NAJAF, Iraq — With a suddenness that seems to have caught American officials by surprise, Shiite Muslim clerics who for decades ministered in the quiet obscurity of the back streets of this holy city are now driving key decisions about the future governance of the nation.
The immediate focal point is a showdown with the American-led coalition over the process for transferring sovereignty to an Iraqi government.
Shiite religious parties, with the backing of the most senior cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, say they favor direct elections for a transitional government rather than the American-backed proposal to use provincial caucuses for selecting delegates to a national assembly.
But beyond this debate, far broader political forces are at work. At stake is the role religious Shiite parties will play in Iraq for the foreseeable future.
The Shiite community, which was brutally persecuted by Saddam Hussein and his Sunni Muslim-dominated Baath Party, would likely benefit from swift direct elections because Shiites make up about 60% of Iraq's population and their religious parties are, at this point, the most organized political force in the country.
But some Bush administration officials fear that if Shiite fundamentalists were to win at the polls, they would advance an anti-Western agenda with a theocratic bent reminiscent of Iran rather than build a relatively moderate democracy that protects the basic rights of all Iraqis, including women and minorities.
The extent to which Shiite clerics end up with a controlling influence after the foreign coalition leaves -- and the role of Koranic law in the nation's constitution -- might well depend on how Americans handle the current challenge from Shiite leaders.
"Absolutely this is a delicate moment," said a senior administration official who is knowledgeable about Iraq policy. "Do we throw the dice and say, 'This is a political issue, and we're not going to let [Sistani] dictate to us'? Will he be willing to deal or not? It's a turning point."
Observers here note that American opposition to the religious Shiites' agenda puts the U.S. in the odd position of resisting what is arguably the most democratic of processes: a free election. They also worry that the Americans have not carefully considered the worst-case scenarios.
