Iran's PMF stance risks future Iraq clashes, Ex-diplomat
Iran's rejection of dismantling the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) could lead to future armed confrontations between Iraqi security forces and pro-Iran factions, former Iraqi diplomat Ghazi Faisal warned on Sunday.
Faisal told Shafaq News that Iran's open stance is not merely a political statement, but a strategic signal with security, military, regional, and international implications, 'which places significant constraints on any Iraqi government seeking to curb factional influence, especially at a time when Baghdad is under US, European, and regional pressure to integrate or regulate the PMF.'
'Iran's refusal to dismantle factions aligned with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps sends a message that these groups will remain militarily active, both inside Iraq and on regional fronts such as Syria, serving as an armed tool in Tehran's bid to expand its military and economic influence across the Middle East.'
According to Faisal, domestic pressure from Iran-backed factions complicates any security reform plan, deepening political divisions between anti-faction forces — who will use Tehran's stance to argue that Iraq's security decisions are subject to foreign will — and pro-Iran groups, who will leverage the position to reinforce their 'resistance narrative.'
Earlier today, Ali Akbar Velayati, Adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader, revealed details of a recent phone call with Nouri al-Maliki, Head of the State of Law Coalition, focused on concerns that the disarmament file could shift from Lebanon's Hezbollah to Iraq's PMF.
The Popular Mobilization Forces were established in 2014 after the fall of Mosul, following a religious edict by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani calling for volunteers to fight ISIS. In 2016, Iraq's parliament passed a law formally recognizing the PMF as part of the state's security apparatus, but without fully integrating its command structure or regulating its internal operations.
A new draft PMF Authority Law, now before parliament, seeks to address those gaps by introducing formal military ranks, defined administrative ties to the Ministries of Defense and Finance, internal oversight mechanisms, and eligibility rules for leadership. Supporters argue it will standardize and professionalize the force, while critics — including the US — warn it would entrench the autonomy of powerful Iran-aligned groups.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Shafaq News
an hour ago
- Shafaq News
Greater Israel: Mythical dream or looming threat?
Shafaq News In 1995, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu published a book titled 'A Place Under the Sun,' in which he outlined his comprehensive ideological vision regarding the Palestinian issue. The book was released two years after the Oslo Accords were signed between the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Israeli government. At its core, Netanyahu's perspective denied the existence of Palestine or a Palestinian people. He repeatedly referred to 'Arabs living in the land of Israel,' or 'the land of the Jews.' According to the book, all territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River is considered to be the exclusive domain of the Jewish people. In some parts, he even extended this claim to include the east bank of the Jordan River. In 2025, during a televised interview on i24 News, Netanyahu appeared with a 'charm' shaped like a map of the Promised Land. The right-wing leader, who has ruled Israel for over two decades, did not hesitate to declare that he was 'certainly' committed to the vision of 'Greater Israel.' He added: 'I am on a historical and spiritual mission… It is a mission of generations.' This statement sparked a wave of condemnation from 31 Arab and Islamic countries, as well as the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the Gulf Cooperation Council. It also brought renewed attention to a long-standing project that has hovered between scriptural narratives and real-world politics for over a century: the project of 'Greater Israel.' However, behind this controversial phrase lies a much older story — one that stretches from the Basel Conference in 1897, through the Balfour Declaration in 1917, and the 1967 war, marked by decades of settlement expansion and political rhetoric that combined religious symbols with strategic aims. Origins Of The Vision The topic remains deeply sensitive and controversial for many across the region — both for opponents of Israel and for those seeking coexistence through normalization agreements. The sensitivity is so acute that several historians and scholars specializing in Zionist ideology and regional history declined to comment, citing the topic's complexity and delicacy. Looking back, over a century ago in a small hall in the Swiss city of Basel in 1897, the First Zionist Congress laid out the contours of a concept that continues to provoke debate today: a national homeland for the Jews, extending beyond historical Palestine, and rooted in a religious narrative describing a land stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates. More than a hundred years later, this vision — known as 'Greater Israel' — remains present in the rhetoric of Israeli politicians, as a symbol in religious slogans, and as a perceived existential threat among many Arabs. While some researchers view it as a political myth unlikely to be realized, others warn that its recurring presence in Israeli political discourse keeps the region in a state of perpetual anxiety, where borders become fluid concepts beyond the scope of international law. Roots Of The Israeli Project Ashraf Akka, an expert in international relations based in Ramallah, told Shafaq News that the project is not a recent development nor a product of contemporary extremism. Its roots go back to 1917, when the Balfour Declaration gave Jews the British-backed promise of a national home in Palestine. 'But the declaration wasn't geographically limited — it carried within it a broader vision extending to natural Palestine between the Nile and the Euphrates,' he said. Akka added that Netanyahu's own writings reflect this interpretation, as he views the state established by the British Mandate on part of Palestine as an incomplete promise — a deviation that must be corrected. He pointed to the 1920 San Remo Conference and colonial understandings like the Sykes-Picot Agreement as factors that granted Zionism more space to envision a redrawn geography in the region, segmented in ways that served the interests of global powers while opening the door to Israeli territorial ambitions. In Jerusalem, historian Hussein al-Deek explained that the project is not merely a political document, but one deeply rooted in religious texts. In an interview with Shafaq News, he noted that both the Torah and the Talmud describe the Promised Land as stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates. The symbolism, he said, 'is evident in the Israeli flag's two blue stripes and in the national anthem Hatikvah, which evokes a dream of controlling the land between the rivers.' Even currency, according to al-Deek, carried maps that went beyond Palestine to include Iraq and Kuwait in the east, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to the south, and Syria and Lebanon to the north. 'These symbols are not random; they are political-religious messages passed down through generations,' al-Deek explained. With the rise of the Likud party in the 1970s, this symbolism began to transform into actual policy, through expanded settlements and rejection of compromises with Arab states. Al-Deek argued that this is when the idea of 'Greater Israel' became a declared political option rather than just a religious aspiration. This symbolic dimension was on display again on September 23, 2023, when Netanyahu stood before the UN General Assembly at its 78th session to present his vision for a 'New Middle East.' He showcased a map shaded in dark green, highlighting countries with which Israel has peace agreements or is negotiating normalization: Egypt, Sudan, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Jordan. The map, however, showed no trace of a Palestinian state — the blue area labeled 'Israel' fully covered the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The scene evoked memories of Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich's earlier controversy in Paris, when he displayed a map that included Jordan and Palestinian territories alongside his controversial statement: 'There is no such thing as the Palestinian people.' Analysts saw this as part of a diplomatic version of the 'Greater Israel' narrative. After the speech, Netanyahu posted on social media: 'The greatest achievement of my life is to fight for you and for our country. Shabbat Shalom.' Between Myth and History Yet some see the story from a different perspective. At Alexandria University, Professor Ahmed Fouad Anwar, a scholar of Zionist thought, described the project as 'more mythical than realistic,' telling Shafaq News that history does not support the existence of a centralized, powerful Jewish state that ever controlled such a vast territory. 'Israelites lived in fragmented principalities and had short-lived periods of rule,' Anwar explained. He also pointed out that even within religious Jewish communities, there was opposition to the establishment of the Israeli state in 1948, viewing it as a premature attempt at divine redemption. Zionists themselves initially debated locations for the homeland, including proposals in Africa or Sinai. 'The lack of a constitution and defined borders for Israel to this day reflects an open-ended ambition, but also exposes the limitations of realizing the 'Greater Israel' project,' he added. The Israeli discourse itself has undergone significant shifts. While earlier leaders focused on negotiations and security, the current government employs more explicit references to religious texts and expansionist maps. This contrast between 'symbolism' and 'policy' explains why opinions are divided over how seriously to take the idea of Greater Israel. In Beirut, Mohsen Saleh, director of the Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies, explained that 'Greater Israel' is a direct reflection of current Israeli government policies, which he describes as the most extreme since the state's founding. Saleh told Shafaq News that maps from decades past continue to reappear — covering Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and parts of Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. 'These are not just symbols, but expressions of strategic ambitions targeting the entire Arab and Islamic world,' he affirmed, adding that the project is built on keeping the region fragmented and weak. 'Any unified renaissance project is viewed as an existential threat to this entity,' Saleh continued. For him, the issue is not limited to Palestine, but is part of a broader civilizational conflict. One of the key events that brought the idea of 'Greater Israel' back to the forefront was the escalation surrounding the Gaza war following Hamas's October 2023 attack, which opened the door to new questions: Is Israel truly aiming to impose expansionist facts beyond Palestine's borders, or is the objective limited to full military control over Gaza? A Contrasting Israeli-Jewish Voice To delve deeper into the issue, Shafaq News turned to the Jewish community in Washington. Israeli-American writer and activist Miko Peled argues that the 'Greater Israel' project has no practical meaning on the ground. 'If realized, it would include millions of Arabs and Palestinians — this is not realistic,' he said. 'I do not believe for a second that there is a genuine intention to expand borders beyond historic Palestine. It is merely a political phrase Netanyahu uses to comfort settlers and the far-right.' Peled added that while the idea stems from the rhetoric of the far-right Zionist movement, it has never gone beyond ideological slogans. 'The reality is that the borders Israeli leaders aspire to today do not go beyond the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. That's the actual ceiling — not the Nile and the Euphrates.' Pointing out that Israel already controls nearly eight million Palestinians, making Jews a minority in historic Palestine — undermining any logic for further expansion, he noted that 'It's illogical for a state facing internal demographic challenges to seek to annex millions more.' However, Peled sees the real danger in Gaza, where — according to him — a large-scale military operation is being planned, aimed at full control over the Strip. 'They are talking about deploying 100,000 troops into Gaza. This is the actual plan being implemented now — not fantasies about expanding to Iraq or Morocco.' He concluded that this is not a genuine political plan, but rather an 'extremist messianic vision used for media purposes.' 'The real threat isn't in the Nile-to-Euphrates maps, but in what's happening every day in Gaza and the West Bank.'
Shafaq News
2 hours ago
- Shafaq News
Zelenskyy in Washington for talks with Trump, European leaders
Shafaq News – Washington Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrived in Washington on Monday to meet US President Donald Trump and several European leaders, stressing the need for a swift and lasting end to the war with Russia. The meeting comes days after the Alaska Summit between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'We all share a strong desire to end this war quickly and reliably,' Zelenskyy said on X, expressing confidence that joint efforts with the US and European partners would 'force Russia into a real peace.' I have already arrived in Washington, tomorrow I am meeting with President Trump. Tomorrow we are also speaking with European leaders. I am grateful to @POTUS for the invitation. We all share a strong desire to end this war quickly and reliably. And peace must be lasting. Not… — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) August 18, 2025 The Ukrainian President is scheduled to meet Trump at the White House later today, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, and other senior officials. For his part, Trump said Zelenskyy could end the conflict with Russia 'almost immediately' if he chose to, while ruling out Ukraine's return of Crimea or its membership in NATO. 'No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE,' he wrote on Truth Social. Trump described the day's summit as a 'big day' at the White House, calling it a 'great honor' for America to host such a large number of European leaders. 'One year ago, the United States was an almost DEAD COUNTRY. Now we are the 'HOTTEST' Country anywhere in the World, the envy of all,' he added.
Shafaq News
2 hours ago
- Shafaq News
Trump-Putin meeting eases concerns, stabilizing oil prices amid Ukraine war
Shafaq News - Singapore Oil prices were largely unchanged on Monday after a drop in early trade, as the United States exerted no further pressure on Russia to end the Ukraine war through measures to disrupt its oil exports following a meeting of the leaders of both nations. Brent crude futures dropped 6 cents, or 0.09%, to $65.79 a barrel by 0342 GMT while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude was at $62.82 a barrel, up 2 cents, or 0.03%. U.S. President Donald Trump met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday and emerged more aligned with Moscow on seeking a peace deal instead of a ceasefire first. Trump will meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and European leaders on Monday to strike a quick peace deal to end Europe's deadliest war in 80 years. On Friday, Trump said he did not immediately need to consider retaliatory tariffs on countries such as China for buying Russian oil but might have to "in two or three weeks", cooling concerns about a disruption in Russian supply. "A non-outcome was largely priced in, the market remains in wait-and-see, more in a bearish context, if more Russian barrels can arrive into the global crude supply pool should hostilities end in Ukraine," said independent energy analyst Gaurav Sharma. China, the world's biggest oil importer, is the largest buyer of Russian oil, followed by India. "What was primarily in play were the secondary tariffs targeting the key importers of Russian energy, and President Trump has indeed indicated that he will pause pursuing incremental action on this front, at least for China," RBC Capital analyst Helima Croft said in a note. "The status quo remains largely intact for now," Croft said, adding that Moscow would not walk back territorial demands while Ukraine and some European leaders would balk at the land-for-peace deal. Investors are also watching for clues from Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell's comments at this week's Jackson Hole meeting regarding the path of interest rate cuts that could boost stocks to further records. "It's likely he will remain noncommittal and data-dependent, especially with one more payroll and Consumer Price Index (CPI) report before the September 17 FOMC meeting," IG market analyst Tony Sycamore said in a note.
