Connect with us

Middle East

A 24-hour ‘civil war’ trial in Iraq

Published

on

Hundreds of supporters of Sadr raided the Presidential and Government Palace in the Green Zone in the capital Baghdad yesterday, and nearly 30 people lost their lives in the clash with the militia. Activists entered the buildings of rival Shiite organizations, set fire to some of them, and detained militia forces until Sadr’s announcement to end the protest today.

Muqtada es-Sadr, who emerged as the first party in the October 2019 elections and obtained the majority of seats in the Assembly, challenged the ethnic and sectarian political system established by the US after the invasion, and he announced that he would establish a government of reconciliation that would include all national parties, Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish. No matter how many votes they received, they were, however, accustomed to being attached to the government according to the quota system, and some faced obstacles from other Shiite groups directly affiliated with Iran. Led by Nuri al-Maliki, the Coordination Framework, using its effectiveness in the judiciary, passed the “two-thirds” decision, which made it impossible for Sadr to form a government. The Sadr group, which refused to agree with the Coordination Framework, resigned from the Parliament and turned to street protests. Sadr supporters, who held a protest in front of the Federal Supreme Court, which discussed the sit-in action in the Green Zone, the raid of the Parliament and the Presidency and the latest application to dissolve the Parliament, did not back down on the following three issues:

  • We will not agree to a compromise that includes the “evil trio” (Nuri al-Maliki, Qays al-Hazeli and Ammar al-Hakim).
  • Parliament shall be dissolved.
  • Early elections shall be held.

Why did Sadr withdraw from politics?

While awaiting the decision of the Federal Supreme Court’s Assembly, Sadr announced that he had withdrawn from the political arena with a sudden decision, within 24 hours of the call “Let’s build a new Iraq without militias, uncontrolled weapons, violence, war, sectarianism, tried parties and sectarian quotas”. So what prompted Sadr to make this statement, which led many cities, especially Baghdad, to turn into battlefields?

The fact that the Shiite Taklid Merci Kazim al-Hairi called for Sadr supporters to follow the Iranian religious leader Ali Khamenei while he was retiring, citing health problems, was undoubtedly the most important factor that prompted Sadr to make this statement. The statement by Hairi, who is the second-ranking religious leader, is not commonplace, as it is not only a sign of disrespect for the biggest Taklid Merci Ayatollah Sistani, but also different from the usual practice of his colleagues, who normally leave the matter to the conscience of the people. Hairi, who had a very limited following apart from the Sadr movement, aimed to undermine Sadr’s legitimacy with this statement he made under pressure from Iran, according to some commentators.

However, Sadr movement is a political and social formation rather than a religious movement in the classical sense, which will be resolved with a fatwa of Hairi, which they follow as a religious authority. Therefore, Hairi’s statement does not seem to have affected Sadrists, except Sadr, who is known to be emotional. Moreover, it is also a mystery whether Sadr took this decision “emotionally” or whether he was at any stage of a grand plan. If someone comes out and says that they watched the trailer of what Sadr can do as a show of strength, there wouldn’t be too much of an objection.

The country done through a 24-hour hell

As a matter of fact, about an hour after Sadr’s decision, yesterday, thousands of Sadr supporters entered the Green Zone and stormed the Presidential Palace. Upon the entry of the Sadr Movement’s armed force Seraya es-Selam (Peace Brigades) into the Green Zone with heavy weapons, Prime Minister Kazimi canceled its routine program, while the Joint Operations Command declared a nationwide curfew ‘until further notice’. Hashd al-Shaabi units within the Coordination Framework against the Peace Brigades, wearing the uniforms of the security forces, opened fire on the demonstrators. In the videos circulating on social media, it was seen that the demonstrators were targeted and killed by snipers. The clashes in which nearly 30 people, most of whom were pro-Sadr lost their lives and more than 150 were injured, continued today.

The Peace Brigades raided the offices and headquarters of the “evil trio” and especially Kays al-Hazeli, not only in Baghdad but also in many places such as Basra and Najaf. Sources close to Sadr said that around 300 headquarters and offices of Maliki’s Dawa Party, Kays al-Hazeli’s Asayib Ahl al-Haq Movement and Ammar al-Hakim’s National Wisdom Movement and their armed militias were raided and some set on fire.

Making a statement at noon today, Sadr asked his supporters, who were clashing on the street, to return to their homes within an hour. Sadr said, “I apologize to the Iraqi people for the conflicts. This revolution is not a revolution the very moment it ceases to be peaceful, thus I cannot call it a revolution. Down with such a revolution.” With Sadr’s call, the curfew in the country was lifted as his supporters returned to their homes.

On the other hand, it should be noted that while the country is going through a 24-hour hell, there has been no call for calm or any statement from the leaders of the Coordination Framework, who are candidates to form a government and run the country.

Why cannot Sadr get along with the “evil trio”?

Sadr’s animosity with Maliki, one of the leaders who formed the Coordination Framework, dates back to 2008. Maliki, together with the US troops, attacked the Iraqi army against Sadr’s Mahdi Army and smashed the Sadrists. Especially the massacres in Basra were engraved in the memory of the Sadr members.

The Asayib Ahl al-Haq Movement and its leader Hazeli, which was founded in 2006-07 by leaving the Mahdi Army, argued that Sadr’s resistance should be suppressed by force after the election. Asayib Ahl al-Haq, which is close to Iran and partially financed by Iran, also came to the fore as an organization that used disproportionate violence to the public in the protests in 2019.

Ammar al-Hakim, who has political weight, seems to be on Sadr’s list due to his inability and indecision to stand up to the Maliki-Hazeli duo, who advocated the use of harsh force against the Sardis.

Why is Sadr against Iran?

Sadr, who marked the recent history of Iraq with his anti-US sentiment, took part in the Shiite governments established after the occupation until 2018. Sadr, who had the most seats in the 2018 elections, which was similar to what happened in the October 2019 elections, could not form a government again due to the obstruction of other Shiite organizations. From the side of Sadr, who is also a Shiite, the picture was as follows: Shiite organizations, some of whom were directly led by Iran, and others close to Iran, blocked Sadr’s path.

While these were happening in the political arena, the economic crisis peaked in the country, which was struggling with problems after ISIS, and the names of politicians began to be mentioned with scandals such as corruption and bribery. All these developments led to the most extensive and widespread protest actions in Iraq after 2003. In addition to economic reasons such as unemployment, lack of basic infrastructure and lack of livelihood, the Iraqi people also took a stance against foreign interventions. The Sadr movement, which could not form a government in the parliament and went into opposition, rose to a position leading this popular movement from the grassroots, thanks to its power in the streets. Now, Sadr has developed a discourse that opposes not only the US intervention but also the total “foreign intervention”. However, the real “relation severing” development in Sadr was the US murder of Iranian Quds Force commander Major General Qassem Soleimani and Hashd al-Shaabi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis near Baghdad International Airport with a drone attack on January 3, 2020, and then a week later. Iran has also had missile attacks targeting the US presence in Iraq. In summary, Iraq, which is in political instability and economic bottleneck, has also become a piece of land where the USA and Iran openly share their trump cards.

When Sadr hosted Ismail Kaani, who replaced Qasem Soleimani as the leader of the Quds Force, he made his position clear by openly telling him, “Don’t interfere in Iraq.” After the 2021 elections, he refused to meet with the Quds Force commander, who came to Iraq to “mediate” between Sadr and the Coordination Framework.

Is Iran against Sadr?

Sadr’s opposition to foreign and therefore Iranian intervention is understandable. So, how much is Iran against Sadr? First of all, every country, if it has such an opportunity, wants political forces directly connected to it or closer to it to be in power. The same is true for Iran. However, it would not be the right approach to try to read Iran’s attitude through figures like Hazeli, who are close to Iran. Because in this case, it becomes impossible to explain the attitude of Hadi al Amiri, who is undoubtedly the closest name to Iran, towards Sadr. The leader of the Fatah Alliance, Amiri, the most important name of the Coordination Framework, is the name that broke the hard power insistence of the Maliki-Hazeli duo against Sadr. Amiri, who is also the leader of the Badr Organization, which was established directly by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards of Iran, is at the forefront of the policy based on reconciliation and dialogue towards the Sadr movement, and Sadr is careful to keep Amiri apart in his speeches where he criticizes the Coordination Framework. Putting all the facts at the bottom, Tehran’’s stance becomes even clearer: Putting up with Sadr rather than fighting Sadr. Tehran knows that a possible Shiite-Shiite conflict will cause great harm to itself along with Iraq.

But why?

It seems that Sadr, who refused reconciliation, is responsible for all these events, but the main reason is the freak system that the USA brought with the occupation. The insistence of the “corrupts”, who have been benefiting from this system for 20 years, to keep their lucrative positions. The fact that the faces whose corruption and failures are revealed deserve to rule. The endless love of armchairs for those who do not take the country a mile further, those who draw weapons against the people who object, those who leave the cities to terrorist organizations, and those who render the state apparatus inoperable…

Sadr is challenging this political order. However, his open-ended rhetoric, sudden decisions and his refusal to even sit at the table harm both Sadr himself, his movement and the Iraqi people. Sadr, who is an important and trusted figure not only for Shiites but also for Iraqis from other sects and ethnic backgrounds, can be successful not today, but in the near future, if he acts within the framework of a program, not with sudden decisions or sudden outbursts. Maybe Sadr should roll up his sleeves to overthrow the sectarian political system with a “non-sectarian political party”. The rule of a political party that includes Shiites, Sunnis, Turkmen and Kurds will automatically lift the system in which Sadr rebelled into the dusty pages of history. As Gandhi said, “If you want to change the world, start with yourself.”

Middle East

US envoy says Syria interim leader Sharaa seeks Israel normalization

Published

on

US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack stated that Syria’s interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, wants to normalize relations with Israel.

At the same time, he called for an end to Israel’s military operations in Syria and questioned whether Washington should intervene to halt them.

Speaking at the Global Security Forum held in Doha, Qatar, Barrack said Sharaa had managed difficult circumstances well and was trying to reassure Israel that his government poses no threat.

“I think President Sharaa has done a very good job under very difficult circumstances,” Barrack said, describing the message he believes the Syrian leader is conveying to Israel: “I am not aggressive, I have no problem with Israel, I want relations with Israel to normalize.”

Barrack also urged Israel to stop its operations in Syria, while voicing uncertainty over whether the US should step in to end them:

“It’s time to stop this [Israel’s actions in Syria]. I don’t know if it’s time for the US to intervene to stop it.”

Israel intensified its military operations in Syria following the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad on 8 December 2024. Israeli forces entered the demilitarized “buffer zone” along the Golan Heights and took up positions on the Syrian side of Mount Hermon (Jabal al-Shaykh), with Israel describing the deployment as a temporary security measure.

Israeli air strikes have also targeted military facilities and weapons depots across the country.

Barrack pointed to Syria’s political transition as an example of how groups once viewed as adversaries could be incorporated into new political and security structures.

“You can take Nusra, which was once designated a foreign terrorist organization; following the transformation that took place on December 8, many people today evaluate this example as ‘here is a model,'” the US diplomat said.

The Nusra Front was a jihadist group that emerged during the Syrian civil war and, after pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda, announced its departure from the network. The organization was designated as “terrorist” by several countries and bodies, primarily the US and the UN.

The group’s leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Julani), subsequently headed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which led the offensive that ousted Assad.

Barrack also highlighted the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) into the Syrian national army as an outcome many had previously considered unlikely.

“Nobody thought you could reintegrate this Kurdish entity, the SDF, into a national army, but it happened,” the US official said.

Damascus and the Kurdish-led forces signed an agreement on 10 March 2025 to integrate the SDF’s military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state.

However, delays occurred in the implementation of the agreement due to disputes over integration terms and the future of self-administration in the region.

Barrack nevertheless expressed doubts about the effectiveness of earlier US interventions in the Middle East, citing Washington’s involvement in what he characterized as “23 regime changes” across the wider region.

“Whenever we have tried to intervene, to change a person or a regime, it seems to have been a mistake,” Barrack said, while also questioning the value of US intervention in Yemen, describing it as apparently “senseless.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

US and Israel weigh Iran strikes after midterm vote, reports say

Published

on

The US and Israeli defence ministries have drawn up plans for a fresh assault on Iran, with the envisioned offensive under consideration to launch after the US Congressional midterm elections on 3 November.

Citing sources, The New York Times reported that the blueprint anticipates a brief but intense campaign.

As military units step up their drills, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth discussed prospective strike options with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The list of targets encompasses Iran’s nuclear sites, its energy infrastructure, and its arsenals of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Several officials who spoke to the newspaper argued that a new wave of attacks could deal a heavy blow to the Iranian economy, forcing the leadership in Tehran into concessions.

Conversely, other sources doubt whether a resumption of fighting would prove any more successful than the earlier campaign conducted between February and April.

That previous offensive drove energy prices higher and drained US stockpiles of interceptor missiles.

It remains unclear whether US President Donald Trump will authorise the operation.

Domestic political calculations in Israel could also influence the trajectory of the plans, given that the country faces general elections on 27 October.

While some experts speaking to the newspaper contended that Netanyahu could leverage the threat of war to form a national unity government, others pointed to the opposition’s distrust of the prime minister.

Washington fears regional spillover

The US administration also harbours concerns that the fighting could engulf the wider region. On Wednesday, the US State Department ordered non-essential government personnel and their family members to leave Saudi Arabia following attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis.

A US military build-up, comprising three aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, and special forces units, is slated to be fully deployed to the region by early November.

The targets under review include the deep underground nuclear facility code-named “Pickaxe”. Trump suggested that the high-yield GBU-43/B bomb, known as the “mother of all bombs”, could be deployed against the site, though experts doubt whether the ordnance can destroy a complex buried so deeply.

For its part, Tehran is preparing for a potential escalation, threatening to broaden its target list. Retaliatory options under consideration by Iran reportedly include data centres and subsea internet cables, in addition to shipping and energy facilities.

Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to an Iranian negotiator, dismissed US hopes of wrapping up a new campaign within 72 hours as a “fantasy”. Mohammadi warned that Tehran’s response would be more severe and unpredictable.

The Financial Times previously reported that an Israeli strike on Iran set for 10 October had been called off because the US president was unwilling to risk a broader conflict ahead of the Congressional midterms.

According to that report, the Israeli military had prepared a multi-day assault on nuclear sites, Iranian government targets, power plants, and civilian infrastructure on Netanyahu’s orders. The strikes had been designed to exceed the intensity of the campaign begun in February.

Washington seeks to secure an agreement from Tehran covering both the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear programme.

“It will either be a deal or a strike,” one source told the Financial Times, adding that an operation could get under way in the coming weeks.

Another official who spoke to the paper suggested that Israeli preparations might serve as leverage to squeeze Iran in negotiations.

Axios also reported that the Pentagon had issued orders to prepare for renewed strikes, though the directive contained no specific date and Trump has yet to take a final decision.

The US and Israel launched their offensive against Iran on 28 February. Iran hit back by targeting US and Israeli assets across the region and curbing vessel transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although both sides signed a memorandum of understanding in June that provided for a ceasefire and talks to lift the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, reciprocal attacks between the US and Iran have persisted.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu trails Eisenkot in Israeli polls despite Trump backing

Published

on

As general elections scheduled for 27 October approach in Israel, the opposition camp led by former Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot continues to lead Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in public opinion polls.

Survey data published in the Israeli press on 19 and 20 October reveal that the governing coalition has failed to catch the opposition, despite explicit backing from US President Donald Trump.

However, the current distribution of votes documents that neither wing can reach a governing majority on its own.

Neither bloc reaches the 61 seats needed to form a government

According to a survey conducted by Channel 13, if an election were held today, Eisenkot’s bloc would win 51 seats, while the Netanyahu coalition would take 50.

A Channel 12 poll indicates that the gap has widened slightly, projecting 55 seats for Eisenkot’s alliance and 51 for the governing bloc. A minimum of 61 seats is required to form a government in the Knesset, Israel’s 120-seat parliament.

A key factor deadlocking the political arithmetic is the refusal by both sides to form a coalition with parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel. This stance stands as the most tangible obstacle to securing a parliamentary majority after the election.

Channel 12 data shows that overall voter turnout is expected to remain at 72%. The inclination to head to the ballot box climbs to 81% among opposition voters, compared with 74% measured among Netanyahu supporters.

The same poll notes that Eisenkot has widened his lead over Netanyahu by two further points in prime ministerial preferences.

Yashar party climbs after Gantz bows out

A survey published on the Walla news site shows that the balance shifted after Benny Gantz decided to withdraw his Blue and White party from the race. Following that move, Eisenkot’s Yashar party increased its projected tally to 23 seats, while Netanyahu’s Likud dropped by one seat to 19.

Eisenkot’s party and the “Zionist Opposition” bloc it anchors have remained atop the polls for several months.

In an earlier message of support, Trump praised Netanyahu as “a great fighting prime minister and an even greater partner for peace.” Public opinion polls document that this diplomatic and political backing has not proved sufficient to tip the preferences of the Israeli electorate in favour of the incumbent government.

Support for Ben Gvir rises among young voters

Although Netanyahu’s alliance trails in overall strength, far-right figures within the coalition appear to be expanding their grassroots base. Gauged interest in the Jewish Power party of Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir is climbing, particularly among younger voters.

Speaking to a study conducted by Agam Labs, affiliated with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an 18-year-old student described his shifting preference: “I used to think he was a bit crazy, but then I actually looked at what he was saying, and it all made sense.”

Another Israeli citizen stated that Ben Gvir’s push to arm West Bank settlers gave them “room to breathe.”

Ben Gvir is known for leading settler incursions into the Al-Aqsa compound and distributing military-grade rifles to tens of thousands of settlers since 7 October 2023.

Criticized for escalating violence against Palestinians, Ben Gvir has called for starving Gaza, maintaining military operations in Lebanon, and bombing Beirut. The far-right minister’s militaristic stances also find a political constituency across several opposition parties in Israel.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey