Iraq’s Shiite Coordination Framework has hit a deadlock with armed factions refusing to surrender their weapons as the Sept. 30 deadline for the final US withdrawal approaches, casting a shadow over government plans to celebrate the date as “Sovereignty Day.”
A three-member committee formed by the Framework has so far failed to secure a breakthrough with the factions, which reject demands to hand over their arsenals by the withdrawal date.
Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s government had initially hoped Sept. 30 would mark both the departure of US forces and the transfer of factional weapons to government control. But negotiations between the Framework and the armed groups now appear to have reached an impasse.
According to the latest position expressed by the armed factions, articulated by Harakat al-Nujaba, as well as statements by former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and Badr Organization leader Hadi al-Amiri, there is no final or fixed deadline for handing over, restricting, disarming or freezing weapons held outside state control.
Several armed groups, foremost among them Kataib Hezbollah and Harakat al-Nujaba, have previously rejected demands to surrender their arsenals, saying they would not abide by any timetable because their weapons are ideological and not confined within national borders.
Ali al-Asadi, head of Harakat al-Nujaba’s Political Council, said the movement remained committed to its right to safeguard what he called the “sanctity” of the resistance’s weapons in the face of regional risks and threats.
In a post on X on Friday, Asadi said he had concluded a visit to leading figures in the Coordination Framework’s political process, during which he reaffirmed the movement’s position on the importance of “preserving the Popular Mobilization Forces as a national body that cannot be compromised.”
He also stressed the need to preserve the “resistance” and the “sanctity of its weapons” in light of what he described as the “real and serious risks and threats” facing Iraq and the wider region.
Asadi also reiterated Nujaba’s policy of not participating in the political process, saying: “This approach is what keeps us alongside our people, experiencing what they experience, carrying their concerns and working to fulfill their demands.”
“This responsibility will remain on our shoulders until comprehensive change is achieved, ensuring sovereignty, security and prosperity, freeing our economy from American domination and stabilizing the domestic situation,” he said.
The Iraqi government, for its part, says through Sabah al-Numan, spokesperson for the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, that “no force in the world and no regional circumstances can break a state whose people, in all their components and communities, rally around its institutions.”
In a briefing, Numan warned of what he called “a flood of alarmism led by platforms financed with suspicious funds to peddle fear and exploit Iraqis’ emotions as the Sept. 30 deadline approaches.”
“The military and security establishment, which stood firm through the darkest and most difficult circumstances and sacrificed its most precious blood to protect this land, fully understands the scale of the challenges and is working around the clock in the field, away from the clamor of political posturing,” Numan said.
“The next phase requires wisdom, steadfastness and solidarity,” he added.
Asked about efforts to bring weapons under state control and the armed factions’ demands regarding the announced timetable for surrendering them, military and strategic expert Mukhlad Hazem told Asharq Al-Awsat that political blocs often made ill-considered statements that did not reflect what they were actually thinking behind closed doors.
“Everyone knows that their options are limited and that they could lose these gains, spoils, prestige and power at any moment,” Hazem said.
“Everyone agrees that the issue of bringing weapons under state control must be resolved because it is no longer a matter of domestic will alone, but also of external will. It is a trade-off between remaining in power and heading into the unknown,” he added.
Hazem said some politicians addressed their supporters merely to provide political cover while trying to appease the factions.
“The reality has been imposed not only on Iraq, but also on Syria, Lebanon and Yemen: No weapons can remain outside the authority of the state, and armed groups cannot be allowed to control decisions of war and peace,” he said.
“Everyone now has few options left in this regard. A decision on bringing weapons under state control has been made conclusively and finally.”
Maliki and Amiri
The three-member committee formed by the Coordination Framework — comprising former prime ministers Mohammed Shia al-Sudani and Nouri al-Maliki, as well as Badr Organization leader Hadi al-Amiri — is continuing negotiations with armed factions that refuse to surrender their weapons.
However, recent statements by al-Maliki and al-Amiri have raised questions among political groups and the Iraqi public about the timetable agreed upon for bringing all weapons under state control.
Al-Maliki said there would be “no disarmament of the factions,” but rather a process to regulate their weapons. He gave no timeframe for doing so, which some sources said meant the process would be postponed until after the US withdrawal.
Al-Amiri went further, saying in a speech that the armed factions would remain in place. He said they had protected the political system by confronting what he called the “October sedition,” a reference to the mass uprising that erupted in 2019 and was violently suppressed.
Academic and political activist Faris Harram told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the first striking aspect of al-Amiri’s statement is that it is consistent with allegations made in several Western reports during the October protest movement that armed factions in Iraq were responsible for killing demonstrators.”
“Some reports at the time named leaders alleged to have been involved in liquidations, assassinations and the unjustified attacks carried out against the young participants in the October uprising,” Harram said.
“Such consistency should immediately draw the attention of Iraq’s public prosecutor,” he added. “I ask: Where has the public prosecutor’s office been in monitoring such statements since 2003? To this day, the public prosecution service has not fulfilled its role in pursuing cases that require judicial intervention.”
Harram said an investigation should have been opened into the statements about the factions’ role in suppressing the October protest movement, given their connection to reports that both the Iraqi government and the armed factions had denied at the time.
“We are therefore facing a connection that must be kept in mind,” he said.
“Al-Amiri must explain what he meant by the statement, which can be understood as saying that the factions were responsible” for suppressing the protests, Harram added.
He said this was also connected to remarks by then-Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi, who said the killings of demonstrators had been carried out by a “third party.”
“Unfortunately, we have grown accustomed in Iraq to everything passing without investigation as part of a broader pattern of impunity,” Harram said.
