US Blocks Maliki Bid, Sends Sharp Warning to Iran

Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki (AP)
Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki (AP)
TT

US Blocks Maliki Bid, Sends Sharp Warning to Iran

Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki (AP)
Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki (AP)

Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s bid to return to power has stalled abruptly after the US delivered blunt warnings against the formation of a government seen as entrenching Iranian influence, raising the prospect that his nomination could collapse altogether.

According to sources, Washington objected to the current trajectory of government formation, arguing it reflects an Iranian rejection of a potential deal aimed at averting an imminent confrontation, and signaling that a Maliki-led government would face isolation.

Asharq Al-Awsat obtained the text of a US letter presented at a meeting of the Shiite Coordination Framework late on Monday, in which Washington rejected the mechanisms used to nominate the prime minister-designate and other senior posts, just two days after Maliki was put forward as the candidate of the largest parliamentary bloc.

The letter came two days after Maliki was named as the candidate of the largest parliamentary bloc for the premiership.

A source said a senior Coordination Framework leader received a surprise call from US officials early on Monday, during which Washington objected to the continued Iranian dominance over the government formation process.

A senior figure in Maliki’s State of Law coalition acknowledged that the US letter had shaken his candidacy and made a third term extremely difficult.

Questions had already been raised over whether the Coordination Framework, the country’s largest Shiite alliance, had received US signals opposing Maliki before his nomination was announced on Saturday, or whether Washington’s position hardened only after reports emerged of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s blessing for Maliki’s bid.

Details

In the early hours of January 26, a Shiite leader received a US call informing him that Washington views the Coordination Framework’s push to form an Iran-backed government as disregarding local and regional concerns and deepening suspicions of sustained Iranian influence in Iraq, exposing the country to risks and sanctions.

The letter said that Washington “will consider it a government under malign control, and reserves the right not to engage with it.”

Caretaker Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani also received a call from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, warning that a government dominated by Iran would be unable to put Iraq’s interests first or shield the country from regional conflicts.

Sudani, who had mobilized his political and governmental influence in pursuit of a second term, ultimately stepped aside in favor of Maliki and publicly described him as “the strongest man.” However, the terms of that arrangement remain unclear.

US diplomatic activity intensified on Monday evening when US envoy Tom Barrack told Kurdistan Democratic Party leader Masoud Barzani that “a government installed by Iran will not succeed, whether for the aspirations of Iraqis or Syrians, or for an effective partnership with the United States.”

Barrack’s reference to Iraqis and Syrians echoed Maliki’s past positions on political change in Damascus, where he was a strong ally of President Bashar al-Assad.

Following Barzani’s call with Barrack, Iraqi political forces announced the postponement of a Tuesday parliamentary session to elect a president. The delay is widely believed to reflect opposition to Maliki, disrupting a deal that would have seen a Barzani-backed candidate elected president.

Kurdish sources said the postponement came at Kurdish request after Barrack warned Barzani that pushing through a presidential election as part of a deal leading to Maliki’s appointment would antagonize Washington.

They added that Barzani had “taken a step back” after reportedly agreeing with Maliki on government formation two months ago.

A stormy meeting

On the evening of January 26, the Coordination Framework convened at the headquarters of the Islamic Virtue Party, where a Shiite leader conveyed the contents of the US letter regarding the future government.

The meeting exposed a rift between factions calling for caution and a review of Maliki’s nomination, and others insisting on pressing ahead and ignoring external objections. Tensions escalated to the point of shouting, and the dispute reportedly turned physical.

One participant was quoted as saying loudly, “We will not listen to the objections of any external party. This phase requires a strong Maliki.”

“What we remember about Maliki”

According to the letter read out at the meeting, the US administration supports Iraqi leaders’ commitment to steering the country away from conflict.

While the selection of the prime minister-designate and other senior posts is a sovereign Iraqi decision, Washington said it would make its own sovereign choices regarding engagement with the next government in line with US interests.

The letter said the United States focuses on interests rather than individuals, but that a viable partnership requires an Iraqi government that weakens Iran-backed terrorism, dismantles militias, places dangerous weapons under state control, and ensures that US-designated terrorist groups are excluded, particularly those that defy Iraqi disarmament decisions.

Such a government, the letter said, would allow Washington to work constructively for the benefit of both Iraqis and Americans.

It also urged Iraq to form an inclusive government representing all components of society, to maintain its current openness to regional partners, and to avoid a return to periods marked by sectarian polarization, regional tension, and isolation.

The letter warned that Maliki’s nomination risks reviving memories of his previous governments, which are viewed negatively in Washington and the region, at a time when Iraq is seeking a new era of stability, prosperity, and security through a mutually beneficial partnership with the United States.

The contents of the letter could not be independently verified with US sources. However, a Coordination Framework leader described it as “a new and decisive position by the US administration.”

A State of Law figure said Maliki’s nomination “may no longer work,” adding: “Yesterday, the ceiling fell on the third term.”

Earlier, State of Law spokesman Aqeel al-Fatlawi had said the United States was satisfied with Maliki’s nomination because he was “capable of controlling the factions,” according to local television.

Figures close to Maliki denied that his chances of being appointed had collapsed.

How did Maliki pass?

Sources said a Coordination Framework meeting on Saturday, which ended with Maliki’s nomination, included letters from European and Arab states expressing reservations about resorting to contentious options unlikely to promote regional stability.

When calls were made during the meeting to reconsider regional objections, one senior figure responded: “Since when do you like to listen to regional and international opinion?”

Before the nomination meeting, two second-tier Framework leaders traveled to Tehran, joined by a senior figure based there, and met Iranian officials to confirm whether Khamenei truly backed Maliki. They were told: “We bless your agreement. Go ahead and accelerate it. There is no time.”

Diplomatic sources believe Washington did not initially oppose Maliki’s name, but reacted after Iran’s direct involvement in the government formation process became public.

A Western diplomat told Asharq Al-Awsat that publicizing Khamenei’s blessing for Maliki angered US officials, prompting intensified pressure in recent hours to halt the process.

The diplomat said Maliki’s nomination ran counter to President Donald Trump’s desire to see Iran sign an agreement on US terms. While Washington had no issue with specific candidates, it viewed the formation of an Iran-aligned Iraqi government at a sensitive regional moment as highly problematic.

The diplomat said the US moves aim to prevent the emergence of an Iraqi government politically loyal to Tehran, force Shiite factions toward a less provocative compromise, and send Iran a clear message: do not expand your influence while negotiations are underway.



Britain’s King Charles Honors Fallen US Troops on Last Day of Visit

 Britain's King Charles and Queen Camilla take part in a wreath-laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknown soldier in Arlington National Cemetery, in Arlington, Virginia, US, April 30, 2026. (Saul Loeb/Pool via Reuters)
Britain's King Charles and Queen Camilla take part in a wreath-laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknown soldier in Arlington National Cemetery, in Arlington, Virginia, US, April 30, 2026. (Saul Loeb/Pool via Reuters)
TT

Britain’s King Charles Honors Fallen US Troops on Last Day of Visit

 Britain's King Charles and Queen Camilla take part in a wreath-laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknown soldier in Arlington National Cemetery, in Arlington, Virginia, US, April 30, 2026. (Saul Loeb/Pool via Reuters)
Britain's King Charles and Queen Camilla take part in a wreath-laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknown soldier in Arlington National Cemetery, in Arlington, Virginia, US, April 30, 2026. (Saul Loeb/Pool via Reuters)

King Charles III paid respects to fallen US troops at a military cemetery on Thursday, the final day of a state visit aimed at healing ties between Britain and the United States strained by the war in Iran.

By all accounts, the four-day visit has been a success, with President Donald Trump serving as solicitous host-in-chief who kicked off the monarch's stay with a pomp-filled welcome and lavish white-tie banquet at the White House.

"He's a great king -- the greatest king, in my book," Trump told reporters as Charles and Queen Camilla arrived at the White House for a brief farewell ceremony under bright spring sunshine on Thursday morning.

As the royal couple drove off following handshakes and a bit of chat, Trump added: "Great people. We need more people like that in our country."

Charles and Camilla then visited Arlington National Cemetery just outside Washington, where they laid a wreath and flowers at the hilltop Tomb of the Unknown Soldier honoring America's unidentified war dead.

The pair stood solemnly as a bugler played "Taps," before visiting the adjacent display room of military exhibits and artifacts.

Next on the agenda was a "block party" to mark 250 years since American independence from Britain and meetings with Native Americans at a national park, before departing for the British island territory of Bermuda in the Atlantic.

- Light moments -

The centerpiece of the whirlwind trip was Charles's speech Tuesday to the US Congress, the first by a British monarch since Queen Elizabeth II in 1991.

The address was warmly received, even as Charles ranged over subjects from climate change and the need for restraints on presidential power to the importance of NATO and defense of Ukraine -- sensitive issues for Trump's ruling Republicans.

The 77-year-old monarch skirted around tensions between Trump and Prime Minister Keir Starmer over Britain's refusal to join the war against Iran, insisting the partnership between the two countries was "born out of dispute, but no less strong for it."

The royals visited New York on Wednesday, where they stopped at the 9/11 memorial and met leftist Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

Charles, who is passionate about gardening and the environment, later visited an urban sustainable farming project in Harlem, while Camilla celebrated the 100th birthday of Winnie the Pooh at the New York Public Library.

Security has been tight for the royal visit, which came just days after an alleged assassination attempt against Trump at a Washington media gala.

The trip has seen light moments between Charles and Trump, including the US president joking that his Scottish-born mother had a crush on the future king when he was younger.


Pivotal US-Iran War Deadline Approaches with No End in Sight for Conflict

 The US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, April 28, 2026. (Reuters)
The US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, April 28, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

Pivotal US-Iran War Deadline Approaches with No End in Sight for Conflict

 The US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, April 28, 2026. (Reuters)
The US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, April 28, 2026. (Reuters)

US President Donald Trump faces a deadline on Friday to end the Iran war or make the case to Congress for extending it, but the date is most likely to pass without altering the course of a conflict that has lapsed into a standoff over shipping routes.

Ending the war appears highly unlikely.

Instead, analysts and congressional aides said they expect Trump to either notify Congress that he plans a 30-day extension or disregard the deadline, with his administration arguing that a current ceasefire with Tehran marked an end to the conflict.

Like most policies in a bitterly divided Congress, war powers have become deeply partisan, with opposition Democrats calling for Congress to reassert its constitutional right to declare war and Republicans accusing Democrats of trying to use War Powers law to weaken Trump.

Democrats have tried repeatedly since the war began on February 28 to pass resolutions seeking to force Trump to withdraw US forces or obtain congressional authorization. But Trump's Republicans, who hold slim majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives, have voted them down almost unanimously.

Under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, the ‌US president can wage ‌military action for only 60 days before ending it, coming to Congress for authorization or seeking ‌a 30-day ⁠extension due to "unavoidable ⁠military necessity regarding the safety of United States Armed Forces."

The Iran conflict began on February 28, when Israel and the United States began airstrikes on Iran. Trump formally notified Congress of the conflict 48 hours later, as the law requires, starting the 60-day deadline clock that ends May 1.

FRAIL CEASEFIRE

Trump is scheduled to receive a briefing on Thursday on plans for fresh military strikes on Iran to compel it to negotiate an end to the conflict, a US official told Reuters.

If fighting resumes, Trump can tell lawmakers that he has started another 60-day clock, something that presidents from both parties have done repeatedly since Congress passed the War Powers law, over then-President Richard Nixon's veto, in response to the Vietnam War.

That conflict also was not ⁠authorized by Congress.

Iran said on Thursday that if Washington renewed attacks it would respond with "long and ‌painful strikes" on US positions, complicating Washington's hopes for an international coalition to open the ‌Strait of Hormuz.

Opinion polls show that the Iran war is unpopular among Americans, six months before November elections that will determine who controls Congress next year.

Trump's ‌approval rating sank to the lowest level of his current term this month, as Americans increasingly soured on the cost of living ‌and blamed the war for higher prices.

But Trump remains strongly in control of his party and few Republicans have objected to his policies. Additionally, Republicans strongly back Israel, which is also striking Iran, and welcome weakening of Iran, a bitter enemy of the United States.

"It's partisanship, plain and simple," said Christopher Preble, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center think tank in Washington. "Republicans refuse to defy the president, simple as that."

'ACTIVE CONVERSATIONS'

The White House has not said how it ‌plans to proceed, or if it will ask Congress to approve an Authorization for the Use of Military Force against Iran.

"The administration is in active conversations with the Hill on this topic. Members ⁠of Congress who try to ⁠score political points by usurping the Commander-in-Chief’s authority would only undermine the United States Military abroad, which no elected official should want to do," a White House official said on condition of anonymity.

The US Constitution says only Congress, not the president, can declare war, but that restriction does not apply for short-term operations or to counter an immediate threat.

A few Republicans who have voted against war powers resolutions to date said they may reconsider after May 1. Republican Senator John Curtis of Utah published an essay saying he supported Trump's actions but would not support ongoing military action beyond the deadline without congressional approval.

But others said they wanted to wait to act.

Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate's Republican majority leader, said it would be "ideal" if Washington and Tehran could reach a peace agreement, although he told reporters he has not ruled out a potential vote on authorizing the war.

"We're listening, obviously trying to stay dialed in to what's there and getting regular updates from the administration about forward progress," Thune told reporters.

Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer of New York has co-sponsored resolutions seeking to end the war.

"Republicans know Trump’s handling of this war has been a disaster. They see how much the American people are hurting right now," he said in a Senate speech, referring to sharp increases in gasoline and other prices.

"How many War Powers Resolutions do Democrats need to put forward before Senate Republicans do what’s right?" Schumer asked.


Israel Defense Minister Says Country May Have to ‘Act Again’ Against Iran

A firefighter stands on the rubble of residential buildings near Niloufar square in Tehran during the ongoing joint US-Israeli military campaign on Iran on March 2, 2026. (AFP via Getty Images)
A firefighter stands on the rubble of residential buildings near Niloufar square in Tehran during the ongoing joint US-Israeli military campaign on Iran on March 2, 2026. (AFP via Getty Images)
TT

Israel Defense Minister Says Country May Have to ‘Act Again’ Against Iran

A firefighter stands on the rubble of residential buildings near Niloufar square in Tehran during the ongoing joint US-Israeli military campaign on Iran on March 2, 2026. (AFP via Getty Images)
A firefighter stands on the rubble of residential buildings near Niloufar square in Tehran during the ongoing joint US-Israeli military campaign on Iran on March 2, 2026. (AFP via Getty Images)

Israel's defense minister on Thursday said his country may soon have to "act again" against Iran, to ensure the Islamic republic "does not once again become a threat to Israel".

"US President Donald Trump, in coordination with (Israeli) Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is leading the efforts to achieve the campaign's objectives, to ensure that Iran does not once again become a threat to Israel, the United States and the free world in the future," Israel Katz said during a military ceremony, according to a statement from his office.

"We support this effort and are providing the necessary support, but it is possible that we may soon have to act again to ensure these objectives are met," he added.