US military prepares options for post-midterm Iran strikes - The Hill

Iraq’s government is trying to keep the country out of a possible US-Iran war. Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi says Iraq should remain a meeting point for regional rivals and is working to reduce tensions. This position also reflects Iraq’s concern about economic, diplomatic and security costs.

Iran-aligned factions take a different view. The Islamic Resistance in Iraq says standing with Tehran is a moral duty and frames the conflict as a fight between righteousness and falsehood. It did not announce new attacks, but its statement showed continued loyalty to Iran.

The divide creates a direct test for Baghdad. Zaidi wants weapons and military decisions placed under state control, while factions retain their own commitments and views about foreign aircraft. Iraq therefore risks being neutral in government policy but involved through armed groups operating inside its territory.

Iran-backed armed factions are Iraqi armed groups that maintain close political and popular ties with Iran. The article identifies the Islamic Resistance in Iraq as an umbrella group of Iran-aligned factions. These groups are important because they possess weapons, make public military statements and can influence how Iraq responds to foreign activity.

Their influence is visible in the limits they place on government policy. Kataib Hezbollah suspended military operations but excluded responses to aircraft and alleged airspace violations until Iraqi air defenses were fully established. The Islamic Resistance also accused the United States of violating Iraqi airspace 171 times.

This creates competing authority. Zaidi says military decisions and weapons should belong to the state, while factions retain their own commitments and threat assessments. The government says it has reached understandings with several groups, but the process remains incomplete and disputed.

The article describes substantial alleged foreign military activity over Iraq, but the figures come from different reports and sources. Iran-aligned factions accused US forces of 171 Iraqi airspace violations between September 30 and October 23. They also said 17 aircraft were detected on one Friday.

The reported aircraft included reconnaissance drones and specialized aircraft. The factions alleged that the United States used bases in Jordan and Turkey for flights over several Iraqi provinces, including Nineveh, Duhok, Erbil, Anbar and Kirkuk. These claims are presented as the factions’ account, not independently confirmed findings.

Israeli activity was reported separately. Axios said dozens of Israeli fighter jets flew through Syrian and Iraqi airspace toward Iran’s border before turning back. The competing allegations put Iraqi airspace at the center of the confrontation and make Baghdad’s effort to control its territory more difficult.

If Iraq’s territory or airspace is used for attacks, Baghdad could lose control over its neutrality. The article links the confrontation to disruption at the Strait of Hormuz, which has already harmed Iraq. It also says some Gulf states believe attacks against them originated in Iraq, creating diplomatic strain.

The danger is not only political. Iraqi officials suspect Israel attacked sites holding Chinese-made air-defense systems transferred from Iran to Iraqi factions. A separate explosion at a Popular Mobilization Forces ammunition facility injured five people. Israeli responsibility for the suspected strikes remains unconfirmed.

Iraq could therefore face pressure from several directions at once. Foreign states may demand action over military flights, while Iran-aligned factions may respond to alleged violations. Factions could become targets even if Baghdad rejects participation. Zaidi’s effort to control weapons and airspace is meant to reduce that risk, but its success remains uncertain.

The article presents Iraq as a state whose authority is divided. Zaidi says weapons and military decisions must come under government control, asking whether Iraq is “a state with factions, or factions with a state?” His pledge implies that the state does not yet fully control all armed power.

The factions demonstrate their independence through public statements and operational conditions. The Islamic Resistance declared support for Tehran, while Kataib Hezbollah suspended military operations but preserved the right to respond to hostile aircraft and airspace violations. These decisions were not described as being directed by Baghdad.

The government says it has completed arrangements with three factions and is finalizing agreements with two more. Talks continue with another two, while some groups dispute the claimed progress. Zaidi now promises that no weapons will remain outside state control by June 30, 2027, leaving the issue unresolved for now.

The provided article does not mention the 2023 Iraq-Iran agreement or Iranian Kurdish opposition groups in northern Iraq. Established background is needed here. The agreement followed Iranian complaints that armed Kurdish groups based in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region were conducting or supporting attacks against Iran.

Iraq agreed to prevent those groups from using its territory for armed activity and to move them away from the Iranian border, with disarmament and relocation central to the arrangement. The groups and their supporters were concerned because these measures could restrict their bases, weapons and ability to operate openly.

The agreement also raised a sovereignty dilemma for Iraq. Baghdad had to balance its security relationship with Iran against the autonomy and political space of groups based in northern Iraq. This background connects to the article’s broader theme: Iraq faces pressure to control armed actors and prevent its territory from becoming a platform for regional conflict.

A government’s monopoly over weapons and military force is central to sovereignty because sovereignty means exercising effective authority over a country’s territory. If armed groups can make war, respond to aircraft or hold weapons outside state control, the government cannot reliably decide whether the country is at war or neutral.

The article shows this problem directly. Zaidi wants Iraq to remain outside the conflict and says military decisions should come under state control. Yet Kataib Hezbollah reserved the right to respond to alleged hostile aircraft, while the Islamic Resistance declared support for Tehran. Their separate positions weaken a single national policy.

State control also protects Iraq from becoming a battleground. Baghdad can regulate airspace, investigate attacks and manage diplomacy more credibly when one authority controls force. Zaidi’s deadline of June 30, 2027 reflects the government’s attempt to restore that authority, though factions dispute the reported progress.