The Sadrist demonstrations have become a staple of Friday afternoons in Baghdad’s Tahrir (freedom) Square. Last week’s demonstrations drew more people than usual based on Muqtada al-Sadr’s demand that his loyal supporters come out for a “million man march”. Last year’s demonstration culminated in the storming of the International Zone (IZ), the fortified district that houses the majority of Iraq’s government institutions. Once again on February 11, 2017 Muqtada Al-Sadr directed his followers to protest outside the gates of the IZ, this time for reforms on the electoral commission. Like all of Sadr’s calls, his faithful supporters answered despite the efforts of Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) to restrain demonstrations by closing off streets in fear of another IZ incursion.

While Baghdad has witnessed weekly peaceful demonstrations for nearly two years, this event was not one of them. Sadrist demonstrations turned violent, clashing with the ISF. One ISF officer and four demonstrators were killed, resulting in a total of five Iraqis dying far from the front lines of the war with ISIL. Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi immediately ordered an investigation to further find details leading to these casualties. Not only are these deaths unnecessary, but such events threaten to endanger Iraqi society during vulnerable times of war and upcoming elections.

The killing of Sadrist demonstrators not only is a catalyst to rally more support for Sadr’s cause, but more dangerously begins to vilify ISF and paints them as oppressors, much like under Saddam Hussein’s Ba’athist regime. This outcome is dangerous for the ISF as Saturday’s events could undo three years of fighting ISIL that has won back popular support for the military. ISF were only doing their duty of protecting government institutions. Last year’s storming of the IZ was met with no retaliation from ISF. However, this time the ISF were given clear orders to prevent such an incident from happening again.

No state would tolerate vandalism in demonstrations let alone storming of government buildings and violence, but reoccurrence of violent incidents will be difficult to counter. Therefore, Sadr must stop using violence as a threat to the government if they do not immediately respond to his demands, giving his followers a misleading message of encouragement. If he is to continue to demand demonstrations from his followers, his messages must stop mentioning storming the IZ as a last resort and emphasize only peaceful measures for his followers to voice themselves.