Iraqi Factions Deeply Divided over Targeting American Interests

 27 October 2023, Iraq, Baghdad: Iraqis take part in a Pro-Palestinian rally near Tahrir Square. (dpa)
27 October 2023, Iraq, Baghdad: Iraqis take part in a Pro-Palestinian rally near Tahrir Square. (dpa)
TT
20

Iraqi Factions Deeply Divided over Targeting American Interests

 27 October 2023, Iraq, Baghdad: Iraqis take part in a Pro-Palestinian rally near Tahrir Square. (dpa)
27 October 2023, Iraq, Baghdad: Iraqis take part in a Pro-Palestinian rally near Tahrir Square. (dpa)

Observers have raised doubt over the “seriousness” of statements issued by armed Iraqi factions, which claim “Islamic resistance,” over attacks on American interests and bases in the country.

They first questioned whether it was in Iraq’s interest to strain relations with Washington given the good ties Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani enjoys with it. The PM is backed by the pro-Iran Coordination Framework, which includes the majority of the armed Shiite factions.

The observers then noted the “deep divisions” between those factions about dragging Iraq in yet another war given the relative security and stability the country is enjoying.

The factions have so far carried out a number of attacks against American interests and bases in Iraq since Israel declared its war on Gaza earlier in October. The observers doubted, however, that these attacks will continue.

They cited the attack carried out by the “Islamic resistance” in Iraq against an American base in Syria on Saturday, viewing it as perhaps an attempt to turn to targets beyond Iraqi borders given the pressure the factions have come under.

In a brief statement, the faction claimed responsibility for the attack on the al-Tanf base in Syria, saying it was targeted by two drones that carried out direct hits. On Monday, the group also claimed responsibility for three previous attacks in Syria.

Head of the Center for Political Thinking in Iraq, Dr. Ihssan Shmary told Asharq Al-Awsat that the war on Gaza has created deep divisions between the armed factions.

Among the contested issues is whether the government should be the sole authority in handling the war. Some factions have advocated that it should, while others refuse because they believe that it undermines them, especially since the government will support diplomatic solutions to the conflict, which goes against the very foundations of these factions.

The greatest divide, however, emerged over whether to attack American interests, Shmary said.

Some factions, such as the al-Nujaba movement, Kataib Hezbollah and Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada, have adopted a more extreme position and backed the attacks. While others, such as the Badr Organization and Asaib Ahl al-Haq, believe that the attacks will harm the Iraqi government.

They believe that a clear vision should be adopted or specific steps carried out in advance before a direct attack is carried out against American interests, he explained, stressing that these factions are ultimately a major element of the government.

These divisions have not stopped some factions from carrying out the attacks, which, in the end, will not hide the disputes between the groups, he went on to say.

Political analyst Nizar Haidar made light of the divisions, telling Asharq Al-Awsat that they are not important since all these factions “receive their orders from one source” - Iran.

The truth is that the main leaders of the Coordination Framework have not commented on the statements that have urged an end to the attacks on American interests, he noted.

They have remained silent to avoid further embarrassing the government and Framework or because they are actually secretly encouraging the attacks, he remarked.

Meanwhile, the more pragmatic leaders, such as Ammar al-Hakim and Haidar al-Abadi, have clearly spoken of the need to respect Iraq’s commitments in protecting foreign military forces deployed in the country.



Jenin Camp: A War on People, Not Just Gunmen

Israeli army drops leaflets over Jenin refugee camp (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Israeli army drops leaflets over Jenin refugee camp (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT
20

Jenin Camp: A War on People, Not Just Gunmen

Israeli army drops leaflets over Jenin refugee camp (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Israeli army drops leaflets over Jenin refugee camp (Asharq Al-Awsat)

Mahmoud Al-Rakh hesitated before setting foot in the Jenin refugee camp where he was born and raised—now reduced to rubble and a death trap by Israeli forces.

After much deliberation, he finally mustered the courage to enter, slipping in under the cover of a group of journalists who, after lengthy discussions, had also decided to venture inside. They all knew the risks: gunfire, injury, arrest, or even death.

The road leading from Jenin’s famous Cinema Roundabout to the camp’s entrance offered a grim preview of what lay ahead. Near the government hospital at the street’s end, heavily armed Israeli soldiers had turned the camp’s main entrance into a military outpost.

But local residents, camp youths, and journalists advised that there was another way in—through the back of the hospital. What they found inside was nothing short of shocking.

There was no one in Jenin. No authorities, no residents, no fighters. As the saying goes, you could hear a pin drop.

Only Israeli soldiers remained, standing amid the vast rubble—silent witnesses to a history of resilience, battles, lives, and untold stories. They lurked in wait, and it seemed their ultimate vision was to erase Palestinian presence and claim the place as their own.

In the distance, visitors can spot signs planted by Israeli soldiers, bearing Hebrew names like “Yair Axis”—a desperate attempt to impose new identities on the land.

Israel’s campaign was not merely a fight against armed militants. It was a war on the land, the people, history, the present, and even the Palestinian narrative.

Israel’s military assault on the Jenin refugee camp, launched on January 21, marked the beginning of an expanded campaign across the West Bank after officially designating it a war zone.

Dubbed operation “Iron Wall,” the assault signaled a shift in Israel’s approach, drawing clear parallels to its 2002 operation during the Second Intifada, when it swept through the entire West Bank.

The latest offensive began with drone strikes targeting infrastructure in Jenin, followed by a large-scale ground invasion involving special forces, Shin Bet operatives, and military police. Aerial bombardments continued throughout the operation.

Twenty-five days later, Israel had killed 26 Palestinians, wounded dozens, and forcibly displaced all 20,000 residents—every single one.

Asharq Al-Awsat asked journalist Ahmed Al-Shawish about what the Israelis are doing inside the camp now.

He replied that Israeli forces were setting up permanent military outposts in areas inaccessible to us—a confirmation of the defense minister’s earlier statement that they had no plans to withdraw.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu personally announced the operation, saying it had been approved by the security cabinet as “another step toward achieving our goal: strengthening security in the West Bank.”

He added: “We are systematically and decisively acting against Iran’s axis—whether in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, or the West Bank.”

The decision to attack Jenin had already been made; the timing was the only question.

Israeli leaders waited for the Gaza ceasefire to take hold, then shifted focus to the West Bank three days later.

Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar had advised the security cabinet that broader measures were needed to reshape the situation and eliminate militant groups in the West Bank.

He warned against complacency, arguing that the recent drop in attacks was “misleading and deceptive” and did not reflect the true scale of what he called “the growing terrorist threat on the ground.”