The fate of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMU) continues to be a central and controversial issue in the Iraqi political landscape, reflecting the deep internal tensions and complex regional dynamics involving actors with often divergent interests, such as Iran, the United States and Turkey. Formed in 2014 in response to the advance of the Islamic State, these militias, composed predominantly of Shiite fighters, are today at the center of a heated debate between those who support their dissolution and integration into the regular army, and those who, instead, defend their fundamental role for the security and stability of the country.
The discussion on the possible dissolution of the PMU and its absorption into the Ministry of Defense is particularly intense and polarized. This issue, widely debated in political circles and public opinion, has met with the firm opposition of the Coordination Framework, the coalition of Shiite forces that supports the government led by Mohammed Shia al Sudani. Consequently, in a rapidly evolving regional context, marked by significant events such as the Syrian crisis and the growing difficulties faced by Hezbollah in Lebanon, international pressure, led by the United States, has increased for Baghdad to proceed with the dissolution of the armed factions linked to the so-called “Axis of Resistance” and the restructuring of the “Popular Mobilization Authority”, with the aim of integrating its members into the Ministry of Defense. In this context, the Coordination Framework has forcefully reiterated its refusal to merge the PMUs with the Ministry of Defense, categorically denying rumors circulating about its alleged request to withdraw forces from specific areas.
In parallel, the highest Shiite authority in Iraq, Ayatollah al-Sistani, is reportedly under increasing international and European pressure to issue a formal fatwa sanctioning the dissolution of the PMUs. Some sources indicate that the secret meeting between al-Sistani and al-Sadr, which took place in the summer of 2024, could be interpreted as a signal of the authority’s desire to end the monopoly of power exercised by the Coordination Framework in the upcoming elections. Al-Sistani reportedly expressed deep concern about the Iraqi political situation, sending messages to the leaders of the Coordination Framework in which he emphasized that the situation had become “unsustainable” and required a change of course.
In response to these pressures, the daily newspaper “al Mada” hypothesized a possible political maneuver by the leaders of the Coordination Framework, who could reach an agreement to reconsider the structure of the Popular Mobilization Forces, in order to protect Iraq from potential military or economic sanctions linked to future payments in dollars.
Within the Iraqi government apparatus, positions on the future of the PMUs appear far from univocal. Deputy Speaker of Parliament Mohsen al Mandalawi expressed his full support for the Popular Mobilization Forces and other security forces, calling for the truth not to be distorted about their successes in defending the country.
On the contrary, the Minister of the Interior Abdul Amir al Shammari assured that all Iraqi security forces operate under the unified command of the country’s armed forces, while revealing new details about the government’s decision to purchase weapons from citizens. Al Shammari also stated that his ministry is preparing to gradually take over the management of internal security from the army and the Popular Mobilization Forces.
On the institutional front, the Ministry of Defense categorically denied having launched recruitment campaigns for volunteers in the ranks of the Iraqi army, while the Coordination Framework denied having requested the withdrawal of the Popular Mobilization Forces from specific areas of the country or having proposed their formal integration within the Ministry of Defense. In parallel, the Anbar Provincial Council has raised concerns over alleged political activities conducted by the PMUs.
The head of the Provincial Council Security Committee, Saad al Muhammadi, has called on the PMU Commander-in-Chief, Faleh al Fayyadh, to prevent the militias from engaging in any form of political activity. Saad Ghazi, a member of the provincial council, revealed that the council is pressuring Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al Sudani to replace the current leader of the Popular Mobilization Forces in the province, Saad Dawai, who was recently summoned by the Supreme Security Committee of the Anbar region to clarify some audio recordings or leaked, in which members of the Mobilization Forces allegedly threatened to take punitive action against those who refused to participate in unauthorized gatherings that were not part of the security activities officially entrusted to the PMU in the province.
Opinions within the Iraqi government on the issue of the PMU remain divided.
The President of the Republic, Abdul Latif Rashid, stated that the factions are now under the control of the government and work is being done to reach a situation that puts an end to any combat activity in these circumstances, exaggerating Iranian influence on the factions and reiterating that they are all under Iraqi control. However, the First Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Mohsen al Mandalawi, expressed a more cautious view, arguing that the dissolution of the armed factions will take time, but is possible given the shift in focus to growing political and economic interests.
In stark contrast, National Security Advisor Qasim al Araji called even talk of disbanding the Popular Mobilization Forces “useless.” On the armed factions front, the Iraqi group Harakat Ansar Allah al Awfiya reiterated its refusal to disarm or disband, reiterating its commitment to resisting US forces in the country. Ali al Fatlawi, a senior member of the group, explained that disarmament is not realistic as long as US forces remain in Iraq and stressed the group’s mission to resist the “occupant,” revealing that they are “closely monitoring the agreements between Baghdad and Washington on the timing of the withdrawal of troops.”
Continuing with statements by representatives and leaders of the Popular Mobilization Forces, we report the speech of the Secretary General of al Nujaba, Akram al Kaabi in which he celebrates the victory of Gaza and the solidarity of the axis of resistance, which unites Palestine, Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon and Iran, reiterating his willingness to resume operations if necessary and criticizing the lies spread by the United States, Israel and Western countries. The leader of the Iraqi resistance rejects the dissolution of the PMU. The secretary general of the Asa’ib Ahl Al-Haq movement, Qais al Khazali, also rejected the dissolution of the Popular Mobilization Forces.
From a legislative point of view, communications are underway between the government and the Popular Mobilization Authority to return the law on popular mobilization to the Parliamentary Security and Defense Committee, with the aim of voting on it.
The Iraqi Parliament’s Security and Defense Committee approved amendments to the Popular Mobilization Forces bill and forwarded them to the Presidency of the Parliament for a vote. The new amendments include the granting of privileges related to salaries, retirement, and the authority of officials to continue to perform their duties, elements that have raised opposition from some political blocs. Analyses by international experts and think tanks also contribute to the debate.
The American website “al Hurra” stated that the refusal of Iraqi factions to hand over their weapons will expose them to “military attacks” targeting their leaders, while the American Institute for the Study of War expressed concern that the factions’ integration into the Iraqi army could increase the influence of armed groups and undermine the army’s national identity. Despite being of diametrically opposed origin to previous publications, the considerations of the Arabic newspaper Asharq al Awsat do not differ greatly from those of the West, as they stated that some factions do not want disarmament and the issue is decided by Iran based on the variables imposed by the negotiations on the nuclear program, highlighting the divisions within the Coordination Framework on the mechanisms to manage the factions and the hesitant positions regarding their dissolution or their merger.
Despite the silence maintained by the Iraqi armed factions loyal to Iran regarding the conduct of possible military operations against the americans in Iraq or against Israel, tensions remain palpable. The Iraqi government has not announced any new position regarding the future of illegally held weapons by armed factions, nor on its relations with Iran, especially in light of Washington’s policy of “maximum pressure” against Tehran. The surprise announcement by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that he was banning any form of negotiations with the United States has further increased uncertainty and apprehension about the possible repercussions on Iraqi armed factions that report to Tehran. The American website al Hurra stated that the refusal of Iraqi factions to lay down their weapons would expose them to potential “military attacks” aimed at their leaders.
The American Institute for the Study of War has expressed concern that the integration of factions into the Iraqi army could increase the influence of armed groups and compromise the army’s national identity. Evidence suggests that armed factions are cautiously addressing regional developments; This may explain their commitment to calm vis-à-vis the United States, especially in light of recent American moves in Iraq, such as the assault on Najaf airport by an American force during a nighttime operation, without any public reaction or stance from those factions. This silence raises questions, especially since these factions were issuing tough statements and positions regarding violations of Iraqi sovereignty before the Trump administration came to power, even on issues far less serious than what has happened recently.
The United States maintains a military presence in Iraq, ostensibly to provide support and training to Iraqi security forces in the fight against remnants of Daesh. However, Washington is also deeply concerned about Iran’s influence over the PMUs and seeks to limit the ability of these groups to operate outside the control of the Iraqi government. The United States has pressured Baghdad to integrate or disband the PMUs, while also offering financial and military support to strengthen the regular security forces. As mentioned above, the assault on Najaf airport by a US force during a nighttime operation, without prompting any public reaction from Shiite factions, has raised questions about the real ability of the latter to challenge the US presence in Iraq.
Turkey is watching with growing concern the situation in Iraq, particularly the presence and influence of the PMUs in the northern regions of the country, near the Turkish border. Ankara considers some of these militias to be an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a Kurdish armed group considered a terrorist by Turkey, the United States and the European Union. Turkey has repeatedly conducted military operations in northern Iraq against PKK bases and has expressed concern about the potential destabilizing impact of the PMUs on the security of the region.
Despite divergent interests and regional tensions, all three powers have a common interest in the stability of Iraq and the fight against terrorism. However, their long-term strategies and goals are often in conflict, further complicating the political and security situation in the country.
The future of the Popular Mobilization Forces remains shrouded in uncertainty, hostage to internal and external pressures, with the Iraqi Parliament’s Security and Defense Committee having approved amendments to the PMU law and MK Yasser al Husseini stating that the political process in Iraq is “on the brink of collapse,” while Nouri al Maliki reiterated that the dissolution of the PMU is unacceptable.
The dissolution or integration of the PMU into the regular army clearly represents a complex challenge for the Iraqi government, called upon to balance the different regional influences and consolidate the country’s sovereignty, with significant consequences for the stability of Iraq and the entire region. The next moves of the Iraqi government, regional powers and international actors will be crucial for the future of these militias and for the long-term stability of Iraq.
Elisa Cicchi
Follow our updates on Spigolature geopolitiche: and on our blog Le Spigolature di AGCNEWS
