Despite US President Donald Trump’s praise for Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi during their White House meeting on Tuesday, remarks about the 2020 killing of Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani and former Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) deputy chief Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis triggered a broad political debate in Iraq.
Greeting al-Zaidi at the White House, Trump described him as “a warrior” and praised the “tremendous chemistry” between them, predicting that the Iraqi premier would remain in office “for a long period of time.”
Turning to the January 2020 US drone strike near Baghdad International Airport, Trump again defended the operation, saying: “And I killed him in my first administration. Had I not, it might be a different story today... I actually think the leaders of Iran were afraid of Soleimani.”
Without mentioning al-Muhandis by name, Trump added: “By the way, a very bad person went with him. They happened to meet at the airport, and a very bad person from Iraq, a leader there, was killed in the same incident.”
He then turned to al-Zaidi with a smile and asked: “So, I don’t know if I did you a favor or not. I’ve never asked you that question before. Maybe you know the answer better than I do.”
Al-Zaidi replied: “At that time, I wasn’t working in politics. This visit is about the future and what we can do together. We’re not concerned with the old past. We’ve had enough of the suffering it caused.”
Munqith Dagher, head of the Independent Institute of Administration and Civil Society Studies (IIACSS) research group, said al-Zaidi had handled the exchange better than many had expected.
Writing on X, he argued that, whether instinctive or the product of media training, the prime minister’s body language and responses spared both himself and Iraq unnecessary embarrassment during one of Trump’s characteristic attempts to put visiting leaders on the spot.
Dagher added that al-Zaidi’s answer could have been even stronger had he delivered it with greater seriousness.
Writer and researcher Adnan Tomeh offered a different assessment, arguing that politics is measured first and foremost by the careful choice of words. He said al-Zaidi could have given a more diplomatic answer that preserved room for maneuver but instead appeared to sidestep the question.
The strongest criticism came from Iran-aligned factions.
Al-Muhandis’ family issued a sharply worded statement accusing Trump of revealing his fear of the consequences of his “crimes,” particularly in Iraq, while rebuking al-Zaidi for distancing himself from the country’s past.
The family also claimed the Washington visit was intended to dismantle the PMF as an “ideological force,” to further US efforts aimed at controlling Iraq’s oil wealth, and to advance calls for disarming armed groups under the slogan of restricting weapons to the state.
Akram al-Kaabi, secretary-general of the US-designated Harakat al-Nujaba, also condemned Trump’s remarks, describing Soleimani and al-Muhandis as “symbols of the resistance.”
