After ceasefire, Iraq reflects on a fragile neutrality in the Iran-Israel Standoff

Shafaq News

5 hours ago

Shafaq News/ The recent 12-day confrontation between Iran and Israel may have drawn to a halt with an unexpected ceasefire, but for Iraq, the crisis has underscored a deeper vulnerability at the intersection of restraint and escalation.
Caught in the geopolitical crossfire of a conflict it neither started nor fully controls, Iraq's strategic exposure and internal fault lines were once again laid bare.
While the guns have fallen silent—for now—the aftermath leaves Iraq with lingering questions about its sovereignty, the authority of its government, and the influence of foreign-backed armed factions operating within its borders.
Tactical Unity Amid Crisis
Throughout the conflict, concerns surged over whether Iran-aligned Iraqi factions might act independently of Baghdad in response to regional developments. However, Sheikh Salam al-Jazaeri, senior official of Asaib Ahl al-Haq (an Irnaian-backed group), dismissed talk of a split. 'This was a coordinated tactic within existing understandings with the government,' he told Shafaq News during the escalation, emphasizing that any resistance action would only occur when 'public interest dictates it.'
Framing the broader clash as one of 'oppressors versus the honorable,' al-Jazaeri maintained that resistance groups remained committed to national unity and religious legitimacy. 'If Iran retaliated, it was justified. If it chose restraint, then 'God spared the believers from fighting.''
Authority vs. Influence
Despite these claims of coordination, Iraqi officials privately and publicly acknowledged a more sobering reality: the government may have legal authority, but its control over the ground remains limited.
MP Mokhtar al-Moussawi stated bluntly, 'The state lacks actual control over armed factions,' pointing to Iraq's fragmented political structure as a root cause of its weakened policy enforcement.
Security expert Ahmad al-Sharifi added that real-time influence rests with Tehran, not Baghdad. 'Should Iran decide to escalate again, the commitments of factions to the Iraqi state could quickly unravel,' he warned, noting how close Iraq came to being pulled into a broader war.
Ceasefire or Intermission?
Although the ceasefire has temporarily eased tensions, analysts say the conditions that exposed Iraq's vulnerability remain unchanged. Regional affairs researcher Ali al-Nasser argues that developments in Syria, ongoing US-Iran tensions, and violations of Iraqi airspace all feed into a volatile environment that could reignite at any moment.
'The factions' involvement depends not just on Baghdad's will, but on what Tehran and Washington do next,' al-Nasser explained.
Political analyst Abdullah al-Kanani believes the US role changed the calculus entirely. 'Once the US entered the battlefield, the risk of retaliation from factions based in Iraq grew exponentially,' he said. Now, with American bases still on alert and factions watching closely, any misstep could reverse the current pause.
A Moment of Reflection
As the ceasefire holds, however tentatively, Iraqi leaders are left to reflect on their position in a region where alliances, geography, and foreign agendas dictate outcomes. Despite efforts to assert neutrality and avoid entanglement, the crisis has reinforced the limits of Baghdad's influence.
'Iraq is not a bystander—but neither is it a sovereign actor,' a regional analyst told Shafaq News on condition of anonymity. 'Its future remains hostage to the decisions of others.'