Son of Najaf Governor Arrested on Drug Charges

The son of the governor of Najaf was arrested on drug-related charges. (AFP)
The son of the governor of Najaf was arrested on drug-related charges. (AFP)
TT

Son of Najaf Governor Arrested on Drug Charges

The son of the governor of Najaf was arrested on drug-related charges. (AFP)
The son of the governor of Najaf was arrested on drug-related charges. (AFP)

The son of the governor of the Iraqi region of Najaf was arrested on drug-related charges, sparking uproar among the people due to the province’s religious significance.

Jawad Louay al-Yasseri and two others were arrested for drug dealing and they are being held in prison in southwestern Baghdad.

Security forces seized in their possession 5.6 kilograms of cannabis, 7,000 narcotic pills and a pistol, said Iraqi police sources.

If convicted, they may face sentences as severe as the death penalty or life in prison.

Najaf is home to the shrine of Imam Ali and several senior Shi’ite figures live in the province.

The arrest of the three suspects sheds light on the growing drug trade in Iraq and the consequent rise in the number of abusers over the past few years.

This prompted the premiership to issue in early 2017 a decree to form a committee of concerned university professors to assess the drug trade in the country.

Jawad’s father, Louay, issued on Sunday a statement stressing that since assuming his duties as Najaf governor, he has been keen on imposing the rule of law on all people, regardless of their standing or position.

“This includes my family, which has prestigious and respected roots,” he added.

“We are all citizens governed by the law,” he declared.

He however criticized the media for highlighting his son’s role in the case, while failing to spotlight his accomplices, saying that these actions were politically motivated given that Iraq is holding elections in May.



Sudan Files Complaint Against Ethiopia at UN Security Council Over Drone Attacks

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres meets Sudanese Foreign Minister Mohieddin Salem in New York on September 24 (UN). 
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres meets Sudanese Foreign Minister Mohieddin Salem in New York on September 24 (UN). 
TT

Sudan Files Complaint Against Ethiopia at UN Security Council Over Drone Attacks

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres meets Sudanese Foreign Minister Mohieddin Salem in New York on September 24 (UN). 
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres meets Sudanese Foreign Minister Mohieddin Salem in New York on September 24 (UN). 

Sudan has filed complaints against Ethiopia with the UN Security Council and the African Union Peace and Security Council over what Khartoum described as attacks on civilian facilities by drones launched from Ethiopian territory, according to a statement from the Sudanese Foreign Ministry.

Khartoum accuses Addis Ababa of siding with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which have been fighting the Sudanese army for more than three years, leaving the country divided into areas controlled by the rival forces.

Ethiopia, for its part, accuses Sudan of supporting rebels in its Tigray region.

The attacks exchanged between the two sides have fueled unprecedented tensions between the neighboring countries, raising fears that Sudan’s war could spill across its borders.

Sudan’s Foreign Ministry declared that “the terrorist militia’s use of Ethiopian territory to target Sudanese territory constitutes a hostile act that places Ethiopia before international law.”

Sudan’s Sovereignty Council, headed by army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, had previously reported that more than 180 drones launched from Ethiopian territory had attacked Sudan this year.

According to a council report, the attacks killed or wounded around 500 civilians, striking residential areas, hospitals, power stations and fuel facilities.

Both sides in Sudan’s war rely heavily on drones, with direct confrontations declining as aerial attacks intensify in the country’s west and south.

The United Nations has warned of an increase in drone attacks, which have killed more than 1,100 people since the beginning of the year, including more than 300 in the past month alone.

The war, now in its fourth year, has killed tens of thousands of people and displaced millions within Sudan and beyond its borders, while famine has spread across several areas.

Recent attacks on power stations in army-controlled areas have caused widespread electricity outages in Khartoum, Al-Jazira, White Nile and Gedaref states.

Reports indicated that around 15 power stations were targeted between October 20 and November 1, while the Emergency Lawyers group announced on Sunday that 15 stations had been targeted in October alone.


Lebanese Army Rejects Direct Coordination with Israel Before Withdrawal from South

The entrance to the village of Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh in South Lebanon as the Lebanese Army deployed following the withdrawal of Israeli forces on July 21, 2026. (Reuters)
The entrance to the village of Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh in South Lebanon as the Lebanese Army deployed following the withdrawal of Israeli forces on July 21, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

Lebanese Army Rejects Direct Coordination with Israel Before Withdrawal from South

The entrance to the village of Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh in South Lebanon as the Lebanese Army deployed following the withdrawal of Israeli forces on July 21, 2026. (Reuters)
The entrance to the village of Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh in South Lebanon as the Lebanese Army deployed following the withdrawal of Israeli forces on July 21, 2026. (Reuters)

The Lebanese Army has rejected Israeli demands for direct military coordination while Israeli forces continue to occupy Lebanese territory, fearing the move could undermine negotiations and draw the military into domestic political disputes.

The army wants to preserve the trust it has built with communities in South Lebanon, even as it cracks down on gunmen and weapons traffickers and expands its deployment in areas outside Israeli control.

Washington has conveyed Israel’s demand for direct coordination between the two armies, which would replace the existing US-mediated mechanism, the Military Coordination Group for Lebanon (MCG4L).

The group oversees implementation of the “framework agreement”, coordination arrangements and assistance with military deployments, beginning in designated pilot areas.

Israel repeated its demand during the eighth round of military-only talks in Tampa, Florida.

President Joseph Aoun backs the army’s refusal. Visitors to the president told Asharq Al-Awsat that he had personally instructed the military not to establish direct contact with Israeli forces.

“It is still far too early to discuss such a step,” Aoun told his visitors. “Under the current circumstances, direct communication is impossible while the Israeli army continues to occupy our territory and attack it every day.”

Indirect coordination

Sources familiar with contacts between the army and Lebanon’s political leadership explained that the military insists coordination with Israel remain indirect, either through the US military or the United Nations, as under previous UN-chaired tripartite and five-party committees.

The army wants an international witness to any discussions, particularly after what the sources described as negative experiences with Israel.

They cited Israel’s refusal to acknowledge the Lebanese Army’s progress in implementing the first phase of the government’s plan to bring weapons under exclusive state control south of the Litani River before fighting resumed on March 2.

Political and domestic concerns

The army’s position also reflects Israel’s continued occupation of Lebanese territory and its refusal to withdraw, halt attacks or offer political concessions that could strengthen Beirut’s negotiating position, according to the sources.

They stressed that the military does not oppose negotiations and has participated in US-mediated talks in Rome and the United States under the framework agreement.

But the army is determined to avoid becoming a target of domestic political disputes over direct negotiations with Israel.

“The military wants to preserve its standing as a national institution trusted across Lebanon’s political and sectarian divides,” the sources explained.

They warned that “direct coordination could expose the army to criticism whenever Israeli forces carried out attacks or violations, weakening public confidence in the institution.”

“Such divisions could also obstruct its mission to implement Cabinet decisions on bringing all weapons under state control and extending government authority across Lebanese territory.”

US praise

The sources reported that the Lebanese Army had faced no opposition from residents south of the Litani River while implementing the first phase of the government’s weapons-control plan.

It collected 2.7 million weapons and pieces of ammunition without coordinating with any domestic party, including Hezbollah, they noted.

The army also pursued and arrested gunmen, people who opened fire and those transporting weapons, while maintaining local support.

US Central Command praised its operations and recognized the difficulties of working in heavily damaged areas, according to the sources.

These included clearing roads, restoring basic living conditions and helping residents return to their villages, particularly in designated pilot areas.

The sources highlighted US military support for the army’s civil-military operations, which have enabled it to carry out its mission without confrontation with local communities.


Iraq’s Ruling Coordination Framework Faces Growing Risk of Split

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi with Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq leader Humam Hamoudi (Prime Minister’s Media Office). 
Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi with Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq leader Humam Hamoudi (Prime Minister’s Media Office). 
TT

Iraq’s Ruling Coordination Framework Faces Growing Risk of Split

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi with Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq leader Humam Hamoudi (Prime Minister’s Media Office). 
Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi with Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq leader Humam Hamoudi (Prime Minister’s Media Office). 

Deepening divisions over Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, the disarmament of armed factions and the distribution of government posts threaten to fracture Iraq’s ruling Shiite Coordination Framework, according to sources close to the alliance.

The sources describe intense polarization fueled by competing political interests, disagreements over the country’s financial crisis and disputes over vacant and previously allocated government positions. Recent public clashes among senior figures have further exposed the widening rifts.

Dispute Erupts in Public

Tensions erupted publicly last Saturday when Khalid al-Marsoumi, a member of the Reconstruction and Development Alliance led by former Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, called for the prosecution of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Al-Marsoumi accused Maliki of “destroying society and spreading discord,” citing the fall of nearly a third of Iraq’s territory to Daesh in 2014, when Maliki was prime minister.

Hisham al-Rikabi, director of Maliki’s media office, responded: “Enough hypocrisy and political grandstanding. Those who speak today about the fall of the provinces and discord must stop exploiting the tragedies of Iraqis in their political disputes.”

Last week, the Reconstruction and Development parliamentary bloc announced it would suspend its attendance at parliamentary sessions in protest against what it described as “systematic violations and irresponsible behavior that some lawmakers insist on pursuing.”

The bloc said such conduct amounted to “malicious smear campaigns and systematic targeting of the Reconstruction and Development Alliance and its leadership.”

Criticism and accusations directed at the alliance and its leader, Sudani, frequently come from lawmakers and political figures affiliated with other Coordination Framework parties.

Al-Zaidi’s Frustration

Sources close to the government and the Coordination Framework told Asharq Al-Awsat that sharp polarization had taken hold within the alliance.

They attributed the divisions to some factions aligning themselves with Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi while others sought to cast doubt on his management of the state and obstruct his efforts to disarm armed groups.

The sources also pointed to objections to Zaidi’s foreign visits, particularly his recent trip to Syria, and competition over vacant government positions, including the premiership and leadership of the National Security Service.

They said Zaidi was frustrated by the polarization and attempts by certain blocs and parties to undermine many of his powers and pressure him over efforts to combat corruption and disarm armed factions.

The prime minister also finds himself heavily constrained by Coordination Framework leaders who insist on meeting with him every week, in parallel with his regular weekly Cabinet meetings, the sources added.

Last Saturday, Humam Hamoudi, head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, said Zaidi was the Coordination Framework’s choice for prime minister.

“The Coordination Framework is accountable before God and the people for formulating visions and policies in accordance with the law and constitution, while Zaidi is responsible for implementing them through his government’s mechanisms,” Hamoudi said.

Observers interpreted the remarks as reflecting the alliance’s dominance over government decision-making and the limited authority exercised by the prime minister.

Political analyst Ihsan al-Shammari, head of the Center for Political Thinking, said the Coordination Framework, which had maintained its cohesion through two successive governments, was now facing serious disagreements stemming from competing interests and conflicting positions on several issues.

“Foremost among these disputes are the distribution of government posts, the handling of corruption cases and the issue of weapons, all of which could expose the Coordination Framework to the risk of a split,” Shammari told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Leadership Rivalries

Shammari said the long-running struggle for leadership within the Coordination Framework had become increasingly evident in the rivalry between Maliki and former Prime Minister Sudani.

The dispute, he explained, reflected a broader contest for leadership and attempts to impose influence and control over decision-making within the alliance.

Dispute Over Armed Factions

Shammari identified the weapons issue as one of the alliance’s most significant sources of division, extending beyond Maliki and Sudani to other Coordination Framework factions.

Most of its members favor keeping weapons in the hands of armed groups, although this is not a position shared by all parties, he said.

The issue has created a crisis between the prime minister’s push for rapid progress toward bringing all weapons under state control and factions unwilling to relinquish their arms amid mounting US pressure.

Shammari warned that the Coordination Framework’s failure to meet US demands to dismantle armed structures operating outside state authority could deepen its divisions.

He said the risk was particularly acute if President Donald Trump’s administration resorted to a maximum-pressure campaign that could include sanctions and other measures. Such developments, he argued, could accelerate the alliance’s fragmentation.

Iran’s Role in Preserving Unity

Despite the mounting tensions, Shammari noted that the Coordination Framework and Iraq’s Shiite political forces had weathered major political and popular upheavals since 2019.

What distinguished the period following the formation of Sudani’s government, he said, was the presence of a political force capable of managing the alliance’s internal balance, containing disputes and preserving a minimum level of cohesion among its members.

Shammari noted that Iran had been the principal external factor preventing the Coordination Framework from breaking apart.

He explained that Tehran continues to regard the alliance’s survival, despite its internal divisions, disputes and mutual accusations, as a means of strengthening its influence over Iraqi decision-making and maintaining a political umbrella that protects its influence in the country.

“As long as this factor remains in place, Iran will apparently continue working to prevent the Coordination Framework from splintering and preserve its cohesion, even if only formally,” Shammari said.

He cautioned, however, that Iranian influence did not guarantee the alliance’s survival.