Premier: Iraq Doesn't Need US Combat Troops

Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi (Asharq Al-Awsat).
Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi (Asharq Al-Awsat).
TT

Premier: Iraq Doesn't Need US Combat Troops

Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi (Asharq Al-Awsat).
Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi (Asharq Al-Awsat).

Iraq’s prime minister says his country no longer requires American combat troops to fight ISIS group, but a formal time frame for their redeployment will depend on the outcome of talks with US officials this week.

Mustafa al-Kadhimi said Iraq will still ask for US training and military intelligence gathering. His comments came in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press ahead of a planned trip to Washington, where he's slated to meet with President Joe Biden on Monday for a fourth round of strategic talks.

“There is no need for any foreign combat forces on Iraqi soil,” said al-Kadhimi, falling short of announcing a deadline for a US troop departure. Iraq’s security forces and army are capable of defending the country without US-led coalition troops, he said.

But al-Kadhimi said any withdrawal schedule would be based on the needs of Iraqi forces, who have shown themselves capable in the last year of conducting independent anti-ISIS missions.

“The war against ISIS and the readiness of our forces requires a special timetable, and this depends on the negotiations that we will conduct in Washington,” he said.
The US and Iraq agreed in April that the US transition to a train-and-advise mission meant the US combat role would end but they didn't settle on a timetable for completing that transition. In Monday’s meeting at the White House, the two leaders are expected to specify a timeline, possibly by the end of this year.

The US troop presence has stood at about 2,500 since late last year when former President Donald Trump ordered a reduction from 3,000.

The US mission of training and advising Iraqi forces has its most recent origins in former President Barack Obama’s decision in 2014 to send troops back to Iraq. The move was made in response to the ISIS group's takeover of large portions of western and northern Iraq and a collapse of Iraqi security forces that appeared to threaten Baghdad. Obama had fully withdrawn US forces from Iraq in 2011, eight years after the US invasion.

“What we want from the US presence in Iraq is to support our forces in training and developing their efficiency and capabilities, and in security cooperation,” al-Kadhimi said.

The Washington trip comes as the premier’s administration has faced one setback after another, seriously undermining public confidence. Ongoing missile attacks by militia groups have underscored the limits of the state to prevent them and a series of devastating hospital fires amid soaring coronavirus cases have left dozens dead.

Meanwhile, early federal elections, in line with a promise al-Kadhimi made when he assumed office, are less than three months away.

Chief on the agenda in Washington, however, is the future of American-led coalition forces in Iraq.

Iraq declared victory over ISIS in late 2017 after a ruinous and bloody war. The continued presence of American troops has become a polarizing issue among Iraq’s political class since the US-directed drone strike that killed powerful Iranian general Qassim Soleimani and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis on Iraqi soil last year.

To quell the threat of widespread instability following the targeted killings, the US and Iraq have held at least three rounds of strategic talks centering on Iraq’s military needs in the ongoing fight against ISIS and to formalize a timeline for withdrawal.

Four years since their territorial defeat, ISIS militants are still able to launch attacks in the capital and roam the country’s rugged northern region. Last week, a suicide bomber killed 30 people in a busy Baghdad marketplace. That attack was later claimed by ISIS.

Al-Kadhimi has faced significant pressure from mainly Shiite political parties to announce a timeline for a US troop withdrawal. Ongoing rocket and, more recently, drone attacks targeting the American military presence have also heaped pressure on the government. They are widely believed to be perpetrated by Iran-aligned Iraqi militia groups.

An announcement that combat troops will withdraw might serve to placate Shiite parties but will have little impact on the ground: The coalition’s combat mission ended effectively in November when the Pentagon reduced US troops in the country to 2,500, according to Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein. Shiite parties have said they do not object to trainers or advisors who may remain as part of the coalition.

US and coalition officials have maintained that US troops are no longer accompanying Iraqi forces on ground missions and that coalition assistance is limited to intelligence gathering and surveillance and the deployment of advanced military technologies. Iraqi military officials have stressed they still need this support going forward.

“Iraq has a set of American weapons that need maintenance and training. We will ask the American side to continue to support our forces and develop our capabilities,” al-Kadhimi said.

Al-Kadhimi assumed power as a consensus candidate following months of political jockeying between rival parliamentary blocs. The blocs were firebrand cleric Muqtada al-Sadr’s coalition on one side and paramilitary commander and former minister Hadi al-Ameri’s Fatah group on the other.

The stakes were high: Al-Kadhimi's predecessor had resigned facing pressure from historic mass anti-government protests. At least 600 people were killed as Iraqi forces used live ammunition and tear gas to disperse crowds.

Al-Kadhimi presented himself as a champion of protester demands and set a lofty agenda: He promised to hold early elections, now scheduled for Oct. 10, and to bring to account the killers of activists, including whoever killed prominent commentator Hisham al-Hashimi outside his home last summer.

The arrest of an Interior Ministry employee in the shooting death of al-Hashimi fell short, many said, because it did not reveal which group ordered the killing.

Critics say al-Kadhimi has not gone far enough. This is partly because the very conditions that facilitated his rise to the premiership have also served as his chief limitation in parliament.
Political opposition watered down ambitious economic reforms that targeted Iraq’s bloated public sector when the country faced a disastrous financial crisis after falling oil prices. Without a party backing him in parliament, and with rival parties vying to control ministries and other state institutions, al-Kadhimi’s government has appeared weak.

Repeated standoffs with Iran-backed militia groups following the arrests of militiamen suspected of launching attacks against the US Embassy and US troops have further tarnished the government’s credibility.

Activists whose cries for elections once resonated in the squares of the capital now say they will boycott the October polls, distrustful that the political establishment could ever produce free and fair elections.

A UN monitoring mission has been established in hopes of boosting voter turnout. But protesters have taken to the streets recently and expressed outrage over the rise in killings of prominent activists and journalists. Even al-Kadhimi conceded certain forces were actively seeking to undermine the polls.

“We are in a sensitive situation. We need to calm the political situation until we reach the elections," he said.

Al-Kadhimi has managed to prove his mettle in one arena: That of regional mediator.

Iraq’s friendly relations with Saudi Arabia and Iran have brought both regional foes to the negotiation table for at least two rounds of talks in Baghdad.

“Iraq has succeeded in gaining the trust of these countries, and accordingly, it is working toward the stability of the region.”



Lawyers in Sanaa Under Houthi Repression

Part of previous consultative meetings for Yemeni lawyers in Sanaa (Facebook)
Part of previous consultative meetings for Yemeni lawyers in Sanaa (Facebook)
TT

Lawyers in Sanaa Under Houthi Repression

Part of previous consultative meetings for Yemeni lawyers in Sanaa (Facebook)
Part of previous consultative meetings for Yemeni lawyers in Sanaa (Facebook)

In areas controlled by the Houthi group in Yemen, there is an increasing number of violations targeting lawyers, raising widespread concerns about the future of justice and the rule of law.

Recent reports from local human rights organizations have revealed a recurring pattern of systematic restrictions on the practice of law profession, including arbitrary arrests, prolonged detentions, and direct threats.

The legal environment in Sanaa and other Houthi-controlled cities no longer provides professional environment for lawyers who themselves are now subject to questioning or targeted for defending their clients, especially in cases of a political or human rights nature.

Observers believe that this reality not only affects lawyers but also threatens the foundation of the judicial system as a whole.

Widespread Violations

The Daoo Yemen Rights and Development organization documented in its report more than 382 Houthi violations against lawyers in Sanaa from January 2023 to December 2025.

These included arbitrary arrests, prolonged detention without legal justification, threats of murder and assault, prevention from practicing the profession, and restrictions on the right to defense in cases of a political or human rights nature.

The report monitored more than 159 Houthi violations against lawyers during 2025, compared to 135 violations in 2023, and 88 violations in 2024, describing this targeting as a “systematic pattern” that affects human rights defenders and undermines what remains of the justice system and the rule of law.

Human Rights Calls

Calls from local and international human rights organizations have escalated for urgent steps to be taken to protect lawyers and ensure the independence of their profession, stressing the need to release lawyers detained for their professional activities and to stop all forms of intimidation or restrictions targeting them.

Human rights activists believe that protecting lawyers is a prerequisite for maintaining any future reform or political path because the absence of an independent defense means the absence of justice itself.


Australia Won’t Repatriate 34 Women and Children from Syria 

Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stands outside the entrance to his office at Parliament House in Canberra on February 11, 2026. (AFP)
Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stands outside the entrance to his office at Parliament House in Canberra on February 11, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Australia Won’t Repatriate 34 Women and Children from Syria 

Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stands outside the entrance to his office at Parliament House in Canberra on February 11, 2026. (AFP)
Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stands outside the entrance to his office at Parliament House in Canberra on February 11, 2026. (AFP)

The Australian government will not repatriate from Syria a group of 34 women and children with alleged ties to the ISIS group, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Tuesday.

The women and children from 11 families were supposed to fly from the Syrian capital Damascus to Australia but Syrian authorities on Monday turned them back to Roj camp in northeast Syria because of procedural problems, officials said.

Only two groups of Australians have been repatriated with government help from Syrian camps since the fall of the ISIS group in 2019. Other Australians have also returned without government assistance.

Albanese would not comment on a report that the latest women and children had Australian passports.

“We’re providing absolutely no support and we are not repatriating people,” Albanese told Australian Broadcasting Corp. in Melbourne.

“We have no sympathy, frankly, for people who traveled overseas in order to participate in what was an attempt to establish a ‘caliphate’ to undermine, destroy, our way of life. And so, as my mother would say, ‘You make your bed, you lie in it,’” Albanese added.

Albanese noted that the child welfare-focused international charity Save the Children had failed to establish in Australia’s courts that the Australian government had a responsibility to repatriate citizens from Syrian camps.

After the federal court ruled in the government's favor in 2024, Save the Children Australia chief executive Mat Tinkler argued the government had a moral, if not legal, obligation to repatriate families.

Albanese said if the latest group made their way to Australia without government help, they could be charged.

It was an offense under Australian law to travel to the former ISIS stronghold of al-Raqqa province without a legitimate reason from 2014 to 2017. The maximum penalty was 10 years in prison.

“It’s unfortunate that children are impacted by this as well, but we are not providing any support. And if anyone does manage to find their way back to Australia, then they’ll face the full force of the law, if any laws have been broken,” Albanese added.

The last group of Australians to be repatriated from Syrian camps arrived in Sydney in October 2022.

They were four mothers, former partners of ISIS supporters, and 13 children.

Australian officials had assessed the group as the most vulnerable among 60 Australian women and children held in Roj camp, the government said at the time.

Eight offspring of two slain Australian ISIS fighters were repatriated from Syria in 2019 by the conservative government that preceded Albanese’s center-left Labor Party administration.

The issue of ISIS supporters resurfaced in Australia after the killings of 15 people at a Jewish festival at Bondi Beach on Dec. 14. The attackers were allegedly inspired by ISIS.


‘Jerusalem After the West Bank’: Israel Effectively Erases the Land of a Palestinian State

The Neve Yaakov settlement north of East Jerusalem, with the Israeli wall visible separating the Palestinian neighborhood of al-Ram in the West Bank (AFP). 
The Neve Yaakov settlement north of East Jerusalem, with the Israeli wall visible separating the Palestinian neighborhood of al-Ram in the West Bank (AFP). 
TT

‘Jerusalem After the West Bank’: Israel Effectively Erases the Land of a Palestinian State

The Neve Yaakov settlement north of East Jerusalem, with the Israeli wall visible separating the Palestinian neighborhood of al-Ram in the West Bank (AFP). 
The Neve Yaakov settlement north of East Jerusalem, with the Israeli wall visible separating the Palestinian neighborhood of al-Ram in the West Bank (AFP). 

A day after an unprecedented Israeli decision allowing the seizure of land in the occupied West Bank, Hebrew-language reports revealed a settlement plan that would, in effect, extend Jerusalem’s boundaries beyond the pre–1967 lines.

According to a report published by Yedioth Ahronoth, a housing plan being promoted in the settlement of Adam (also known as Geva Binyamin), in the Binyamin region, is formally presented as an expansion of the settlement bloc.

In practice, however, it would push Jerusalem’s municipal boundaries beyond the lines that existed before the June 1967 war. Such a move would amount to the imposition of de facto sovereignty over the city and a further expansion of Israel’s occupation of Jerusalem.

The Palestinian Authority (PA), backed by international resolutions, demands East Jerusalem as the capital of the hoped-for Palestinian state on the basis of the pre-1967 borders, within the framework of a two-state solution.

Limited Options for the Palestinian Authority

Israeli efforts to seize Palestinian land are effectively undermining the prospects of statehood, while the PA appears to have few tools at its disposal to confront the occupation.

The Palestinian presidency rejected the Israeli decisions, saying it does not recognize them and that they “do not change reality in any way.” It described the moves as a threat to security and stability and as an annulment of signed agreements.

A well-informed Palestinian source told Asharq Al-Awsat that the PA’s options are limited to “the steadfastness of Palestinians on their land and confronting this Israeli encroachment by relying on and adhering to international law and international legitimacy resolutions, turning to the UN Security Council, relevant institutions, international courts, and diplomatic channels.”

The source acknowledged that the PA’s tools are confined to resisting on the ground and rejecting Israeli decisions on the basis that they neither create nor negate rights and do not alter the status of the West Bank as occupied territory.

The PA is also betting on a global rejection of these measures and on pressure by influential states on Israel and the United States to halt them.

He added that the PA has instructed its apparatuses and ministries not to deal with any situation imposed by Israel in the West Bank and is relying on public awareness among Palestinians to avoid engaging with Israeli attempts to create new facts on the ground.

In parallel, the international community, the Security Council, and all legal and international bodies have been urged to confront these unilateral steps and take urgent action.

The PA is also awaiting the outcome of US President Donald Trump’s plan for Gaza, hoping it will lead to a political process toward statehood.

It remains committed to the plan’s provisions and pins hopes on potential changes in Israel’s upcoming elections that could unseat the current right-wing government in favor of a less extreme coalition.

Trump’s “Peace Council” is scheduled to hold its first meeting in Washington on Thursday, as the US president speaks of achieving what he calls “global peace.”

The Jerusalem Plan

The plan for Jerusalem calls for the construction of hundreds of housing units on land located some distance from the Adam settlement, currently without direct access from it, despite earlier discussions about building a bridge to link the two areas.

Construction in the designated zone would create geographic contiguity within Jerusalem and effectively expand the Neve Yaakov neighborhood. According to the plan, the housing units are intended for the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) community.

Advancing the plan through the West Bank planning system has become significantly easier following sweeping changes introduced by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich within the Civil Administration, including the creation of a new settlement authority.

Approval is expected to proceed rapidly, and under procedures adopted in recent years, the project could be implemented within a few years. Smotrich has reshaped the government’s approach to settlement construction by replacing lengthy bureaucratic processes with fast-track approval channels.

A “Misleading Cover”

The Jerusalem Governorate said Israel’s Ministry of Construction and Housing plans to build around 2,780 settlement units to expand the Adam settlement, describing this as a misleading cover aimed at extending Jerusalem’s municipal boundaries beyond the Green Line—the demarcation between territories occupied in 1948 and those occupied in 1967—as part of a calculated policy to impose new sovereign realities without an official declaration.

In a statement issued Monday, the governorate said promoting what is called the “expansion of Adam” is an attempt to obscure the truth.

The plan shows that the new settlement neighborhood would, in practice, be administered as part of Jerusalem’s municipality, despite being formally presented as part of the settlement, an open attempt to conceal annexation behind deceptive planning labels.

Israeli Opposition

Knesset member Gilad Kariv, from the opposition Democrats party warned that the planned step would exacerbate friction between Israelis and Palestinians and inflame unnecessary tensions.

He added that the plans contradict Israel’s international commitments, including those toward Trump, and reflect Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s complete submission to his extremist partners.

The Israeli peace group Peace Now sharply criticized the move, saying that for the first time since 1967, the government is clandestinely annexing land under the pretext of establishing a new settlement.

In a message to Trump, the group warned: “Netanyahu is deceiving you. You said you would not allow annexation, yet he is carrying it out before your eyes.”

The Jerusalem plan comes amid a series of controversial decisions by the Israeli government regarding the West Bank. On Sunday, the government approved the reopening of land registration in the West Bank for the first time since 1967, endorsing a proposal to register vast areas in the name of the state—effectively granting legal cover to the seizure of Palestinian land.