al-Sistani’s office was closely following what was happening and studying which practical steps were most appropriate to take. The situation was very sensitive. Al-Sistani does not accept the shedding of Iraqi blood. At the same time, he does not want to be involved in the political conflict between the parties because he refuses to support one party over the other.” That is why Al-Sistani “sent an unwritten verbal message, through his own channels and through some people from his trusted inner circle, who delivered a message to Muqtada Al-Sadr that what is happening now in Iraq — in terms of fighting — may lead to a devastating civil war, which is something that harms the people and the state. Therefore, it is necessary to put a clear and explicit end to what happened.” The well-informed source, who is very close to the senior religious authorities in Najaf, added: “Al-Sistani’s message was clear and Al-Sadr knew that he had to do something and quickly in order to implement the message. Otherwise, he would endanger himself and lose his position. That is why he ordered his supporters during his press conference to withdraw from the Green Zone.” The Mahdi Army used to be the striking force of the Sadr movement, before turning into the Peace Brigades. It is an armed group that obeys the decisions of Al-Sadr. Its members are ready to do anything he asks of them. The religious authorities in Najaf know that Al-Sadr has armed militias and a wide audience that supports him without question or opposition. Therefore, they are cautious in dealing with him. However, this does not mean that they submit to him or that they are unable to confront him. They possess the juristic legitimacy that Al-Sadr does not, since he is not a mujtahid, but rather inherited his social and political leadership from his father, Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Sadiq Al-Sadr. The jurisprudential reference of the Sadr movement was passed on to Ayatollah Kazem Al-Haeri at the behest of Mohammed Sadiq Al-Sadr himself. Al-Sadr realized that any attempt to maneuver within Al-Sistani’s message could push the religious authority, who is followed by the majority of Shiites around the world, to declare an explicit position that may be very harmful to him and directly affect his political leadership and popularity. Therefore, Al-Sadr preferred to bow before the storm and come out and say: “I am now criticizing the Sadrist movement’s revolution because it deviated from its peacefulness and chose violence.” He also noted that “shedding the blood of the Iraqi people is forbidden.” He added: “If the movement does not withdraw even from the sit-in in front of parliament within an hour, I will disavow it.” Al-Sadr’s statements, which may have disturbed a portion of his party and were considered by some as a retreat from his intransigent stances against the forces of the Coordination Framework that are hostile to him, were a repositioning and an attempt to win the favor of Al-Sistani’s office, while also saying that he listens to the reference’s orders and does not rebel against the Hawza Najaf. Al-Sadr has the confidence of his party and his influence is greater than that of the religious authority, Kazem Al-Haeri. The majority of the Sadrist movement consists of a new generation that does not care much about the doctrinal issue, so if Al-Sadr’s opinion contradicts that of Kazem Al-Haeri, they will certainly implement Al-Sadr’s words, even if he is much less knowledgeable than Kazem Al-Haeri. Whoever monitors the performance of the religious authority in Najaf realizes that it was not intending to intervene in the political and security crisis in Iraq because it does not support the involvement of clerics in politics. Al-Sistani is interfering now and in his own way because “it came to fighting with weapons and there were many victims. The religious authority does not wish for an internal war, so he stepped in to stop the violence,” according to a source close to him in Najaf. Al-Sadr last week criticized former Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki and the head of the Popular Mobilization Units Falih Al-Fayyadh, calling for the latter’s dismissal and describing him as “weak” in a tweet published by Saleh Al-Iraqi, who is described as the “leader’s minister” on his Twitter account. Al-Iraqi also called for “the elimination of the popular crowd from border controls and crossings in order to preserve the reputation of the good mujahideen, as there are those who deliberately distort their reputation through the use of violence, trade, smuggling and so on.” Everyone knows that Al-Iraqi tweets on behalf of Al-Sadr. However, the Najaf authority did not interfere in this dispute between Al-Sadr on the one hand and Al-Maliki and Al-Fayyadh on the other, as it is between political parties and the authority refuses to be part of the political conflict in Iraq. Some may be of the view that the Najaf authority is not doing enough to resolve the crisis in Iraq or that it is necessary for it to take explicit positions toward the warring political parties, condemning both the Coordination Framework and the Sadrist movement. They also say that it must issue a fatwa banning all corrupt politicians and clerics from government work or from running to be prime minister or a member of parliament. However, through its methodology, which is based on the separation of religion from government, and the necessity of using national competencies, not religious scholars, for political action, it does not interfere except in extreme circumstances, when the matter becomes about civil peace and preserving the state. The religious authorities in Najaf know that Al-Sadr has armed militias and a wide audience that supports him without question or opposition. Hassan Al-Mustafa These are major challenges that Iraq is facing and perhaps “the only hope is that the current crisis might prompt everyone in Iraq to seek a radical solution to their problems by reviewing the constitution and its interpretation, and seeking to limit the electoral disagreements. Achieving this necessitates a genuine will among all the political sides to admit that, if the current crisis prevails, it might become a death sentence for each of them,” according to Saudi political writer Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed. In his article entitled “The Chaos in Iraq,” published by Asharq Al-Awsat last week, he stressed that: “About a quarter of the regional countries are already inflicted by chaos, and having a new war or another chaotic failed country isn’t another play they need.” This may prompt the wise inside Iraq and its neighboring countries to intervene in order to find a preliminary solution, form a new government and end the constitutional void that is currently occurring. Hassan Al-Mustafa is a Saudi writer and researcher interested in Islamic movements, the development of religious discourse and the relationship between the Gulf Cooperation Council states and Iran. Twitter: @halmustafa Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News" point of view