Iraq’s al-Zaidi talks to Trump as Baghdad seeks to stay out of war on Iran

The core message was that Iraq wants to stay out of the conflict. Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi told President Donald Trump that Iraqi territory must not become a platform for attacks against neighboring countries. This matters because Iraq borders Iran and has close ties with both Iran and the United States.

During their phone call, the leaders discussed regional developments, security, and the next phase of events. Al-Zaidi reaffirmed Iraq’s call for respect for state sovereignty. He also stressed diplomacy and dialogue as the best ways to protect regional security and stability.

The position reflects Baghdad’s effort to prevent escalation inside Iraq. Since the war began, Iraq has faced attacks involving the United States, Iran, and Iraqi armed groups. Al-Zaidi’s message seeks to keep Iraq from becoming a direct battlefield while diplomatic efforts continue to prevent renewed US attacks on Iran.

The groups are Iraqi fighter organizations described as powerful and pro-Iran. The article does not identify them by name. It says several have launched attacks in support of Iran across the region since the war began, making them the main Iraqi actors that could widen the conflict.

Their possible involvement comes from their existing alignment with Iran. They have acted in support of Iran during the war, so an Iranian retaliation could draw similar backing from them. This is why Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein publicly warned Iraqi armed groups not to join the fighting.

Baghdad is trying to disarm all fighter groups, including the pro-Iran factions. Hussein said Iraq is not part of any axis and should not become a battlefield. If armed groups ignore that policy, Iraq could face attacks, retaliation, and deeper pressure from both Washington and Tehran.

For Iraq, neutrality means refusing to become part of a US-Iran military alignment. It means keeping Iraqi territory from serving as a launch point, battlefield, or base for attacks. This matters because Iraq says it has good relations with both the United States and neighboring Iran.

Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein described the policy clearly: Iraq is “not part of any axis” and does not want the Iraqi arena turned into a battlefield. The key mechanism is political and security control. Baghdad must prevent armed groups from joining Iran’s retaliation while also protecting Iraqi sovereignty.

This balance is difficult. Iraq has already faced attacks involving the United States, Iran, and armed groups inside Iraq. Its government is therefore pursuing disarmament, diplomacy, and dialogue. Remaining neutral could reduce escalation, but it depends on whether state authorities can control armed groups and preserve Iraqi territory as non-belligerent space.

Renewed US attacks on Iran could trigger Iranian retaliation, including actions by aligned armed groups inside Iraq. That would pull Iraq into a conflict it says it does not want. The danger is especially serious because Iraq lies next to Iran and contains powerful pro-Iran fighter groups.

The mechanism is escalation across borders. Iraqi groups could launch attacks in support of Iran, while the United States or Iran could respond against targets in Iraq. Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein said Iraq had already been attacked by the US, Iran, and armed groups inside the country after the war began.

Hussein warned that pushing Iraqi society into the war would be disastrous. Iraq’s government says neither its society nor its armed forces are prepared for war. Renewed strikes could therefore damage security, undermine sovereignty, and make Baghdad’s balancing policy much harder to maintain.

The reported loss is more than $60bn in oil revenues since the war began. That figure shows the conflict’s direct economic cost for Iraq. It is especially severe because oil accounts for about 90 percent of Iraq’s federal budget, leaving public finances heavily exposed to export disruptions.

The main mechanism is the closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Tehran. About 90 percent of Iraq’s oil exports normally pass through the waterway. When access was largely cut off, Iraq could not move most of its usual oil exports, sharply reducing revenue. Iran later granted Iraq an exemption to pass freely.

The exemption may ease the immediate pressure, but the reported losses show Iraq’s vulnerability. Any renewed fighting or disruption around Hormuz could again threaten exports and government income. Economic damage adds to the security risks Baghdad is trying to avoid by staying outside the war.

The Strait of Hormuz is a strategic waterway through which Iraq normally sends most of its oil exports. In practical terms, it is a sea passage connecting Iraq’s oil trade to overseas buyers. Its importance comes from the concentration of Iraq’s exports through this single route.

When Tehran closed the waterway, about 90 percent of Iraq’s oil exports were largely cut off. That is the key mechanism: fewer shipments mean less oil revenue. Since oil provides about 90 percent of Iraq’s federal budget, a transport disruption quickly becomes a government-finance crisis, not merely a trade problem.

The article reports that Iraq lost more than $60bn in oil revenues after the war began. Iran has since granted Iraq an exemption to pass freely through the strait. However, renewed conflict could still threaten that access, leaving Iraq exposed to decisions made during a war it says it does not want to join.

Iraq faces unusual pressure when regional powers fight because geography, economics, and security are tightly connected. It borders Iran and maintains relations with the United States, so conflict between them can quickly affect Iraqi territory. Its economy is also highly dependent on oil exports and government oil income.

The article shows how these risks reinforce one another. About 90 percent of Iraqi oil exports normally pass through Hormuz, while oil supplies about 90 percent of the federal budget. At the same time, powerful pro-Iran armed groups inside Iraq have launched attacks supporting Iran. These groups can make Iraq part of the fighting even when Baghdad rejects that role.

Iraq has already been attacked by the US, Iran, and armed groups since the war began. Foreign Minister Hussein said Iraqi society and the armed forces are not prepared for war. Renewed fighting could therefore bring security damage and major economic losses at once.