Iraq’s armed factions are sending mixed and contradictory signals about disarmament, as political sources say limited expressions of willingness to confine weapons are aimed primarily at easing US pressure.
A senior Iraqi political source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there were expectations that US special envoy Mark Savaya would visit Baghdad soon, accompanied by a senior US delegation, to outline the framework of relations with the Donald Trump administration in the next phase.
According to the source, recent statements by some factions suggesting readiness to confine weapons were linked directly to the anticipated visit and were designed to reduce pressure from Washington.
“These signals are about taking the file off the pressure table and shifting focus to other issues,” the source said, adding that they should not be read as a genuine move towards disarmament.
The comments underline growing confusion in Iraq over whether powerful Iran-backed militias are prepared to relinquish their arms, amid mounting US demands, internal political manoeuvring and outright rejection by some armed groups.
This month, there was uproar among government agencies after Lebanon's Hezbollah and Yemen's Houthis appeared briefly on a list of terrorist groups facing sanctions, before it was retracted.
Mr Savaya said on Monday that any disarmament of Iran-backed militias in Iraq must be comprehensive and carried out within a clear national framework, warning that the country was at a crossroads.
In a post on X, he welcomed what he described as “reported steps by Iraqi armed groups towards disarmament”, but stressed that statements of intent alone were not enough.
“Disarmament must be comprehensive, irreversible, and implemented through a clear and binding national framework,” Mr Savaya wrote, calling for the full dismantling of armed factions and an orderly transition of their members into civilian life.
His remarks followed comments by Faiq Zidan, head of Iraq’s judiciary, who on Saturday thanked armed groups for responding to his advice on “co-operating to enforce the rule of law, confining weapons to the hands of the state, and transitioning to political action”. Mr Zidan did not say which militias he was referring to.
The US envoy’s intervention comes at a time of intense pressure from Washington on the Iraqi government to curb the influence of militant groups close to Tehran, an effort that mirrors a broader regional push that includes groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon.
“Iraq stands today at a crossroads,” Mr Savaya wrote.
Mr Zidan's statement shows the increasing internal and external pressures to disarm Iran-backed armed groups, said Inna Rudolf, an Iraq expert and Senior Fellow at the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King's College London.
"Whether this becomes real demobilisation depends on credible security guarantees, the status of foreign forces, and political bargains that protect factional stakes inside the state," Ms Rudolf told The National.
"Washington’s posture and any troop adjustments will affect Tehran’s room for manoeuvre," she said, adding that "Iran’s preferred strategy is embedding allies institutionally rather than risking exposed proxy adventurism."
Renad Mansour, director of the Iraq initiative at London's Chatham house, said armed groups are under threat and pressure from Washington.
The Iranian-backed armed groups "are aware that Washington's risk is real to them but they wont go completely along with their demands," Mr Mansour said.
Washington "will continue to push hard on the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) but will not be happy about the process of the integration as it will be based on the PMF law that it has opposed," Mr Mansour said.
The PMF law would establish the armed forces as autonomous security organisation separate from other government military or security agencies, including granting it financial independence.
"This dance, back and forth will continue," he said.
Ongoing debate
Iraq sits uncomfortably between two rival powers. The US wants to curtail militia influence to limit Iran’s reach, while Tehran views those same groups as a strategic buffer against pressure from Washington and Israel. Baghdad, meanwhile, maintains close ties with both sides, hosting US forces at military bases while sustaining deep security and trade links with Iran.
US forces continue to present their presence as part of a mission to fight ISIS, Iraqi political sources say, framing redeployments as operational adjustments.
The domestic political context has further complicated the issue. Recent elections strengthened pro-Iran blocs within the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF), giving them significant parliamentary weight and the ability to block legislation related to disarmament.
The PMF is an umbrella body of mostly Shiite militias, many of them backed by Iran, that was formally incorporated into the Iraqi state. It also includes factions that are not aligned with Tehran and instead take guidance from religious authorities or holy shrines.
In August, Iraq’s government withdrew a controversial draft law regulating the PMF from parliament under pressure from the US and other foreign powers, underscoring the sensitivity of the issue.
Analysts say the renewed focus on disarmament is closely tied to the formation of the next government.
Munqidh Dagher, head of the Independent Iraqi Research and Studies group, said the timing was intentional rather than accidental.
“The issue has been on the table for some time, but now it has been communicated explicitly to all political leaders that no minister will be accepted in the next government if they are linked to an armed group,” he said.
Dr Dagher said the stakes were high because losing ministerial posts would also mean losing access to economic privileges tied to those positions, which form the backbone of party and factional finances.
“That is the real pressure point,” he said.
is meaningful as a signal of strategic recalibration among pro‑resistance actors toward consolidating gains within state structures,
Despite talk of flexibility in some political circles, armed groups themselves have issued blunt rejections.
A source in Kataib Sayyid Al Shuhada dismissed talk of handing over weapons as “pure nonsense” and described it as a “media storm”.
The group’s secretary general, Abu Alaa Al Walai, recently met Hamas officials in Baghdad, holding talks focused on Gaza and the Palestinian cause, a move seen by observers as a signal that the group remains firmly committed to its regional “resistance” role.
Iraq has previously absorbed armed groups into the state, including the Badr Organisation and Awakening forces that fought Al Qaeda, but the landscape today is far more complex.
For now, Iraq’s disarmament debate remains caught between US pressure, political calculation and armed factions that appear unwilling to surrender power, leaving the country, as Mr Savaya warned, standing at a crossroads with no clear direction ahead.
Abbas Al Zaydi, a member of the group’s political bureau, said Kataib Sayyid Al Shuhada remained committed to “unity of arenas” and rejected any suggestion of disarmament. Asked about factions that had announced they would hand over weapons, a source close to the group said: “empty words”.
