This is confusing to me. What does it mean to say al-Sadr owes fealty to Ayatollah Khamenei? Seems you want to intimate something but don't say it.
Yes, I only want to put the thought out there, not to state it without equivocation. There's a lot to equivocate about, I don't think it's a simple matter. I do think you are mistaken about the relationship between Muqtada and Sistani, and I would encourage you to review the actions of Sistani in response to al Sadr's 2004 insurrection as well as al Sadr's political statements vis-a-vis Sistani's calls for reconciliation in 2006-07 for evidence of the tension between the two.
Khamenei is a higher ranking figure in Shi'ite terms than Sistani. Muqtada al Sadr spent a great deal of his formative years in Iran, and was educated in Najaf, which is more Iranian than Iraqi, bear in mind. If Khamenei issues a
fatwah commanding all Shi'ites to rise up against the Americans in response to an Israeli attack against Iran, and Sistani calls for calm, my expectation is that al Sadr would go along with Khamenei. No doubt al Hakim would, as you seemed to speculate in your post.
