Alwaght- These days, the US is more openly appearing as the supporter and facilitator of the Israeli occupation, as if it has a mission to remove all the barriers ahead of the Israeli projects in the region. After confrontation with Iran, now Washington is aiming at another part of the Axis of Resistance to pave the way for a fresh Israeli adventure in the region.
In this connection, the US Department of State on Wednesday issued a statement saying it added to its so-called terror blacklist four Iraqi resistance groups of Al-Nujaba Movement, Kataib Sayyed Al-Shohada, Ansarullah Al-Awfiya, and Kataib Imam Ali.
It claimed the banned groups were involved in attacks on the US embassy in Baghdad and the military bases hosting the American forces and Western coalition and have used pseudonyms or proxy groups to conceal their role.
The Department claimed that this action is pursuant to National Security Presidential Memorandum-2 (NSPM-2) issued by Trump, which emphasizes exerting maximum pressure on Iran to cut off the Tehran’s funding of "its proxy and terrorist allied forces.”
Iraqi reactions
The American move drew reactions from the Iraqi politicians and commanders of resistance groups. The Resistance Coordination Committee announced that leaders of the sanctioned groups will hold a broad session in the coming days to discuss consequences of this American decision and how to respond and avoid military action or escalation against Washington in the current period.
In response to the new sanctions, leaders and political figures from the targeted Iraqi factions issued defiant statements, dismissing the measures as ineffective and politically motivated.
Kadhim al-Fartousi, a spokesman for Kataib Sayyid Al-Shohada, stated: "We had previously been sanctioned by the US Treasury, and today we are sanctioned by the US State Department. These sanctions will have no effect because we have no foreign relations or economic interests."
Abdul Qadir Al-Karbalaei, the military deputy of the Al-Nujaba Movement, in an X post said: "Label us however you want and say whatever you wish about us. We swear by God that we will never stray from the path of truth, justice, pride, and dignity, and Al-Quds (Jerusalem) will remain the symbol of our resistance."
Abu Ali al-Karawi, a security official for Kataib Imam Ali, emphasized in a ln X post: "As usual, with the same repetitive criminal and hostile approach, America classifies the front of truth and dignity—which defends the issues and rights of the Islamic nation to liberate itself from Zionist-American domination—as a terrorist organization. It is as if America is blind to the daily, systematic Zionist terrorism that massacres thousands of innocent, defenseless civilians in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and other countries, in addition to the starvation policy being implemented by wicked Netanyahu and Trump."
Mukhtar al-Musawi, a member of the ruling parliamentary block Shiite Coordination Framework (SCF), noted the groups' official standing, saying that these factions are part of the Iraqi landscape, and some of them hold an official position within the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), which was established by a law passed by the Iraqi parliament. Therefore, targeting them in this way does not affect their domestic legitimacy."
Additionally, Ali Fadlallah, another politician close to the resistance groups, emphasized that "the American decision was not surprising, but a predicted and recurring step within the framework of Washington's overt hostility towards these groups."
The US actions against the resistance are not without precedent; it has previously imposed sanctions on various Iraqi groups and figures. Kataib Hezbollah was designated as a terrorist organization by the US in 2009. The Al-Nujaba Movement and its secretary-general were sanctioned in 2019. In January 2020, the US State Department announced its plan to place Asaib Ahl Al-Haq and its leader and his brother on its list of terrorist organizations. In November 2023, the US Treasury imposed sanctions on a number of leaders of the Kataib Sayyed Al-Shohada.
These American adversial moves come as resistance groups over the past decade have had a decisive role in securing Iraq amid rise of US-backed terrorism. By beating ISIS, a terror group the US and its allies nurtured, these groups have gained major popularity and today their representatives in the parliament and their official status in the country's military structure bear witness to their political and security weight in Iraq.
Behind-the-scenes US objectives
The Trump administration's decision to designate Iraqi resistance groups as terrorist organizations is suspiciously timed with the highly tense and sensitive climate on the eve of Iraq's parliamentary elections—a period that will determine the makeup of the country's next government.
Under these circumstances, the US objective is the political, economic, security, and military targeting of the members and leaders of these factions to prevent representatives close to the PMF, Hashd al-Shaabi in Arabic, from entering parliament.
The reality is that the presence of resistance groups within Iraq's political structure means less room for US maneuverability and influence projection in the country. In recent years, these groups have used political tools and pressure on the government to turn the withdrawal of US forces into a national demand.
Therefore, if these groups succeed in the elections and solidify their place in the power structure, continuing the occupation will become nearly impossible for Washington. The US is aware that the stronger the social and political base of the resistance becomes in Iraq, the less legitimacy its military presence will have.
Another layer of this American action is the direct pressure it exerts on the Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al-Sudani. By labeling the resistance forces as terrorist, Washington is attempting to compel Baghdad to prevent these groups from re-entering the political structure.
If the PMF once again gains a significant presence in parliament, Washington will use this as a pretext to intensify pressure against Baghdad—a prospect that could worry Iraqi politicians and public opinion alike.
Such pressure could put the Iraqi government in a tight spot politically and diplomatically, simultaneously influencing electoral coalition-building and even creating divisions and discord within the SCF itself, jeopardizing the prospect of unity among Shiite forces in the next parliament.
Another objective of the US must be viewed within the framework of regional developments and alignment with the escalatory actions of the Israeli regime.
While West Asia is dealing with the Israeli aggressions, Iraqis believe that they are next in line after Tel Aviv launched attacks on Qatar and other Arab countries. It is said that during last month visit to Baghdad of secretary-general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani who signed a security MoU with Iraq, senior Iraqi officials voiced worry that given the Israeli launch of attacks on Iran during the 12-day war using Iraqi airspace, odds are Tel Aviv will strike Baghdad in the future.
In such a climate, this move could pave the way for violations of Iraq's national sovereignty under the pretext of combating regional threats. In effect, designating the resistance groups as terrorist provides Washington and Tel Aviv with a pretext to orchestrate attacks against Iraqi territorial integrity under the title of "fighting terrorism."
The sanctions and the effort to undermine and eliminate the resistance groups are linked to a strategy of managing instability in Iraq. Given the unstable environment in Syria following the rise of armed rebel groups and the intensification of sectarian and ethnic conflicts, Washington sees the spillover of crisis from Syria into Iraq as being in its interest for continuing its own presence there. However, this plan is not feasible with the vigilant presence of the resistance groups, which is why efforts are underway to weaken them as Iraq's security guarantors.
Baghdad's weak performance
One of the eye-catching issues amid reactions to the new measure by the US is the weak position of the government of PM al-Sudani that majorly adopts a conservative standing in the fave of the Washington's pressures. One of the main reasons is the financial dependence of Iraq to the US. Since 2004, Iraqi oil incomes have been directly going into an account opened for Iraq's central bank in New York, which means Iraqi financial transactions are subject to a severe monitoring regime. This makes Baghdad avoid sharp reactions to the hostile measures of the US against resistance groups.
This is while al-Sudani rose to power with the support of the SCF and cannot remain silent in the face of American ambitions. If he seeks to consolidate his position and secure a second term as prime minister, he will inevitably have to move away from a conservative approach and resist Washington's pressure.
The reality is that the resistance groups are now an official part of Iraq's military and political structure. They operate legally within the framework of the armed forces, have played a significant role in defending the country, and recently, the draft law for the PMF was placed on the parliament's agenda, underscoring their important role in the country's military and security apparatus.
Therefore, when the US labels these forces as terrorist, it effectively poses a major challenge to the government's ability to carry out its sovereign duties. This is because these forces are, by official law, part of Iraq's armed forces, and the government is obligated to fulfill its commitments—such as securing their bases and personnel and paying their monthly salaries—to entities under the ministry of defense.
Resistance losing strategic patience with the US
Recent American measures could bear serious consequences on the ground and backfire to the US aims.
So far, the resistance groups have adopted a strategy of "patience and restraint" in the face of largely hostile US policies—not out of weakness or fear, but to prevent the return of widespread instability to Iraq. Consequently, the relative security of US forces in Iraq has also been a product of this show of self-restraint by the resistance factions.
These groups possess the capability to alter the on-the-ground equations in a short period and completely expel the occupiers from Iraq. The experience of the US withdrawal from certain bases due to the political and military pressure from the resistance is a clear example of this power. Therefore, now that Washington, by applying the terrorist label, has effectively left the resistance with no path but direct confrontation, the conditions are set to change.
This time, the resistance groups may show no consideration towards the American occupation forces. On the contrary, this American action could accelerate their decision to escalate the confrontation. In this way, a new chapter of confrontation may be beginning, the outcome of which will show Washington that the resistance is a heavyweight not only in the political arena but also on the battlefield.
Overall, although the US thinks it can finish its unfinished projects in the region through labeling as terrorist the resistance groups, this adventure can deliver the reverse as Iraqi resistance groups have already shown they can turn threat into opportunity at sensitive junctures. So if Washington carries on with its hostile path, not only it will not cut the resistance popularity, but also it will enhance its position as a force defending independence and national sovereignty of the country.
