Iranian Messages Seek to Defuse Iraq Dispute Over Armed Factions

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi attends a Coordination Framework meeting in Baghdad. (INA)
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi attends a Coordination Framework meeting in Baghdad. (INA)
TT

Iranian Messages Seek to Defuse Iraq Dispute Over Armed Factions

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi attends a Coordination Framework meeting in Baghdad. (INA)
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi attends a Coordination Framework meeting in Baghdad. (INA)

Iran has urged leaders of Iraq’s Coordination Framework to contain a dispute over armed factions’ weapons and avoid a confrontation with groups that may refuse to disarm after a Sept. 30 deadline set by Baghdad.

Iraq’s judiciary, meanwhile, said it would take action against anyone carrying weapons after the deadline.

Local reports cited informed sources as saying Tehran had called for negotiations with the factions rather than confrontation. The proposed talks would cover which weapons could be surrendered, how they would be handed over, and what the factions might receive in return.

Committees could also be formed to manage the process and prevent a direct confrontation with the government or the United States.

The move comes as Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s government pushes ahead with a plan to place all weapons under state control.

Baghdad has tied the end of September to the conclusion of the US-led international coalition’s military mission against ISIS and the start of a new phase in bilateral security relations.

National Security Adviser Qassem al-Araji said this week that the coalition’s mission would end on Sept. 30. Dialogue with the factions over restricting weapons could begin afterward, he said, in an apparent effort to ease tensions over the deadline.

An informed source said a senior Iranian official briefly attended a recent Coordination Framework meeting and delivered messages on how to handle the coming political and security developments.

The messages also addressed the communication channel between the Framework and Tehran.

The reports identified the official as Mohsen Qomi, a representative of Iran’s supreme leader. Qomi attended part of the meeting in Baghdad during a visit that the source said was also intended to formally introduce his role to the Iraqi government and political and religious leaders.

The source said Qomi left shortly afterward and did not take part in all the discussions.

Qomi also met Coordination Framework leaders in Baghdad, including Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council President Humam Hamoudi and al-Zaidi.

The meeting, held at Hamoudi’s office, covered issues of mutual interest, according to the Iraqi News Agency.

The reports said Qomi told Framework leaders that Hamoudi had been designated as a channel of communication between Iran and Iraq. The move would organize political contacts with Tehran as pressure mounts on Iran-aligned armed factions.

The reports attributed the delay in Qomi’s visit to security conditions in Iran. His arrival coincided with growing debate in Iraq over the future of armed groups after the coalition’s mission ends.

Ghalib al-Daami, a professor of media studies at Mustansiriyah University, said the Coordination Framework forces understood the risks of confronting the United States over the weapons issue.

But they also did not want disarmament to be carried out quickly or fully if that would strengthen the government and the prime minister, he said.

Daami said Shi’ite forces could seek a formula that partly meets US demands without handing the government a major political victory. In his view, those forces generally prefer to keep the prime minister’s success within limits they can control.

Washington says ending the coalition’s military mission does not mean abandoning its security relationship with Baghdad. Instead, the relationship will shift to a bilateral defense partnership.

The United States and Iraq agreed in 2024 on a timetable to end the coalition’s military mission in Iraq by September.

The deadline has brought growing pressure on Iran-backed armed groups to surrender their weapons or fully integrate into state institutions.

Iraqi officials say some factions are resisting the move, making the issue one of the most sensitive tests facing al-Zaidi’s government as the coalition mission draws to a close.

International coalition withdrawal

In the Kurdistan Region, German forces serving with the international coalition ended their military and advisory duties this week, another step in the coalition’s gradual withdrawal.

An official ceremony was held on Tuesday at Camp Stephan at Erbil International Airport.

Officials from the Kurdistan Regional Government and the Peshmerga Ministry attended, along with representatives of the German Defense Ministry.

The Peshmerga Ministry said the German advisers and trainers had completed their mission after years of working with Peshmerga forces in the fight against ISIS.

Kurdistan Region President Nechirvan Barzani told a member of the German parliament that the region valued Germany’s support during the war against terrorism.

He highlighted the assistance Germany provided while Peshmerga forces were fighting and the region was receiving large numbers of displaced people.

The German withdrawal comes as US troops and the remaining coalition forces finalize plans to leave Iraq.

The United States and Iraq agreed in 2024 to end the coalition’s military mission and move to a bilateral security partnership. Cooperation against ISIS will continue under the new arrangements.

Separately, Iraqi Supreme Judicial Council President Faeq Zidan met with Joshua Harris, chargé d’affaires at the US Embassy in Baghdad, on Wednesday.

They discussed judicial measures against individuals and groups carrying weapons in violation of the Constitution and the law.

The meeting signaled a growing focus on the judiciary’s role as the end of the coalition’s military mission approaches.

The Supreme Judicial Council said the talks covered measures the judiciary would take after the mission ends on Sept. 30. They also discussed how to enforce the rule of law equally.

The meeting followed Zidan’s visit to Iran, where he met several senior officials.

They included Judiciary Chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Eje’i, President Masoud Pezeshkian, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Supreme National Security Council Secretary-General Mohsen Rezaei, according to statements from Iraq’s judiciary.

After meeting Zidan in Tehran, Rezaei said the countries of the region would determine their own future and that the US would have no place there.

He said Iran wanted “an independent and strong Iraq.”

Rezaei also called for resolving the status of groups opposed to Iran that are based along the two countries’ border, a reference to Iranian Kurdish parties in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region.



Thousands of Pro-Palestinian Demonstrators Rally in London

People cross Westminster Bridge as they take part in a National March in support of Palestine, organised by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, in central London on October 10, 2026. (Photo by JUSTIN TALLIS / AFP)
People cross Westminster Bridge as they take part in a National March in support of Palestine, organised by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, in central London on October 10, 2026. (Photo by JUSTIN TALLIS / AFP)
TT

Thousands of Pro-Palestinian Demonstrators Rally in London

People cross Westminster Bridge as they take part in a National March in support of Palestine, organised by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, in central London on October 10, 2026. (Photo by JUSTIN TALLIS / AFP)
People cross Westminster Bridge as they take part in a National March in support of Palestine, organised by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, in central London on October 10, 2026. (Photo by JUSTIN TALLIS / AFP)

Several thousand pro-Palestinian protesters marched through central London on Saturday, calling for an end to Israeli strikes on Gaza, three years after Hamas's October 7 attack.

Marchers carried placards reading "End the genocide" and "Free Palestine" as they made their way along the route near the British parliament.

"We are here today to mark three years of the ongoing genocide in Gaza," Aimee Shalan, director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, told AFP.

She said UK-led Western sanctions over settler violence did not go far enough, calling for "full sanctions on Israel".

A ceasefire began a year ago and although Israel has reduced its level of attacks it has kept striking Gaza on a near-daily basis.

Strikes have killed some 1,450 Palestinians since the ceasefire, according to Gaza's health ministry.

Police said they had made "several arrests" including a man and a woman with placards of support for the banned organization Palestine Action.

Recent graduate Hibo Hassan, 23, said she was there to show her solidarity.

"Although it is happening in the Middle East, it affects us here now," she said.

"It's extremely dystopian and that is something we should be all scared about," she added.

Another protester, a 32-year-old Kosovar immigrant who gave his name as Kobe, said his own experience of war made him want to "stand up today and not let history repeat" itself.

The "National March for Palestine" organized by the Palestine Coalition, according to police, came three days after the third anniversary of the October 7, 2023 attack.


Putin Told Trump about Iran's Position on Peace Deal

 This combination of pictures shows (L/R) US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on August 10, 2026 and in this pool photograph distributed by the Russian state agency Sputnik, Russia's President Vladimir Putin in the Novosibirsk region on August 11, 2026. (AFP)
This combination of pictures shows (L/R) US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on August 10, 2026 and in this pool photograph distributed by the Russian state agency Sputnik, Russia's President Vladimir Putin in the Novosibirsk region on August 11, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Putin Told Trump about Iran's Position on Peace Deal

 This combination of pictures shows (L/R) US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on August 10, 2026 and in this pool photograph distributed by the Russian state agency Sputnik, Russia's President Vladimir Putin in the Novosibirsk region on August 11, 2026. (AFP)
This combination of pictures shows (L/R) US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on August 10, 2026 and in this pool photograph distributed by the Russian state agency Sputnik, Russia's President Vladimir Putin in the Novosibirsk region on August 11, 2026. (AFP)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has told Donald Trump about Iran's position on a possible Mideast peace deal, the Kremlin said Saturday.

The Kremlin said Tehran's stance was relayed in a phone call held between the two leaders on Friday. It did not say how Trump responded, nor elaborate on Iran's position.

Diplomatic efforts to end the more-than-seven-month-long Iran conflict, which began with US-Israeli strikes on Iran in February, have been at an impasse since the summer, according to AFP.

Putin met Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on the sidelines of a summit in Turkmenistan earlier this week, where the Russian leader expressed an interest in helping broker peace.

"In coordination with the Iranian president, Putin conveyed the Iranian side's views on a possible resolution to the conflict to Trump," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Saturday, according to Russia's state RIA news agency.

The United States and Iran agreed a memorandum of understanding in June that spelled out a framework for ending their conflict, but Iranian attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz prompted a resumption of US military operations.

Recent indirect talks between Washington and Tehran on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly failed to produce a breakthrough.

 

 

 

 


First Execution to Be Livestreamed in the US: Nidal Hasan’s Journey from Psychiatric Clinic to Death Row

(FILES) This April 9, 2010 file photo released by the Bell County Sheriffs Department, shows US Major Nidal Hasan after being moved from Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio to Bell County Jail in Belton, Texas. . (Photo by Handout / BELL COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT / AFP)
(FILES) This April 9, 2010 file photo released by the Bell County Sheriffs Department, shows US Major Nidal Hasan after being moved from Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio to Bell County Jail in Belton, Texas. . (Photo by Handout / BELL COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT / AFP)
TT

First Execution to Be Livestreamed in the US: Nidal Hasan’s Journey from Psychiatric Clinic to Death Row

(FILES) This April 9, 2010 file photo released by the Bell County Sheriffs Department, shows US Major Nidal Hasan after being moved from Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio to Bell County Jail in Belton, Texas. . (Photo by Handout / BELL COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT / AFP)
(FILES) This April 9, 2010 file photo released by the Bell County Sheriffs Department, shows US Major Nidal Hasan after being moved from Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio to Bell County Jail in Belton, Texas. . (Photo by Handout / BELL COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT / AFP)

In an unprecedented move that has shaken Washington’s political and legal establishment, American society stands on the threshold of a deeply sensitive historical and moral turning point. The Pentagon is preparing to carry out what would be the first public execution broadcast live over the internet in modern US history, sentencing former Army Major and psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan to death on December 3.

The case is particularly significant because it would mark the first execution by firing squad under military law since 1945, the end of World War II. It would place a US Army major before the ultimate punishment, in a highly publicized execution watched by millions on their screens, after decades in which such military sentences had remained uncarried out.

Origins and Background: Between Achievement and Extremism

Nidal Malik Hasan was born in September 1970 in Arlington County, Virginia, to a family of Palestinian origin. He attended American schools before deciding to join the military in 1988, immediately after graduating from high school.

The US government fully funded his university education until he earned his medical degree in psychiatry. He steadily advanced through the military ranks, eventually becoming a major and Army psychiatrist, a position that placed him on a promising career path.

Behind this distinguished military career, however, a profound identity crisis and bitter ideological struggle were taking shape out of sight. Subsequent investigations revealed that Hasan had engaged in extensive ideological correspondence with extremist figures abroad, most notably Anwar al-Awlaki, a leader in Al-Qaeda, according to US media reports.

Hasan increasingly voiced strong opposition to US foreign policy, viewing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as direct attacks on his beliefs. The crisis reached its peak when he received official military orders assigning him to active duty in Afghanistan.

Fort Hood and the Mass Shooting

On November 5, 2009, just weeks before he was scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan, Major Nidal Hasan made the decision to completely repudiate his military oath and stormed the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at the well-known Fort Hood military base in Texas.

Hasan drew his firearm and opened fire indiscriminately and repeatedly on his fellow service members, who were unarmed and waiting to undergo medical examinations and routine vaccinations before deployment.

The surprise attack killed 13 people, including 12 military personnel and one civilian, and wounded another 32, with injuries of varying severity. It was described as the deadliest attack on a US military base in modern history.

The shooting ended when civilian security personnel at the base opened fire on Hasan, leaving him partially paralyzed and confined to a wheelchair from that day onward.

The Courtroom and the Shocking Admission

During his landmark military trial in 2013, Nidal Hasan stunned those present by refusing to use lawyers and choosing to represent himself before the military jury.

Hasan made no effort to defend himself or offer excuses. Instead, he openly accepted full responsibility for the incident before the court, stating that he had changed his allegiance and switched sides to protect those he believed were fighting against US forces.

The 13-member military panel convicted him on 45 counts, including premeditated murder and attempted premeditated murder. He was sentenced to death and subsequently transferred to the strict military confinement facilities at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Hasan was not formally convicted of terrorism, as US military criminal law does not contain a separate offense bearing that designation. Instead, the case was prosecuted as a major mass-murder crime.

Nidal Hasan in a 2007 photograph at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. Hasan held the rank of captain in the US Army when the photograph was taken. (Wikipedia)

Trump’s Approval and the End of Six Decades

Under the strict and complex provisions of US military law, the death sentence of a serving military member cannot be carried out without formal approval and the final signature of the US president in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

After all available levels of appeal and legal challenges had been exhausted, and the Supreme Court had rejected his petitions, President Donald Trump signed the execution order following an explicit recommendation from his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth.

The presidential decision paves the way for the end of decades without military executions. The planned execution would be the first of its kind in the US military overall since 1961, when soldier John Bennett was hanged. Its particular historical significance lies in the fact that it would be the first military execution by firing squad since soldier Eddie Slovik was executed for desertion in 1945 during World War II.

Screens of Death and Divisions in the White House

The US Department of Defense sparked a major controversy when it announced that the execution by firing squad would be public and available to watch live on internet platforms. The Pentagon justified the unprecedented measure as an effort to establish a decisive deterrent and demonstrate the grave consequences of military betrayal.

Officials selected 1:30 p.m. as the execution time, precisely matching the time Hasan carried out his deadly attack at Fort Hood years earlier.

The announcement of the livestream triggered a storm of controversy and sharp divisions within American political circles. US Vice President JD Vance expressed serious reservations and deep skepticism about broadcasting the execution publicly, stating that he would not watch the spectacle under any circumstances.

Democrats strongly criticized the move, calling it a regressive act unbecoming of a country governed by institutions. Some prominent Republicans also expressed disgust at turning judicial justice into a media spectacle resembling practices associated with extremist totalitarian regimes.

Nidal Hasan in his 1986 high school yearbook. (Wikipedia)

The Legal Clash and the Constitutionality of a Public Broadcast

The decision to livestream the execution opens a dark and contentious legal and constitutional chapter in the American justice system. No official execution has been broadcast on public screens in the country’s modern history since the last authorized public execution took place in the 1930s.

This political ambition faces a complex legislative framework governing the public disclosure of executions, with substantial differences between state and federal law. In most US states, local laws prohibit filming and broadcasting executions, allowing only a limited number of witnesses and journalists to attend for transparency purposes.

Meanwhile, Federal Military Regulation 190-55 restricts attendance to a small group that includes victims’ relatives and accredited journalists, while imposing an absolute ban on anyone below the legal age.

Despite efforts by the defense to submit emergency petitions to civil courts seeking to halt the execution on the basis of these legal loopholes, the Pentagon appears determined to overcome the obstacles and proceed with both the execution and its broadcast on the scheduled date.