After the US invasion of Iraq in April 2003, the Shiite leaders, who have been under the auspices of the Tehran regime, returned to Iraq: as demographic balance has changed and the power of Sunni minority represented by Saddam Hussein’s leadership has become history, there was no doubt that there would already be Shiites in the central government.
In the first election, the Shiites came to power, Jalal Talabani, one of the Kurdish leaders, was elected president by parliament at Washington's infusion to maintain demographic balance and for the Kurds to stay in this mosaic. Although Moqtada al-Sadr, the most radical US opposition of the time, the leader of the Shiite group in and around Baghdad, was targeted by the occupation forces, he was able to save his life by hiding in Iran and going underground in Iraq.
Today, Moqtada al-Sadr is in conflict with Iran, which has kept (or is trying to keep) Iraq under its hegemony, more than the US forces in the country. After the ISIS terrorist organization invaded the northern regions of Iraq and declared a Shariah state there, and the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) volunteers, which was established with the support of the Qasem Soleimani, have that state’s presence in Iraq become history, In the person of Soleimani, Iran has almost become a country trying to dominate everything in Iraq. Both Iraq and the US are concerned about this.
In the May 2018 parliamentary elections, when Moqtada’s "Sadr movement" entered into an alliance with the Communists and liberals and became the first political body of parliament, had a voice in the formation of a new government. As al-Sadr, who was the main reason of Nouri al-Maliki’s, who was heavily affiliated with Iran, resignation and fail to establish a government again, has been a leader in the last 1.5 years by trying to make Baghdad pursue its policy as independent as possible from Tehran; at the same time, was concerned about the PMF organization's, behind which Qasem Soleimani stood, rule over Iraq and then its giving unlimited support to Syria would and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Because, on the one hand, Tehran's inexhaustible ambitions over Baghdad from economy to politics have put Iraq in serious danger in the region and the West and put its presence at risk, and on the other hand, the fact that the Iranian state has established its own self-defense shield from the West in Iraq, is clearly worrying al-Sadr, who is increasingly gaining momentum in the political arena. Moqtada al-Sadr, a member of well-established Lebanese Shiite sect, has become one of the symbols of resistance to the United States following the 2003 American occupation; despite numerous serious injuries, he has been treated in Iran from time to time and has continued his struggle.
The main difference between the Iranian hegemony trying to be established in Iraq over Qasem Soleimani and Shiite policy represented in the Iraqi parliament under the leadership of Shiite secret policy represented by the Iraqi parliament under the leadership of Moqtada al-Sadr is that, unlike 15 years ago, al-Sadr goes light on the West. That is to say, in the near and medium-term future of the Shiite movement, it is about finding the answer to the question – “In the Iranian hegemony or in the Iraqi Parliament?” and in this search, it appears that Moqtada al-Sadr is the most profitable option for the West (at present).
Of course, this does not mean that al-Sadr will pursue an anti-Iranian policy altogether, and it is impossible. It was about an echo in the West triggered by an attack on the US embassy in Baghdad by a force that emerged as a part of the Soleimani-PMF partnership, and the incredible military and moral support created by Soleimani forces in Syria for the Hezbollah of Lebanon that the assassination of him and the second leader of the PMF will undoubtedly have a significant impact on further processes. That is, Iran’s advantage, which it gained in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon thanks to Soleimani and PMF, will drop significantly.
From this point of view you can already believe that the "Revenge" roars that are rising from Iran and, unfortunately, "echoed" in the Republic of Azerbaijan, are empty. Put the Third World War aside, even in the simplest of ways, revenge will not be able to taken. Do not let the fact, that the employees of the US Embassy in Tehran were taken hostage and released 444 days later by the order of Khomeini in 1979, confuse you: Washington's main goal in the Islamic Revolution was to prevent the Communist Tuda Party and the trade-union movement surrounding Iran. Therefore, it was needed to wind Khomeini up, the 444-day hostage of embassy employees was designed for Washington’s big goal and it was completed successfully.
Although it may surprise you, but it would not be surprising to me that Moqtada al-Sadr will be eliminated one day by these scenarios.