Why Iraq Should Be Wary of Security Reforms That Serve U.S. Interests

Iraq at a Crossroads: The Popular Mobilization Forces as a Case Study

Abstract

The recent political discourse in Iraq, particularly Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ Al-Sudani’s July 2025 call for tighter control over the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), echoes earlier attempts in Lebanon to dismantle Hezbollah under international pressure. This article argues that disbanding or weakening the PMF, Iraq’s most significant paramilitary force, risks repeating the Lebanese experience: weakening national defense, inviting foreign intervention, and destabilizing internal security. Drawing on the Iraqi fight against ISIS, regional threats, and recent foreign strikes on Iraqi soil, this analysis warns against security reforms that may appear legitimate but serve external agendas.

Introduction

Iraq finds itself facing a familiar regional script. are now pressing Baghdad to curtail or dissolve the PMF, citing the principle of “monopoly of arms by the state.” But Lebanon’s experience since 2006 offers a sobering lesson: when a country dismantles its own deterrent forces without a credible alternative, it risks plunging into security chaos and foreign dependency.

1. Disbanding the PMF: A Risky Gamble

The PMF is more than just a paramilitary group. Formed in 2014 in response to the ISIS onslaught, the PMF played a critical role in defending Baghdad and reversing the territorial gains of the Islamic State. It remains a vital security actor in Iraq’s complex landscape.

Today, Iraq faces a web of overlapping security threats:

• ISIS remnants operating across the Syrian desert and along the Anbar border (Syrian Observatory, 2025).

• Former ISIS-affiliated groups resurfacing under political or tribal banners inside Iraq.

• Turkish airstrikes in Iraqi Kurdistan, justified by Ankara as operations against the PKK (Reuters, April 2025).

• Israeli attacks targeting PMF sites and Iraqi military infrastructure, including confirmed strikes on Iraqi radar systems between 2019 and 2024 (Al Jazeera, Sept. 2023).

Against this backdrop, dissolving the PMF without establishing a viable national security alternative would create a vacuum — much like what happened in Lebanon when Hezbollah’s operations in the south were curtailed or in Syria when local militias were dismantled in 2012, paving the way for ISIS expansion.

2. Capitulation Does Not Lead to Sovereignty

The record is clear across the region:

• In Lebanon, a weakened army has been unable to prevent Israeli incursions, reduced to issuing condemnations without action.

• In Syria, dismantling local militias contributed directly to ISIS capturing nearly 40% of the country’s territory.

• In Iraq, the push to sideline the PMF — especially under pressure from Washington — risks isolating Baghdad from the regional resistance axis and undermining its deterrence against both American and Israeli interference.

Prime Minister Al-Sudani’s recent statements about reorganizing and controlling the PMF align with U.S. security interests more than with Iraq’s internal realities (Asharq Al-Awsat, July 15, 2025). While couched in terms of “state sovereignty,” these measures risk weakening Iraq’s only effective grassroots security structure.

3. Iraq Cannot Afford Another Lebanese Scenario

Iraq’s sectarian and political balance is far more fragile than Lebanon’s. A centralized military structure imposed under international oversight risks destabilizing the delicate coexistence between Shi’a, Sunni, and Kurdish forces.

The PMF is not a fringe militia — it is an institution of over 145,000 fighters, deeply embedded in Iraqi society. Dismantling or sidelining it could unravel Iraq’s fragile national fabric and reignite internal conflict.

Moreover, regions liberated by the PMF, especially in Diyala, Salahuddin, and Anbar, remain vulnerable.

Disarming the PMF would almost certainly embolden terrorist cells and criminal networks in these areas.