Arms and authority: Iraq faces renewed debate over state control

Report by Wissam Nasrallah, English adaptation by Mariella Succar

From Baghdad came a clear and forceful message: weapons will not be surrendered.

It was delivered openly, not behind the scenes, as Iraq stands on the brink of a new political phase.

Having emerged from elections, the country has entered the complex process of forming a government. There is no clear parliamentary majority, no agreed candidate for prime minister, and alliances are still taking shape. 

At this sensitive moment, a long-standing question has resurfaced: who controls the use of force in a country shaped by competing regional and international influences, from Washington to Tehran?

The renewed debate over limiting weapons to state control was sparked by remarks from Faiq Zaidan, head of Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council, who called for engagement with armed faction leaders to move away from weapons and into political life.

In Iraq, discussion of weapons is never purely technical. It carries political weight, serving as a signal and a test of intent.

Iran-aligned factions Kataib Hezbollah and Harakat al-Nujaba responded quickly, rejecting any talk of disarmament. They said the issue could only be discussed once Iraq’s sovereignty is fully restored and U.S. forces have withdrawn.

Their response went beyond a refusal. It reframed the debate, casting the issue not as weapons outside the state, but as a state whose sovereignty remains incomplete.

The broader picture is more nuanced. Other factions operating within the Popular Mobilization Forces, and backed by the Najaf religious authority and former prime ministers, have expressed support for limiting weapons to the state — or have avoided opposing it outright. 

The split in positions reflects a deeper struggle over influence, political roles and the future shape of Iraq’s system.

Timing adds to the tension. Iraq is preparing for the conclusion of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq by the end of the year, removing an international framework and placing full responsibility for security and politics back in domestic hands. 

As that moment approaches, each side is reinforcing its leverage ahead of political negotiations.

In Baghdad, weapons are not only a security issue. They have become part of the political bargaining tied to government formation and the broader balance of power between the United States and Iran.

The central question is whether weapons will be brought under state institutions, remain in place in exchange for political guarantees, or be deferred as an unresolved issue. 

While the debate is unfolding in Iraq, its implications extend beyond the country’s borders. The question of state control over weapons has become a recurring regional issue, stretching from Baghdad to Beirut and beyond.