Today, in an amazing turn of events, a tentative deal was brokered between Sadr and Maliki over the Knight's Assault operation occurring in Sadr City. As it is being reported, a ceasefire is to take place starting tomorrow morning, Sunday. Now, as I allude to in the title of the post, the devil is in the details...

Let's first look at what is being reported...

Al Jazeera

Sheikh Salah al-Obeidi, a spokesman for al-Sadr, said that the agreement would be effective from Sunday.

"We will stop the fire, stop displaying arms in public and open all the roads leading to Sadr City," he said on Saturday.

Ali al-Dabbagh, the Iraqi government spokesman, said the authorities support the agreement and "calls upon everybody to commit themselves" to it.

"The agreement contains 14 points representing the government's vision to end public displays of arms, clean Sadr City of bombs, and enforce law in Sadr City," he said.

Al-Dabbagh further said the accord gave powers to the security forces to "raid and search any place it suspects there are heavy and medium weapons" in Sadr City.

There was no immediate comment from the US military.

The Gulfnews reports...

Al Obeidi said an agreement had been reached between parliament's coalition of Shiite parties and the Sadrists.

"A 10-point agreement has been reached between members from the United Iraqi Alliance and Sadrist movement in Baghdad and we are informed that Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki is committed to it," Al Obeidi said in the southern city of Najaf.

He added that "the agreement stipulates that Mahdi Army will stop fighting in Sadr City and will stop displaying arms in public. In return, the government will stop random raids against Al Sadr followers and open all closed roads that lead to Sadr City."

Middle East Online...

"We will stop the fire, stop displaying arms in public and open all the roads leading to Sadr City," Obeidi said.

"This agreement will be executed from tomorrow. The Sadr movement has agreed to the contents of the deal and it has now become an official document.

Obeidi, who took part in the negotiations leading to the clinching of the deal in Baghdad, said the two sides had reached agreement on most issues.

"The two groups agreed on 10 of the 14 points discussed. The agreed points do not include disbanding of Jaish al-Mahdi," he said, referring to Sadr's feared Mahdi Army militia.

The Sadr movement says it needs its weapons for self-defence until other Shiite and Sunni groups nurtured by the US military and the Baghdad government are also disarmed.

Now, essentially, 10 of the 14 points that Maliki demanded were agreed to, what is noticeably absent from the agreement is the continued US use of gunships and artillery that has killed 19-20 people(depending upon which report you look at)and wounded over a hundred others, the US claims only one individual was killed, btw, in the past 24 hours in on-going air strikes! As several of the articles point out the US has not commented or participated in the cease-fire, that is one major detail that needs to be addressed ASAP!

I thought Dr.iRack raised some poignant points...

It will be interesting to see how the ceasefire is spun, politically, in Baghdad and Washington. Some will argue it is a victory for Maliki because it allows the ISF to assert more control over Sadr City. The McClatchy piece, for example, frames the agreement as "a surprising capitulation that seemed likely to be hailed as a major victory for Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki."

Others will argue that Sadr is the winner because he was not forced to completely disband his militia. (In this context, it will be interesting to see if Maliki still tries to bar Sadrists from upcoming provincial elections if JAM remains intact.) Still others will say that Sadr was allowed to have a "partial win," and that this shows that the American and Iraqi governments are going back to their core strategy of trying to co-opt moderate elements of JAM by allowing Sadr to save face. Dr. iRack suspects (and hopes) that this is part of the story given the overall strategy against JAM articulated in the joint campaign plan (which calls for seperating "reconcilable" from "irreconcilable" elements of the movement). It may also help explain the verbal gymnastics and ratcheting down of anti-Iran rhetoric in recent days--which were perhaps part of a concerted effort to provide enough discursive "slack" to allow Sadr (and the Iranians?) a face-saving exit strategy.

How Betrayus and the Odorous One, receives or reacts to it is critical to it's success. I'll reserve judgment until I see what the US response is... In the meantime, I am encouraged to see some action on redressing the tragic conditions imposed on the residents in Sadr City. Hopefully, it'll bring much needed respite and vital food and meds to the beleaguered residents...! We shall see...