Were they?

Were the "grisly attacks and other sectarian violence unleashed by last week’s bombing"…"which killed more than 1,300 Iraqis" (Washington Post) merely a spontaneous reaction to the destruction of the Askariya Mosque, or were they part of a broader strategy to incite civil war?

And why were so many of those who were killed …"shot, knifed, garroted or suffocated by plastic bags over their heads". (Washington Post) Many others were killed gangland-style with hands bound behind their backs and a gunshot wound to the head.

Is this the method of killing we would expect from rampaging mobs, or is it more like a deliberate campaign of terror designed to spread fear through the population.

In Max Fuller’s seminal article, "For Iraq, 'The Salvador-Option, becomes Reality", Fuller points out that the Iraqi Interior Ministry’s death squads were, in fact, trained by agents from the CIA who had honed their skills in Vietnam and El Salvador. (Recently even the New York Times has admitted that these groups received American training) Fuller sees the same pattern appearing in Iraq as in other American-backed counterinsurgency operations. He says:

"In Iraq the war comes in two phases. The first phase is complete: the destruction of the existing state, which did not comply with the interests of British and American capital. The second phase consists of building a new state tied to those interests and smashing every dissenting sector of society."

Fuller’s observations are consistent with what we already know about the deliberate destruction of Iraqi institutions, infrastructure, trade unions, peasant organizations and academics. The Iraqi state is being systematically decimated to pave the way for the new order.

Fuller states: "Behind every imperialist counter-insurgency war…lurks the reality of exploitation and class war, and, as successive imperialist powers have shown, the bottom line in combating the hopes and dreams of ordinary people is to resort to spreading terror through the application of extreme violence. In Iraq, the Salvador Option may mean returning home to find your entire family seated at a table with their own severed heads served to them and a bowl of blood for relish."

So, how does Fuller’s theory square with the reality of this week’s violence in Iraq?

Well, for one thing, Iraqi-born novelist, Haifa Zangana, confirms that there is "a systematic assassination-campaign" directed at academics and human rights activists which is designed to "destroy intellectual life in Iraq". Hundreds of Iraqi intellectuals have been killed without prompting even one investigation by occupation authorities.

Does that sound intentional?

We also have on record the observations of Construction Minister Jassem Mohammed Jaafar who investigated the site of the bombed-out Askariya Mosque and acknowledged that it "was the work of specialists…..Holes were dug into the mausoleum’s four main pillars and packed with explosives. Then charges were connected together and linked to another charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to a detonator which was triggered at a distance."

Who benefits from such a vicious attack on one of the main icons of Islamic identity?

Some observers are suggesting that Muqtada al-Sadr, the defiant adversary of the US occupation, may have been behind the bombing so that his "black-clad" Mahdi Army could sweep through Baghdad purging his Sunni enemies.

It’s possible.

After all, The Washington Post states that, "Many of the bodies had their hands still bound—and many of them had wound up at the morgue after what their families had said was their abduction by the Mahdi Army, the Shi’ite militia of Muqtada al-Sadr."

Al-Sadr has denied any involvement in the homicidal rampage that followed the bombing. But, is he lying or did agents’ provocateurs dress up in black so they would look like the Mahdi Army and, thus, incite greater hostility between Sunnis and Shiites?

It is impossible to know.

We do know, however, that al-Sadr met the very next day with representatives of the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars (AMS) and called for an immediate end to the bloodshed.

He also delivered a speech that was suspiciously omitted from western press-coverage where he demanded an end to the violence and an immediate withdrawal of all occupation forces.

He said, "The Iraqi people must not be divided"…"they are one from north to south"….He called for "joint Friday communal prayers with both Sunnis and Shiites" affirming that "there are no Sunni or Shiites mosques, you are a single people."

"Do you want to give aid to the enemy? Do you want to render the occupier victorious? Do you wish to make Satan triumphant or do you wish to help the truth.

No, no to falsehood," he shouted.

"Our Iraq is passing through a big crisis, insofar as our enemies are entering among our brethren and spreading turmoil among you."

"Do not forget the plotting of the Occupation, for if we forget its plots it will kill us all without exception. This series of attacks is not the first and it won’t be the last. The attacks will continue. Beware, and be responsible. Religion is your responsibility, mosques are your responsibility, the Muslim people are your responsibility, so do not attack the secure houses of God. Love one another and be brethren of one another so that our Iraq will be secure and stable and independent. We want the expulsion of the Occupier and the American ambassador." (Juan Cole; "Informed Comment")

Is al-Sadr sincere or are his words all part of a political calculation to confuse his enemies and sow greater division between Sunnis and Shiites?

Is he secretly trying to foment hostilities to make Iraq ungovernable and hasten an end to the occupation or is genuinely interested in building solidarity with the Sunnis?

There’s no doubt about it, al-Sadr could be at the heart of Iraq’s recent travails, but more likely he is just one of the many victims.

Max Fuller aptly summarized Iraq’s devolution into anarchy when he stated, "The bottom line in combating the hopes and dreams of ordinary people is to resort to spreading terror through the application of extreme violence."

If that’s true, then what we are seeing is neither an accident nor proof of one fiery cleric’s ambitions. It is, in fact, the expression of a carefully crafted plan for pacifying Iraq and establishing imperial-rule.