عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

US Keen to Form Alliance with Iraq, Syria Away from Iran’s Influence

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi meets with US Envoy Tom Barrack in Baghdad on June 16, 2026. (Iraqi government press office)
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi meets with US Envoy Tom Barrack in Baghdad on June 16, 2026. (Iraqi government press office)
TT
TT

US Keen to Form Alliance with Iraq, Syria Away from Iran’s Influence

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi meets with US Envoy Tom Barrack in Baghdad on June 16, 2026. (Iraqi government press office)
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi meets with US Envoy Tom Barrack in Baghdad on June 16, 2026. (Iraqi government press office)

Three Syrian, Western, and Iraqi sources said Monday that Iraq and Syria are preparing to sign an economic agreement under US sponsorship during Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s visit to Washington in mid-July, in a move that could pave the way for a new alliance in the region that “moves away from the region’s anti-US camp.”

A Syrian source told Asharq Al-Awsat that Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani is expected to travel to Washington in mid-July, where he is scheduled to meet with al-Zaidi or Iraqi officials accompanying him on the sidelines of the PMs visit.

A Western source said the talks would follow an anticipated meeting between al-Zaidi and US President Donald Trump at the White House.

According to the Syrian source, US Special Envoy Tom Barrack will sponsor the agreement between Baghdad and Damascus, with the possibility of other Arab countries joining at a later stage if ongoing technical and political understandings are finalized.

An Iraqi source neither confirmed nor denied whether al-Zaidi would meet Syrian officials in Washington. However, a political adviser in the previous Iraqi government said that “al-Zaidi’s team is making special preparations to sign a regional economic agreement that includes Syria.”

Another Iraqi source said al-Zaidi’s visit to Washington, scheduled to begin on July 15 and last about four days, will include meetings with the US president, Republican and Democratic congressional leaders, and representatives of American oil companies. He is then expected to travel to Texas for additional meetings with major energy firms.

A government official told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the prime minister will travel to Washington at the invitation of the US president, and the meeting with Trump tops the agenda,” while declining to disclose whether meetings with officials from other countries were also planned.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa meets with Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein in Damascus. (Syrian Presidency)

‘Core alliance’

For weeks, the Iraqi government has focused on advancing two parallel tracks: bringing armed factions’ weapons under state control and integrating them into the security institutions, while pursuing individuals suspected of corruption, including figures believed to have ties to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Baghdad has also shown an increasing tilt toward Washington as the US administration continues to press Iraq to reduce its dependence on Iranian influence.

Observers describe al-Zaidi’s government as “a promising opportunity” to reshape the regional balance of power as part of a new regional framework that could redefine relations between Baghdad, Washington, and Tehran.

These developments come as Iraq seeks to diversify its oil export routes and reduce reliance on traditional maritime shipping lanes, while Syria is betting on its geographic location to restore its role as a regional corridor for energy and trade.

The Western source said Barrack is working to translate his approach toward Iraq and Syria into concrete projects by establishing the “core of a new alliance of interests” linking Iraq, Syria, and regional partners through a shorter route to the Mediterranean, thereby reducing dependence on the Strait of Hormuz.

If concluded in its proposed form, the agreement would reflect a shift in the US approach toward the region, emphasizing cross-border infrastructure projects linking Iraq to the Mediterranean coast while giving Syria a greater role in reshaping regional energy flows.

A drone view of vessels anchored in the Strait of Hormuz as seen from Musandam, Oman, June 8, 2026. (Reuters)

Leaving Iran’s influence

An Iraqi researcher believes al-Zaidi’s visit could mark a transitional moment in Iraq’s regional realignment, similar to the shift that followed Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s visit to the White House in November 2025, which was widely viewed as a turning point in Syria’s move from the Iranian camp to the Western camp led by the United States.

Akeel Abbas, an expert on US affairs, told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the significance of al-Zaidi’s visit to Washington closely resembles al-Sharaa’s.”

Abbas, who is based in Washington, said the essence of al-Sharaa’s visit was Syria’s repositioning from a country opposed to the United States to a partner in the US-led international coalition against terrorism.

Washington wants to see Iraq follow a similar path through clear, measurable, and verifiable steps, including projects linking regional energy pipelines, he added.

“Washington wants this Baghdad-Damascus alliance to reduce the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz and limit its impact in the event of a second round of war with Iran,” he explained.

Most Viewed

 
 
Arab World

Houthi Casualties Strain Sanaa Hospitals’ Capacity

Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)
Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)
TT
TT

Houthi Casualties Strain Sanaa Hospitals’ Capacity

Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)
Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)

The fallout from the Houthis’ military escalation in Yemen is straining hospitals and endangering civilians in areas under the group’s control, while fueling rare criticism from within its own ranks.

Activists and former fighters accuse the group of exploiting poverty to recruit young men, trading on fighters’ blood and diverting resources to the war effort at the expense of civilian needs.

Medical sources in the Houthi-held capital Sanaa told Asharq Al-Awsat that the group’s Health Ministry had recently ordered several government hospitals to limit admissions of critically ill patients.

Intensive care units, emergency departments and other wards have instead been reserved for wounded Houthi fighters arriving from the front lines.

The measures cover Al-Thawra, Al-Jumhouri, Police, Military, Al-Quds, 48 and Kuwait hospitals — among the capital’s leading medical facilities. Their capacity to treat civilians has consequently shrunk, particularly for patients needing urgent care or intensive treatment.

The restrictions coincided with the arrival in Sanaa of large numbers of dead and wounded Houthi fighters following battles on several fronts across Yemen.

Health workers said hospitals were taking in growing numbers of casualties and setting aside beds, equipment and wards for those arriving from combat zones, including fighters requiring surgery or intensive care.

Hospitals under strain

The Houthis have tightened security around several medical facilities, barred media access and withheld information about the identities and conditions of casualties arriving from the front lines.

Health workers said the influx of wounded fighters had pushed hospitals closer to capacity, leaving less room for civilian patients.

Ahmed, whose relative needed treatment in Sanaa, said his family struggled to obtain the necessary care at Al-Jumhouri Hospital and was forced to look elsewhere because the facility lacked the resources to treat the patient.

He accused the Houthis of channeling available medical resources into the war effort, warning that civilians — particularly children, older people, chronically ill patients and emergency cases — faced growing risks.

The measures come as the health system in Houthi-held areas reels from years of war, dwindling funding and severe shortages of medicine, supplies and medical staff. Health facilities have also been damaged, forcing some to close.

The strain extends beyond Sanaa. The capital’s main hospitals routinely receive referrals from other provinces and regions, meaning their reduced capacity affects a far wider population under Houthi control.

Dissent from within

As the escalation weighs on the health sector, criticism is also mounting among figures and activists aligned with the Houthis.

Their complaints center on the war’s human cost, the treatment of fighters and the families of those killed or wounded, and recruitment practices that prey on economic hardship.

In the latest rebuke, activist and former Houthi fighter Abdullah Sharaf al-Mahdi attacked the group’s leaders and supervisors, accusing them of trading on fighters’ blood and sidelining bereaved and wounded families for personal gain.

Fighters and their families bear the cost of the war, al-Mahdi said, while officials and supervisors receive privileges including property and financial allocations. The conflict, he added, had become a vehicle for advancing the interests of factions within the group.

Al-Mahdi said he regretted the years he had spent fighting for the Houthis and would not support them again. His comments reflect a shift among some critics from opposing the group’s policies to questioning its motives for prolonging the war.

Criticism has also emerged from within Houthi-controlled institutions.

Abdu Bishr, a member of the Houthi-controlled parliament in Sanaa, accused the group of ignoring Yemenis’ suffering and pursuing what he called “futile” wars. He urged it to keep economic and humanitarian issues out of the conflict.

Bishr called for salaries to be paid, detainees released and airports reopened. He warned that what he described as “taking pleasure in bloodshed” would deepen the humanitarian catastrophe and urged the group to ease people’s suffering or “leave the scene.”

Houthi activist and writer Zaid al-Kibsi also criticized the group’s recruitment of young people and adolescents, saying it exploited poverty and worsening economic conditions to push more of them toward the front lines.

He accused the Houthis of using religious and sectarian rhetoric, along with slogans of “jihad and martyrdom,” to recruit young people as many families struggle to meet their basic needs.

Some recruits depend on the group’s modest payments to support their families while risking death or injury in combat, al-Kibsi said.

Many are young men who have had no chance to build their lives or start families, leaving their relatives to bear the consequences when they are killed or wounded.

Arab World

Israeli Support for Ethiopia’s Maritime Access Bid Fuels Tensions With Egypt

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)
Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)
TT
TT

Israeli Support for Ethiopia’s Maritime Access Bid Fuels Tensions With Egypt

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)
Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)

Israeli support for landlocked Ethiopia’s bid for access to the Red Sea is fueling tensions with Egypt, which has repeatedly opposed Addis Ababa’s moves amid a separate dispute over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and its impact on Cairo’s Nile water share.

The Israeli backing raises friction with Egypt and gives Tel Aviv another way to pressure Cairo over its positions, despite the legitimacy of Egypt’s stance under international law, experts told Asharq Al-Awsat. They said the international community would ultimately determine the outcome.

Ethiopia has been landlocked since 1993, when Eritrea gained independence after a three-decade war. It relies on neighboring countries’ ports, particularly Djibouti’s.

The Ethiopian News Agency said Israel had announced diplomatic support for Ethiopia’s efforts to secure access to the sea. It quoted Israeli Ambassador to Ethiopia Avraham Neguise as saying that his country firmly backed the East African nation’s push for a Red Sea outlet.

Empowering and strengthening Ethiopia and stabilizing the Red Sea are in everyone’s interest, not Ethiopia’s alone, and Israel stands with Ethiopia in this effort, Neguise told the agency on Thursday evening.

It was not Neguise’s first intervention on an issue dividing Egypt and Ethiopia. In August, he told reporters that Israel would “continue to strengthen its support for Ethiopia, with the aim of helping it become a leading economic power on the African continent.”

Threat to Egyptian interests

African affairs expert Asmaa al-Husseini said the Israeli statements “increase tensions with Egypt” and point to “a covert Israeli role in Ethiopia’s Red Sea moves aimed at harming Egyptian interests.”

The issue may not trigger a direct crisis between Cairo and Tel Aviv, she told Asharq Al-Awsat, but Egypt would closely monitor it. Cairo’s response would depend on the level of escalation and Ethiopia’s actions on the ground.

“Egypt has the right to defend its national security,” Husseini said. “If any military arrangements targeting it are pursued in the Red Sea, Egypt will take measures to prevent them. Ethiopia and Israel understand this, but they are trying by every means to impose a fait accompli. Egypt will never accept that.”

Neguise’s latest remarks coincided with renewed Egyptian opposition to Ethiopian access to the Red Sea.

“There are sovereign states with ports on the Red Sea, and no one has the right to grant any country military maritime access. Otherwise, there would be chaos, particularly as many African countries are landlocked,” Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty told a news conference on Thursday evening.

“There is no problem with commercial access,” he added.

Ramadan Qarny, an expert on African affairs, said Egypt’s opposition rested on several established principles.

“The first is legal: respect for international law, which affirms the exclusive right of littoral states to maintain a presence on the Red Sea coast,” Qarny told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The second is respect for African Union principles, which uphold the sanctity of borders inherited from the colonial era. Raising this issue could therefore open the door to widespread unrest across African countries.”

The third principle, Qarny said, was that “Egypt’s actions and position align with the principles of the African and Arab states bordering the Red Sea.”

Qarny said Israel was seeking Ethiopian backing on a similar issue: Israel’s presence in, or recognition of, the breakaway Somaliland region, which took place in December 2025.

“There is a political quid pro quo,” he said. “Israel supports Ethiopia in obtaining access to the Red Sea coast in exchange for Ethiopian support for Israel’s recognition of the breakaway Somaliland region.”

Cairo’s position

Cairo has not officially responded to Israel’s continued moves on Ethiopia.

Former Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohamed El-Orabi, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the chairman of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs, has downplayed their impact.

In earlier remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, he said they would “neither undermine nor change” Egypt’s positions.

Qarny said Israeli support was unlikely to significantly alter the dynamics of the Egyptian-Ethiopian disputes.

“Tensions already exist and are likely to increase,” he said, adding that Ethiopian media had in recent months waged what he described as “a coordinated and organized campaign,” led by the Ethiopian News Agency, against Egypt’s positions.

The campaign, he said, had targeted Cairo’s stance on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, the Nile Basin countries’ Cooperative Framework Agreement and Ethiopia’s bid for maritime access.

Arab World

Iraqi Factions Demand Law Bringing All Weapons Under State Control

Officials from the Kurdistan Region’s Peshmerga Ministry attend a security coordination meeting in Baghdad (government media)
Officials from the Kurdistan Region’s Peshmerga Ministry attend a security coordination meeting in Baghdad (government media)
TT
TT

Iraqi Factions Demand Law Bringing All Weapons Under State Control

Officials from the Kurdistan Region’s Peshmerga Ministry attend a security coordination meeting in Baghdad (government media)
Officials from the Kurdistan Region’s Peshmerga Ministry attend a security coordination meeting in Baghdad (government media)

Iraqi factions have renewed their demand that the Kurdistan Region’s Peshmerga forces be included in a plan to bring weapons under state control through a new law.

Qais al-Khazali, a senior figure in Asaib Ahl al-Haq, which announced last month that it had handed over its weapons, said the Kurdish forces were “constitutional and recognized by law.”

Iran-aligned Iraqi groups have repeatedly set conditions for accepting the plan. Observers believe the groups are trying to buy time as they await the outcome of the Iran-US conflict in the region.

Al-Khazali, a leader in the Coordination Framework alliance, said in televised remarks on Thursday night that “the Peshmerga is a constitutional institution and is not subject to the criteria for bringing weapons under state control.”

“These forces are recognized under the law,” he added.

Al-Khazali said bringing weapons under state control was “a legitimate aspiration for the stability of state institutions.” He added that “Shiite politicians are more concerned with this project than others.”

He said weapons had been transferred to state institutions “genuinely, rather than merely symbolically,” adding that Asaib Ahl al-Haq’s weapons had been placed under the authority of the Popular Mobilization Forces.

Al-Khazali’s position on the Peshmerga reflects sharp divisions among Shiite forces, including armed factions that have demanded the disarmament of Kurdish formations.

Al-Zaidi had made bringing weapons under state control a central part of his government program. Asaib Ahl al-Haq and other factions joined the settlement in the hope of easing international pressure and clearing the way for their participation in political and executive roles.

Sabah al-Numan, spokesperson for the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, said on Thursday that talks with armed factions were underway at the highest levels to resolve the weapons issue.

He said, however, that implementation would begin after the international coalition’s mission ends on Sept. 30.

A law applying to everyone

Al-Khazali’s remarks followed local reports citing sources familiar with the talks with the factions.

The sources said the factions had demanded a new law requiring everyone, including the Peshmerga, to disarm.

Several faction officials told figures in the Coordination Framework that restrictions on weapons should apply to all parties, the sources said.

They said the proposal aimed to control, regulate, and manage weapons nationwide under a unified legal framework. This would prevent measures from being applied selectively to one party but not another.

The sources said a committee would be formed in the next phase to draft a law governing the control, regulation, and management of weapons.

The draft would undergo legal review before being referred to parliament for a vote, with political forces participating in the process.

Kifah Mahmoud, media adviser to the president of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the Iraqi constitution recognizes the legitimacy of the Peshmerga’s weapons.”

He described al-Khazali’s remarks as “a belated acknowledgment.”

Mahmoud said the federal government was fully informed about the Peshmerga’s weapons, equipment and military divisions. He added that the Peshmerga was an essential part of Iraq’s official military establishment.

He said bringing the Peshmerga into the debate over weapons control in Baghdad reflected deep divisions within the governing alliance and an attempt to divert attention from the heart of the crisis.

A political source familiar with the matter told Asharq Al-Awsat that the government’s plan was being obstructed by disagreements within the governing alliance itself.

The source said some figures opposed disarmament because they believed these groups should not be stripped of their power and influence.