Caught between US red lines and Iranian maneuvering, Iraq’s political class braces for a contest that could redraw the country’s internal balance.
The Cradle
Political experts describe it as a strategic repositioning that triggered a tactical earthquake, reshuffling the cards in domestic decision-making centers and in regional and international maneuvering rooms alike.
The return of Nuri al-Maliki is an ember beneath fragile balances. It is a return where the ambitions of the State of Law Coalition intersect with apprehension in Washington, and where the threads of a deferred Kurdish consensus intertwine.
Tehran watches from the shadows, moving its pieces as bargaining chips in its broader negotiations with the US, amid cautious Turkish silence and Persian Gulf anticipation that reads in Maliki’s features a roadmap shadowed by the past.
Sudani steps aside: tactical retreat or calculated wager?
Sudani’s departure from the saddle of future power is widely viewed as a clever escape from a carefully laid geopolitical ambush. Analytical readings suggest that Sudani – who for two years attempted to balance American pragmatism with domestic rigidity – recognized that the winds blowing from Washington carried a storm his fragile government could not withstand.
Remaining in office meant confronting zero-sum US demands to sever organic ties with power centers aligned with Tehran in Baghdad – political suicide within the Coordination Framework. Sudani instead chose to bow to the storm, placing the burning coal in Maliki’s hands.
He is gambling that another political deadlock could return him as the sole firefighter with international blessing, or legitimize a one-year technical extension of a caretaker government until the dust of regional tension – oscillating between negotiation and total war – settles.
Erbil’s opening, Anbar’s resistance
In the corridors of Erbil, where positions are weighed by the scales of political stability and constitutional guarantees, it appears that Maliki has restored his "chemistry" with the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP). The KDP leans toward favoring the "strong partner" who seems capable of fulfilling financial and oil obligations toward the Kurdish Region.
The Kurds, who support his candidacy both privately and publicly, view Maliki as a figure well-versed in Baghdad’s governance maps. They have turned the knot of electing a President of the Republic into a deliberate time window, giving Maliki space to arrange his position within the Shia house and with Washington to ensure a safe transition to the post-Sudani phase.
Conversely, Mohammed al-Halbousi and other Sunni forces act as a bulwark against this candidacy. They recall an era marked by political confrontation and judicial prosecutions targeting Sunni figures, and they fear a return to polarization that could unsettle the national balance of power.
This divergence between Erbil’s welcome and Washington’s rejection places Maliki before a difficult test: Can he reassure a wary Sunni spectrum while capitalizing on Kurdish confidence?
Washington draws its red lines
When US President Donald Trump launched a digital broadside via his Truth Social platform attacking Maliki’s candidacy, he was not acting in an emotional vacuum; rather, he was drawing the boundaries of the "forbidden zone" for the new American policy in Iraq.
Although the post was later deleted, political realism reads this as a familiar US tactic designed to extract political concessions. The deletion gave Maliki room to demonstrate alignment with Washington’s demands, including centralizing arms control and curbing financial channels that indirectly benefit Tehran.
Maliki, seasoned in political maneuvering, has begun reading these signals. He presents himself as a strong guarantee capable of reining in uncontrolled weapons and surrounding financial corruption, positioning himself within White House conditions.
Whether this maneuver yields reluctant US acceptance remains uncertain. History casts a long shadow.
US retrenchment and Iraq’s exposed flank
On the security front, Iraq faces a serious challenge with Washington’s decision to withdraw forces from major bases and exit Syria while concentrating its military presence in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region.
This marks a redefinition of the protection umbrella. Large swathes of Iraqi geography are left exposed, while the Kurdistan Region becomes Washington’s primary observation deck over a volatile landscape.
The relocation of US power to Iraqi Kurdistan effectively removes direct air and intelligence cover from softer zones, placing Baghdad’s sovereignty under strain – particularly as this shift coincides with heightened regional tensions that render the Syrian–Iraqi border a critical vulnerability.
The ISIS detainee dilemma
The security picture darkens further with the transfer of thousands of ISIS detainees from Syrian prisons to facilities inside Iraq. This file is a sensitive political and security landmine.
A potential Maliki government would assume responsibility for managing a radicalized population without direct US intelligence backing following the withdrawal. The risk of prison breaks is no longer theoretical. It echoes the nightmare of 2014, when such centers became launch pads for violence.
The stability of Sunni provinces could once again be tested by an organization waiting for any breach in Baghdad’s control systems.
Tehran’s bargaining chip
In Tehran’s strategic calculus, Maliki is not a passing political figure but a reusable weight in moments of recalibration. His timely nomination represents a valuable Iranian pressure card in negotiations with Washington.
Tehran understands that Maliki’s name alone generates sufficient concern to serve as leverage. The most plausible scenario suggests Iran could ultimately withdraw support for his candidacy at the last moment, presenting it as a meaningful regional concession to the Trump administration in exchange for progress elsewhere.
In that sense, Maliki remains a useful card for Tehran either way.
Iraq in the line of fire
Fears of a broader regional war are intensifying as tensions between Washington, Tehran, and Tel Aviv escalate amid uncertainty over nuclear negotiations.
Should talks collapse, Iraq becomes a primary arena of confrontation. A total war scenario would transform Iraqi territory into a firing range and strategic battleground. Baghdad would face pressure to choose sides.
Maliki’s return at this moment places him in an unenviable position: either he emerges as a crisis manager capable of shielding Iraq from direct collision, or his government becomes the first casualty of escalation.
Gulf capital on edge
Economically, Maliki’s candidacy introduces uncertainty for Persian Gulf investments that have begun reviving Iraq’s economy. Capital from Riyadh, Doha, and Kuwait seeks stability and international acceptance.
Any confrontation with Washington or renewed polarization could freeze these projects. Iraq cannot afford to lose Gulf confidence. Investment in real estate, energy, and infrastructure remains vital to its economic trajectory.
Without political stability, these investments risk becoming deferred commitments, leaving Iraq exposed to oil volatility, rentier economics, and US dollar pressure.
Ankara’s leverage and the Qandil pressure point
The transformation in Damascus and the rise of Ahmad al-Sharaa (formerly known as Abu Muhammad al-Julani) under Turkish sponsorship reshape Iraq’s western neighborhood. This shift demands deep security coordination between Ankara, Baghdad, and Damascus.
Ankara effectively controls the valves of this geopolitical space, placing Maliki before a new security and economic equation.
The withdrawal of Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) fighters toward the Qandil Mountains intensifies Turkish pressure on Baghdad to cooperate in resolving this file. At the same time, Turkiye leverages the water file and economic understandings tied to the Ibrahim al-Khalil crossing.
For Ankara, its Syrian model invites replication – a security coordination framework linking Ankara, Damascus, and Baghdad, potentially paving the way for cross-border energy and Development Road projects. This will test Maliki’s flexibility within a shifting regional balance. #
Constitutional deadlines or political theater?
As for the Constitution, its legal deadlines have turned into "advisory texts" threatened by the will of political consensuses and complex partisan interests. This places the current Iraqi political reality before several inevitable scenarios:
- Total risk (15 percent): Installing Maliki despite US rejection, risking security and economic rupture reminiscent of 2014 under diminished American cover.
- Grand compromise (65 percent): Replacing Maliki with a consensus figure aligned with evolving US signals and regional recalibration.
- Anxious stagnation (20 percent): Extending Sudani’s caretaker role pending clarity on regional negotiations and war trajectories.
Back to the starting line?
Iraq stands in a state of organized confusion. Maliki’s candidacy crystallizes the clash between internal decision-making and international balance.
The coming days will answer a decisive question: Has Maliki returned to guide Iraq toward federal stability, or will his return become the detonator that fractures Iraq internally and entangles it further in regional and international confrontation?
No comments:
Post a Comment