Mazloum Abdi to Asharq Al-Awsat: We Urge the US to End the Syrian ‘Holocaust’

Commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) Mazloum Abdi. (AFP)
Commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) Mazloum Abdi. (AFP)
TT

Mazloum Abdi to Asharq Al-Awsat: We Urge the US to End the Syrian ‘Holocaust’

Commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) Mazloum Abdi. (AFP)
Commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) Mazloum Abdi. (AFP)

Commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) Mazloum Abdi hoped that the administration of US President Joe Biden would “rectify the errors” of its predecessor when it gave the greenlight to Turkey to “occupy” regions in northeastern Syria.

In a telephone interview to Asharq Al-Awsat on Thursday, he called on the Biden administration to adopt a “new strategy” to reactivate America’s role and “put an end to the Syrian holocaust.”

Are SDF forces still cracking down on ISIS cells east of the Euphrates River?
After ISIS was geographically defeated in the battle of Baghouz, there was a need to eliminate its sleeper cells and end its popular support. This prompted the SDF to begin to coordinate with the international coalition against terrorism. We achieved the desired results by arresting several leaders and members of the organization, which was carrying out murders and bombings. Our campaign is still ongoing.

We noted, however, that the sleeper cell attacks increased after Turkey occupied Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad in northeastern Syria.

The operations against the cells have not ended. On the contrary, there is a need for us to intensify the operations, especially after the organization started to expand its attacks to the Syrian Badia (desert) and its attempts to expand to regions that were liberated by our forces. The threats are still present. This is our vision and that of the coalition, as well. Our efforts at this time are therefore focused on expanding operations against the cells.

Is everything being coordinated with the coalition?
We can say that the coordination is good at this time. Nothing has changed since the new American administration took office. Based on the meetings we held with coalition officials, it appears to be leaning towards expanding its counter-terrorism operations, especially after ISIS threatened to carry out attacks in various regions and several countries.

We noticed an uptick in ISIS attacks east of the Euphrates and other regions. Why is that?
There are two reasons. The first, as we have said, is the Turkish occupation of Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad that has reinvigorated the organization, which is receiving support from Turkish occupation forces. We have confirmed reports that ISIS members, who had fled northern and eastern Syria, had arrived in regions that are occupied by Turkey, such as Afrin, Azaz, al-Bab, Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad. ISIS has regrouped under the so-called Syrian National Army and has been provided with military and logistic support by Turkey. Turkey has facilitated the terrorists’ passage to our regions where they have carried out murders and attacks that have mostly targeted civilians.

The second reason is our preoccupation with resisting the Turkish occupation that targets our regions every day. This has allowed ISIS to carry out some operations. Other sides are also seeking to exploit these attacks in order to weaken the SDF and autonomous administration.

Some say that Arabs are being marginalized in regions east of the Euphrates.
This is not true. On the contrary, our Arab brothers make up the majority of the SDF. We do not distinguish between ethnicities. They all live together in peace and harmony while still preserving their national and cultural identities.

You are sometimes accused of labeling anyone opposed to you as being affiliated with ISIS.
I believe the facts on the ground refute these claims. Freedom exists in Rojava and northeastern Syria. All political views, including opposition to the autonomous administration, are welcome. Their rights are guaranteed in the freedom to hold rallies and protected under the autonomous administration’s laws.

What about the increased ISIS attacks in the Badia? Is coordination taking place with the Syrian government or Russia in the war against ISIS west of the Euphrates?
No, there is no cooperation in this issue. This is due to the geographic divide between us. But another more significant reason is that any coordination in this regard should entail comprehensive agreement on other files. We believe that these files are a priority over military coordination, which does not exist at this moment.

How do you view the current American troop presence?
We believe that the deployment is part of the war against terrorism. It helps restore stability in Syria. The US is also a major power and plays a great and central role in resolving the crisis. It cannot be sidelined.

American officials say that the deployment in Syria is not permanent and that it is tied to the complete defeat of ISIS. Did you receive word of this?
No such discussions were held between us. We believe that the American presence in Syria hinges on the defeat of terrorism and restoration of security and stability in northern and eastern Syria. It also hinges on resolving the Syrian crisis according to United Nation resolutions and participation in the reconstruction of the country.

In October 2019, the Americans pulled out from some regions east of the Euphrates. How did that affect your forces?
The American administration committed a major mistake by withdrawing from the Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad regions. Let us be more clear: former President Donald Trump granted Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan the greenlight to occupy those regions. There is no doubt that the move impacted our forces’ ability to fight terrorism as we became preoccupied with defending those regions. The withdrawal negatively reflected on the US and its strategy in Syria and the Middle East.

So what are your expectations from the Biden administration?
We believe the administration will work on rectifying the massive amount of errors that were committed by the Trump administration. This includes the whole approach towards the Syrian crisis. We urge the new administration to adopt a new strategy that would reactivate America’s role in pushing for an end to the Syrian “holocaust.”

Some say that the Biden team is more sympathetic of your demands. What are your expectations?
The US has interests in Syria and the region. We share similar views on important issues, such as the fight against terrorism. The long-term strategy, however, does not change with a change in presidents and administrations. Some minor changes do take place that could alter some goals and policies. At this point, the new administration’s policy has not been shaped, despite some positive and encouraging signs shown to our forces and autonomous administration.

Agreements in the east of the Euphrates region have been reached between Russia and Turkey, the US and Turkey and Damascus and the SDF. What is the situation like amid all of these deals?
We are preserving the balance in the region through contacts with all parties. Each side enjoys its area of influence. The Russian and regime forces entered our regions through an understanding with us. On October 23, 2019, Russia signed a deal with Turkey that asks it to preserve the ceasefire between our forces and the Turkish occupation and the international coalition forces. The regime forces, meanwhile, are tasked with protecting the Syrian border in line with its role in preserving Syrian state sovereignty.

What about the Peace Spring Operation region? Did you carry out what was asked of you?
The so-called “peace spring” region refers to Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad, but the Turkish occupation is trying to impose its labels on the area. It announced similar labels when it referred to Afrin as the “olive branch” region. We do not recognize such labels. We are committed to the agreement signed between former US Vice President Mike Pence with Erdogan and another signed between Russian President Vladimir Putin with Erdogan.

In line with the agreements, we withdrew 30 kilometers away from the region. The other side was required to fully pull out as well, with Syrian border guards set to deploy. Turkey, however, did not respect the understandings. In fact, it is trying to expand its occupation. The two state sponsors of the agreements are morally bound to pressure Turkey to implement them. Turkey’s attacks against our forces and unarmed civilians in Ain Issa, Tal Tamr and Kobani reveal its intentions to destabilize the region.

What about Turkey and Russia’s patrols near Kobani and their understanding on Afrin?
The patrols in the Kobani countryside are part of the agreement with Moscow. They are part of an attempt to impose a sort of calm between us and Turkey after its occupation of Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad.

The violations against Kurdish civilians in Afrin – the region’s true locals – are, however, unprecedented throughout history due to their atrociousness. The only side responsible for this is the Turkish occupier. Russia is also partly to blame because it has not deterred Turkey from committing those crimes. The Turkish occupation has cordoned off Afrin, even preventing rights and humanitarian groups and the media from uncovering the crimes committed there. I therefore, call on Russia to assume its moral responsibility in ending the Turkish occupation of Afrin.

Russia’s military recently expanded to Derik where US forces are deployed.
As we have said before, the Russian military police carries out patrols along the border in line with the October 23, 2019 agreement.

We have, however, seen run-ins between the Russian and American forces.
We constantly stress to both sides the need to focus on operations aimed at restoring stability and combating ISIS.

Does Russia coordinate with you amid the deployment east of the deployment and presence of a large Russian base in al-Qamishli?
Yes, coordination is ongoing with us over the deployment and mobilization of patrols. All of their movements are taking place according to a mechanism that was agreed between us.

Who is your ally today, Russia or the US?
We do not oppose either side. We have established relations with them in pursuit of the interests of our people and their aspirations for freedom and a dignified life, as well as security and stability.

What about the efforts to reunite Kurdish internal ranks?
We have come a long way in the dialogue that we had launched. The most significant achievement is restoring trust between the two sides. We also completed the memorandum over the political leadership, which will be the basis for any future agreement. Other disputed issues are secondary affairs and agreements will be reached over them during future rounds of dialogue that will be launched soon.

Is the SDF ready to meet the military demands and include other factions in its ranks?
Our doors are open to all forces that believe in the principles and goals of the SDF. These forces should not have goals that contradict with ours and the principle of coexistence. They must also defend our territories against all forces that seek to violate them.

Some sides criticize you for following leader of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), Abdullah Ocalan.
The PKK is a fraternal Kurdish party. We enjoy ties with it along with other Kurdish parties in the southern Kurdistan region. We are not affiliated with it. We are the Syrian Democratic Forces. We are independent in our decisions and have a clear strategy that we are implementing Syria, which is the sole area of our operations. We do, however, adhere to the idea and democratic nation project proposed by Ocalan.

What about your alleged siege of the “security square” in al-Hasakeh? Is it true that the regime has you surrounded in Aleppo?
We have never besieged Hasakeh. Movement between our regions and those held by the regime had never come to a halt. The regime, however, is imposing an oppressive and unjustified siege of the Shahba region, where refugees from Afrin have fled. A similar siege is being imposed on the al-Sheikh Maksoud and Ashrafiyeh neighborhoods in Aleppo whereby no food, fuel and medical supplies are allowed in. The regime has set up checkpoints to limit the movement of the locals after its hopes for the fall of Ain Issa were dashed.

I believe the main reason for the siege is the regime’s mentality of elimination that drives it to restore the situation in Syria to the way it was before 2011. The provocations and tensions that it is stoking in Hasakeh and Qamishli and attempts to spark Arab-Kurdish strife are all part of efforts to pressure the autonomous administration and turn back the hands of time. On our end, we are trying to restore calm, avoid being dragged towards strife and seeking serious dialogue over fateful issues. We are not pursuing further escalation.

Rounds of dialogue were previously held with the regime. Are they still ongoing?
The dialogue came to halt due to the regime’s stubborn and backwards mentality. Just days ago, a Syrian Democratic Council delegation was in Damascus, but it left emptyhanded because the regime rejects all solutions and initiatives that could lead to a political resolution of the Syrian crisis. We believe this stubbornness will not do it any good.

But military agreements with Damascus still stand.
The understandings hinge on Russia because it ensures that they continue. These understandings have not expanded to become comprehensive agreements because the regime is shirking its commitments and refuses to make any concessions that could build trust with it. This is hindering the possibility of military agreements being expanded to launch serious national political dialogue. We believe that any military understanding that is not backed by a political one will not last long, which we hope would never come to pass.

In the bigger picture, there has been talk about the formation of a Syrian military council. Is the SDF ready to take part in such a council that includes you, the regime and opposition?
I had previously said that we do not oppose joining any Syrian national military structure that achieves Syrian national goals in restoring security and stability in the country and preserves that the SDF. Such a council should not have a nationalist, religious or sectarian identity. It should instead believe in defending the nation and should not be subject to foreign agendas.

Is that possible?
Yes, as long as the will and determination are available and intentions are sincere.



Al-Khanbashi to Asharq Al-Awsat: We Warn Against Incitement, Hadramout Has Room for All

Governor of Hadramout, Salim Al-Khanbashi delivers a press conference in the city of Mukalla in Yemen's coastal southern Hadramout province on January 19, 2026. (Photo by FADEL SENNA / AFP)
Governor of Hadramout, Salim Al-Khanbashi delivers a press conference in the city of Mukalla in Yemen's coastal southern Hadramout province on January 19, 2026. (Photo by FADEL SENNA / AFP)
TT

Al-Khanbashi to Asharq Al-Awsat: We Warn Against Incitement, Hadramout Has Room for All

Governor of Hadramout, Salim Al-Khanbashi delivers a press conference in the city of Mukalla in Yemen's coastal southern Hadramout province on January 19, 2026. (Photo by FADEL SENNA / AFP)
Governor of Hadramout, Salim Al-Khanbashi delivers a press conference in the city of Mukalla in Yemen's coastal southern Hadramout province on January 19, 2026. (Photo by FADEL SENNA / AFP)

Presidential Leadership Council (PLC) member and Governor of Yemen's eastern Hadramout province Salem al-Khanbashi says he believes that “Hadramout triumphed for itself,” and that what took place there in December 2025 and early January 2026 marked a decisive moment in which Hadhramis reclaimed their right to protect their identity and blocked any political project seeking to dissolve the “Hadhrami self” under the slogans of outsiders.

In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat Podcast, recorded in Riyadh on February 9, 2026, al-Khanbashi advised the new Yemeni government led by Dr. Shayea al-Zindani to steer clear of partisanship, raise performance levels, and combat corruption. During the discussion, he presented his account of events, framing the operation as a “takeover of military camps,” not the “ignition of a war.” He broadened the discussion to what he views as the priority of the current phase: consolidating stability, activating development, and opening the door to long-awaited Hadhrami investments returning home.

“Liberate us" from ourselves?

In describing the outcome of the confrontation, the deputy rejects reducing the picture to who won and who lost. He says the real victory was achieved when the people of Hadramout rejected the notion that someone could arrive and say, “We came to liberate you,” asking: “Liberate you from whom? From ourselves?” He stresses that the governorate, with its history stretching back “thousands of years,” cannot have another identity imposed upon it. He records his appreciation for those who stood in defense of this distinctiveness, while at the same time extending explicit thanks to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, its leadership and role, which he said was a key player in containing last month’s events.

On the moment he was tasked with the governorship at an extremely sensitive time, al-Khanbashi recounts that he was residing in Hadramout and did not leave except when necessary, before receiving a call from President Rashad al-Alimi and from parties including Saudi officials and colleagues on the Leadership Council, asking him to assume responsibility for the governorate “because we need you.”He says he tried to decline, but accepted under the pressure of “necessity,” emphasizing that he is a son of Hadramout who spent most of his life there, and that he accepted the post fully aware of the weight and complexity of the phase.

The picture becomes heavier as al-Khanbashi moves to his successive roles: governor, then commander of the National Shield Forces in Hadramout , then a member of the Leadership Council with the rank of vice president. He deliberately labels the January operation a “battle to take over the camps,” so that it would not be understood as targeting civilian society or as a search for settling scores.

Al-Khanbashi says his overriding concern was to spare Hadramout street fighting, protect civilian infrastructure, and minimize human losses. He describes the operation as “swift and decisive,” with a limited number of casualties.

Securing withdrawals... and a political outlet

Asked whether the military operation in Hadramout ended with reprisals against opponents, al-Khanbashi is keen to deny this. He says the withdrawal of departing forces was secured and that they were not subjected to any military or popular harassment. “We instructed that no one who was in the Southern Transitional Council, whether military or civilian, be harmed,” he says. At the same time, he explains that he took decisions to dismiss certain security and military leaders accused of involvement in looting weapons and ammunition or of poor performance, and that they will be referred for accountability in accordance with what they committed against the governorate.

Amid this, al-Khanbashi reiterates a message he wants widely understood: “Hadramout has room for all.” He calls for civic conduct that avoids incitement, and warns against marches he believes target civil peace and provoke the local scene.

He again urges adherence to civil behavior without incitement, citing gatherings that took place in early February 2026 in Seiyun. He suggests they were not spontaneous, saying: “We have evidence that these people were paid, and we want them not to force us to take measures involving a degree of coercive force against those who want to practice such acts. We are still under a state of emergency, and all measures can be taken.”

In the broader political context, al-Khanbashi speaks of moves to convene a broad Hadhrami meeting in Saudi Arabia bringing together political and social components, including Hadhramis from the Southern Transitional Council, with the aim of preparing a unified vision in the name of Hadramout to be presented to the Southern Dialogue Conference. He notes that a preparatory committee was formed in Mukalla to draft a position reflecting “all societal and political forces” in the governorate, alongside a parallel desire to represent the voice of Hadhrami expatriates within a single vision.

Electricity and investment

Electricity tops the services file, according to the governor. He places it at the head of priorities, explaining that the needs of the coast and the valley differ, but the headline is the same: energy that does not meet demand, especially in summer, with humidity and heat on the coast and harsh desert conditions in the valley.

He speaks of support projects to generate 300 megawatts for the coast, and other projects for the valley, alongside proposals for gas-powered plants and private-sector solar energy options with capacities that could reach 150 megawatts. He believes that a medium-term solution is not a substitute for a long-term strategic project for a large gas plant capable of covering Hadramout's future needs.

From energy he turns to investment as the other face of stability. Al-Khanbashi lists opportunities he sees as promising: tourism, real estate, the export of high-purity gypsum, potential minerals, coal in specific areas, black sands and heavy elements, fisheries, and the idea of aquaculture. He recalls his participation in a Hadhrami investment conference, calling on businessmen to balance their external investments with investing in Hadramout, while pledging to provide facilitation and an attractive environment.

On government affairs, al-Khanbashi describes the discussions that preceded the formation of the new government as having focused on criteria of competence, experience, and geographic balance, while rejecting the principle of quota-sharing. He then offers three pieces of advice he places at the core of the government’s test: moving away from ego and partisan drift, combating entrenched corruption in several ministries, and raising the level of revenue collection and transferring it to the central bank, especially in revenue-generating ministries. He highlights the need to regulate the financial relationship between the center and the governorates in accordance with the Local Authority Law, arguing that strict application would ease many chronic problems.

He recalls Hadramout's experience with oil revenues before exports were halted, noting that the governorate received 20 percent of the value of exported oil and used it for development projects such as electricity, roads, health, and education, before this resource stopped after the Houthis targeted export facilities.

"No barriers" with Saudi Arabia

In assessing Saudi development support, al-Khanbashi links relief and reconstruction as a single window for enabling Yemen to overcome its crisis, pointing to packages of projects in electricity, roads, health services, and others within Hadramout.

He places this within a relationship he describes as intertwined, difficult to separate socially, economically, and politically, invoking the extended borders, shared tribes, and cultural ties, to conclude that it is not possible to erect a “barrier” between Hadramout and the Kingdom.

Asked about the moment that remained most vivid in his memory during the 48 hours of the operation, al-Khanbashi says he feared the forces might not withdraw easily and what that could entail in terms of destruction and casualties, before the operation ended in record time with limited losses. He says this is what he will continue to take pride in: that Hadramout succeeded in avoiding internal fighting. In his message to the people of Hadramout, he calls for unity, abandoning the causes of division, and prioritizing security and development, pledging that the expansion of stability will lead to a “bright development era” reflected in the lives of the governorate’s residents.


Iraqi Justice Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: ISIS Prisoners Held at a Fortified Site, Escape Impossible

Iraqi Justice Minister Khaled Shwani
Iraqi Justice Minister Khaled Shwani
TT

Iraqi Justice Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: ISIS Prisoners Held at a Fortified Site, Escape Impossible

Iraqi Justice Minister Khaled Shwani
Iraqi Justice Minister Khaled Shwani

Iraqi Justice Minister Khaled Shwani told Asharq Al-Awsat that Iraq will not repatriate foreign prisoners affiliated with ISIS to their home countries if their involvement in crimes against Iraqi citizens is proven. He said a heavily fortified Iraqi prison currently holds thousands of ISIS members transferred from Syria, stressing that security breaches, escapes, smuggling, or internal unrest are not possible, despite what he described as enormous pressure on judicial institutions and the presence among the detainees of some of the world’s most dangerous terrorists.

Iraq agreed to receive thousands of prisoners suspected of affiliation with ISIS starting January 21. Although the international coalition transferred them in batches from prisons previously overseen by the Syrian Democratic Forces following military operations by the Syrian army in northeastern Syria, Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani confirmed that “the decision to receive the prisoners was purely an Iraqi one.”

Since then, Shwani says he has been “working intensively with judicial, government, and security officials” to manage a highly sensitive and dangerous operation aimed at accommodating a large number of prisoners in a way that prevents them from becoming a “ticking time bomb,” and at returning most of them to their countries so that their detention does not turn into a new school for producing extremism.

The Minister was born in the city of Kirkuk, north of Baghdad, in 1975. He has served as Iraq’s justice minister since 2022. He is a lawyer and constitutional expert, and a member of the political bureau of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, led by Pavel Talabani.

Iraqi Justice Minister Khaled Shwani

In an exclusive interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, the Iraqi Minister said that taking custody of ISIS prisoners in such large numbers came after major efforts to ease prison overcrowding, but that Iraqi authorities bore the burden in order to safeguard regional security.

According to Shwani, the Justice Ministry has long experience in managing terrorist inmates and confronting extremism. It relies on a program known as the “Moderation Program,” which aims to strip inmates of extremist ideology through multiple means, including vocational training. For this reason, he said, the international community trusts Iraq to house the most dangerous terrorists in its prisons. The following is the full text of the interview:

When the decision was announced to transfer prisoners from Syria to Iraq, was the Justice Ministry ready to receive this number of inmates?

After the Iraqi government agreed to receive the prisoners, the National Security Council of Ministers convened, and preparations began to take custody of them. Certainly, receiving such a large number is neither easy nor simple. It requires large prison facilities, equipment, and security protection, in addition to everything inmates need in correctional institutions, whether for the prisoners themselves or the security requirements to protect the prisons.

Our prisons were already overcrowded. But because we believe in the importance of this issue, and because it is related to protecting regional security from prisoners of an extremely dangerous level, urgent measures had to be taken to prepare prison sections to receive and house them. With the support provided by Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani, and the relevant bodies in government and the judiciary, we were able to succeed. All prisoners received were placed in jail, and we have now provided all prison-related requirements, as well as the security requirements to protect it.

What do you mean by those requirements?

The detainees are now housed in standard prisons with air conditioning, bathrooms, and cleaning supplies. They receive three meals a day and are guarded by a professional staff of guards and investigators. I can say that the judicial institution is dealing with them professionally, likely different from the situation in Syria. Their conditions are now better than they were before their transfer to Iraq.

An ISIS member at Al-Karkh Prison in Baghdad (AP)

Has overcrowding increased after the addition of these prisoners? How are they distributed?

Because of the exceptional circumstances Iraq went through, including the occupation of areas by ISIS, earlier bombings by Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups, as well as organized crime, the prison overcrowding rate when I took office three years ago stood at 300 percent. We put in place a systematic plan and managed to reduce overcrowding to 25 percent above normal capacity.

However, receiving 5,704 prisoners at once caused overcrowding again, because accommodating nearly 6,000 inmates required placing additional strain on other prisons, undermining efforts to ease overcrowding.

Where were they housed?

They were placed in a single prison. The operation is complex because their classification requires housing them in a prison that is tightly secured, fortified, and protected- security-wise, militarily, and intelligence-wise.

How were they housed while in pretrial detention, given that the Justice Ministry deals only with convicted prisoners?

Under Iraqi law, when a detainee is dangerous, a judge has the authority to place him in a secure location from which escape is impossible or feared, and where his protection can be guaranteed. This is not an exceptional case; it is purely legal. They are detainees under judicial decisions, and because of the danger they pose, they were placed in this prison, where they are held away from other prisoners.

How do you bear the burden? How is such a large number of prisoners managed?

There is a heavy burden on us at all levels. We need human resources to run this prison, infrastructure, additional manpower, military and security forces for protection, as well as the costs of housing, maintenance, and providing services to 5,704 prisoners. This is not easy. We face challenges, especially financial ones. But there is communication with the international coalition to bear the costs, and they have expressed readiness in this regard.

How is this matter funded?

There is understanding and communication with the international coalition, which has expressed readiness to bear financial burdens related to housing those prisoners, providing infrastructure and prison supplies, and some security requirements. We prepared a comprehensive project and sent it to the coalition, and we are awaiting their response and procedures.

How many investigators handle the prisoners’ cases?

About 150 investigators are working through the files of thousands of prisoners. They are carrying out enormous work, assisted by a large number of employees and specialized experts.

How are they classified?

We have among them the most dangerous terrorists. They are classified according to security criteria and internationally approved standards for dealing with prisoners. Highly dangerous inmates and those with terrorist ideology do not mix with ordinary prisoners. Our prisons are classified by type of crime, the severity of the offense, and age groups.

How likely is a breach or internal mutiny?

This prison is fortified and cannot be breached. I will not disclose further details, but the site is protected and cannot be penetrated. Nor can we speak of internal mutiny, because the security agencies supporting the Justice Ministry have taken their precautions with full professionalism. This cannot happen.

How are prisoners’ affairs managed inside the prison, and what measures are taken to prevent some from becoming potential hubs for terrorist activity?

First, we are in contact with their countries to repatriate them according to their nationalities once investigations are completed, provided they are not among those who fought Iraq, killed Iraqis, or participated in terrorist activities inside Iraq. Those exceptions will not be returned even if requested. We are working to repatriate the remaining detainees, and the international coalition is working with us to expedite the process.

As for their management, the Justice Ministry has long experience in this field. Other prisons of the same security classification hold dangerous terrorists, including ISIS leaders captured during operations to liberate Iraqi territory from the group. They have been placed in rehabilitation and reform programs.

This includes the “Moderation Program,” which aims to remove extremist ideology through intellectual, cultural, social, sports, and artistic approaches, in addition to vocational training. The program has achieved significant results. We seek to ensure their stay is temporary pending deportation, and during their time in custody we apply established programs and expertise in dealing with high-risk terrorist inmates.

What if efforts to return them fail? What would the situation be if they remain in Iraqi prisons for a long period?

What has been agreed with countries and with the international coalition is to return them as quickly as possible. There is clear coordination on this matter, with the exception of those who fought Iraqi security forces or committed crimes against Iraqis, as I said earlier. Those will be tried and will remain in Iraq.

ISIS members as they are placed in custody at Al-Karkh Central Prison in Baghdad (AP)

Are there countries that refuse to take back their nationals?

The matter is still in its early stages, as are the attempts. The international coalition and the United States are working with us to urge countries that have prisoners to receive them, and we will continue these efforts.

Why did the international coalition transfer ISIS prisoners to Iraq?

There may be a political aspect unrelated to the Justice Ministry, but I will highlight clear points: there is trust in the Iraqi defense and security system, trust that Iraq is a partner and an influential state within the international coalition to combat ISIS, and a reliable system to house these prisoners.


Ukrainian Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Russia’s Demands to Annex Territory are a Red Line

Ukrainian soldiers at an undisclosed location in Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region on January 30, 2026 (AFP)
Ukrainian soldiers at an undisclosed location in Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region on January 30, 2026 (AFP)
TT

Ukrainian Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Russia’s Demands to Annex Territory are a Red Line

Ukrainian soldiers at an undisclosed location in Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region on January 30, 2026 (AFP)
Ukrainian soldiers at an undisclosed location in Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region on January 30, 2026 (AFP)

A senior Ukrainian official said Kyiv is concentrating its negotiating efforts with Russia on achieving an unconditional ceasefire, while stressing the need for full international security guarantees to ensure that any future attack on Ukraine does not recur. He underscored that Russia’s demands to annex Ukrainian territory represent a red line.

Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Ukraine’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia Anatolii Petrenko reaffirmed his country’s commitment to peace, saying: “We take every opportunity to engage in diplomatic negotiations with Russia to deescalate the ongoing military standoff as a key prerequisite for inclusive political solution in order to achieve just and lasting peace.”

He added that “real breakthrough in current negotiations would be to achieve the unconditional ceasefire.” He also stressed the urgency of making progress on the return of abducted Ukrainian children and prisoners of war, noting that “If promptly agreed these would pave the way for much broader and deeper dialogue between Ukraine and Russia potentially leading to a comprehensive political decision.”

Anatolii Petrenko, Ukraine’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia (Embassy of Ukraine in Riyadh)

Petrenko said that, in this complex process, Ukraine is supported by its international partners who stand firmly on the principles of international law, Ukraine’s sovereignty, and its territorial integrity. He said: “We are convinced that unconditional ceasefire would be top testament of Russia’s genuine readiness for lasting peace.”

At the same time, he expressed regret that “daily realities of Russian strikes against Ukraine’s critical energy infrastructure against the backdrop of ongoing diplomatic efforts reflect fundamental gap we are to bridge using every compelling leverage in possession of international community.”

Petrenko went on to stress that “the issue of Russia’s demands for territorial annexation are illegitimate and represent our red line in accordance with Ukraine’s Constitution.” He added that “It cannot be considered as a matter of a technical compromise for the sake of ongoing negotiations with Russia,” noting that “Ukraine’s delegation has a clear mandate to pursue further diplomatic negotiations strictly based on our national interests.”

The American Role

Petrenko described the US role in any political settlement as central, saying: “The United States’ role remains central. This is our strategic partner, and we rely on our partnership to achieve a strategic solution for Ukraine’s sovereignty.”

He said this partnership includes “steadfast support to ongoing diplomatic negotiations with Russia, vital commitment to sustained combat readiness of our defense forces with tangible security guarantees and clear common vision for economic recovery of Ukraine once the war is terminated.”

Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy during at the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 22 (Reuters)

Petrenko stressed that “United States’ leadership in maintaining world security should deliver an effective political solution to stop war against Ukraine thus undoubtedly generating global stability much needed across all continents and regions.”

On another front, he said Ukraine aspires to join the European Union in the foreseeable future, saying: “Ukraine has always been a part of Europe.” He added: “Our national ambition is to become a new member of the European Union in foreseeable future.”

He said “the European Union is our strongest partner to maintain macro-economic stability, develop Ukraine’s defense industry and contribute to future security guarantees,” noting that “our joint approach to ending the war has always been unified – politically, economically and militarily.”

Petrenko added that “European Union has to be part of diplomatic negotiations for peace as we all understand the European security remains undivided and Ukraine is the cornerstone of that security.”

Russia’s Exhaustion

Petrenko spoke about Russian losses since the war began on 24 February 2022, saying: “Since 24 February 2022, Russia has lost around 1.3 mln personnel, with 11,654 tanks, 24,013 armored vehicles, 435 aircraft and 28 warships destroyed.” He said “These figures illustrate not only a tragic human toll but also a profound degradation of Russia’s warfighting capacity.”

On the economic front, he noted: “Russia’s wartime economy shows clear signs of running aground,” stressing that “GDP growth has slowed to near stagnation at around 1% in 2025 and projected to remain minimal in 2026 due to sanctions, declining oil and gas revenues and rising structural imbalances.” He added: “Annual inflation reached around 7% with key interest rate at 16%, the budget is expected to run a noticeable deficit.”

Petrenko said: “War brings no prosperity to any nation in the world.” He added that “Russia should take this very seriously and reverse the aggression into civilized neighborly relationship with Ukraine as a responsible member of the United Nations and its Security Council.”

Saudi–Ukrainian Partnership

On relations with Saudi Arabia, Petrenko said: “Ukraine and Saudi Arabia experience a dynamic phase of consistent political and economic engagement.”

He said: “Last year President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy paid an official visit to Saudi Arabia which resulted in the adoption of a Joint Statement showcasing the strong political will of the leaders to deepen and expand cooperation in the prospective fields.”

Volodymyr Zelenskyy holding talks with Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman in Jeddah on March 10, 2025 (EPA)

Petrenko reaffirmed the two countries’ determination to strengthen investment relations through partnerships in priority sectors, including energy, food industries, and infrastructure, with a shared desire to continue exploring opportunities for cooperation in oil, gas, their derivatives, and petrochemicals.

He added: “Particular value is attached to the Kingdom’s practical efforts to provide a conducive environment for diplomatic engagement within the Ukraine–US–Russia triangle last year, underscoring the Saudi Monarchy’s sincere commitment to contribute to a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine in a meaningful and practical way.”

Petrenko expressed his country’s deep gratitude for the humanitarian and energy assistance provided by Saudi Arabia.