Iran Grants Iraqi Militias Greater Autonomy, Allowing Operations Without Tehran Approval

Iran has granted its commanders greater autonomy over militias in Iraq, allowing some groups to carry out operations without Tehran’s approval, a shift driven by the pressures of the war, three militia members and two other officials told The Associated Press.

“Driven by the pressures of war, Iran gives its field commanders more power over militias in Iraq Driven by the pressures of war, Iran gives its field commanders more power over militias in Iraq BAGHDAD (AP) — Iran has granted its commanders greater autonomy over militias in Iraq, allowing some groups to carry out operations without Tehran’s approval, a shift driven by the pressures of the war, three militia members and two other officials told The Associated Press”

Associated Press

The change is described as a move toward a decentralized command structure, with “The various forces have been granted the authority to operate according to their own field assessments without referring back to a central command,” said one militia official, who did not have permission to speak publicly.

Associated Press

The Associated Press report says many Iran-backed militias are funded through the Iraqi state budget and embedded within the security apparatus, drawing criticism from the United States and other countries that have borne the brunt of their attacks.

The AP account frames the war in the Middle East as exposing “the fragility of Iraq’s state institutions and their limited ability to restrain these groups.”

It also links the militia shift to a broader confrontation between Washington and the militias, with factions acting as an extension of Iran’s regional campaign and escalating attacks on U.S. assets in Iraq before a tenuous ceasefire deal was reached in April.

The Associated Press report adds that even if the ceasefire agreement holds, Washington is expected to intensify efforts against the groups militarily and politically, particularly as they gain latitude to operate more independently.

In Baghdad, the same AP reporting is republished by The New Indian Express and Times Now, both describing Iran’s decision as “driven by the pressures of the war” and emphasizing that some groups can act without prior approval from Tehran.

The AP reporting ties Iran’s decision to the escalation that followed U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran on Feb. 28, describing how “Days into the war” an Iranian delegation arrived in Iraq’s Kurdish region with a message aimed at preempting complaints after attacks.

The Associated Press says the delegation told Kurdish authorities that if militia attacks escalated near U.S. military bases, commercial interests and diplomatic missions, Iraqi Kurdish authorities should not come to Tehran with complaints, “as there was little they could do about it.”

rudaw.net

A senior Iraqi Kurdish government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, “They said they’ve devolved authority to regional Iranian commanders,” and contrasted it with prior practice in which Kurdish leaders would call Iranian officials after attacks to ask why they had been targeted.

The AP account adds that this time Kurdish leaders were told, “We can’t help you with the groups in the south right now,” a line the Kurdish official said was intended to “preempt” follow-up.

The Associated Press also places the militia autonomy shift alongside U.S. pressure, saying that on Friday the U.S. imposed sanctions on seven commanders and senior members of four hard-line Iran-backed Iraqi militia groups.

Michael Knights, head of research for Horizon Engage and an adjunct fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, is quoted saying, “The U.S. is still going to feel it has the freedom of action to hit Iraqi militias,” and that this could “play out into an effort to try and guide a less militia-dominated government formation.”

The same AP reporting appears in Standard Democrat and The New Indian Express, which both repeat the Feb. 28 trigger and the sanctions framing, while Rudaw’s version characterizes the Iranian message to Kurds as a “clear message” that Kurdish officials “should not come to Tehran to complain.”

While the AP report describes Iran’s shift as granting autonomy to field commanders, it also includes a direct statement from a militia spokesperson that frames attacks as coordinated with Iran.

“BAGHDAD (AP) — Iran has granted its commanders greater autonomy overmilitias in Iraq, allowing some groups to carry out operations without Tehran’s approval, a shift driven by the pressures ofthe war, three militia members and two other officials told The Associated Press”

Standard Democrat

The Associated Press says a spokesperson for Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, among the Iran-backed militia groups that have attacked the U.S. in Iraq, told AP there was “coordination” with Iran in launching attacks but did not provide details.

The spokesperson, Mahdi al-Kaabi, is quoted saying, “Since we are allies of the Islamic Republic, we have coordination with our brothers in the Islamic Republic,” and the AP report presents this as part of how the militia justifies its relationship with Tehran.

The AP reporting also describes how U.S. strikes have targeted different layers of leadership, saying U.S. strikes largely killed mid-level commanders, according to militia officials, and that “None of the first-line leaders have been killed,” said a second militia official who was not authorized to brief reporters.

Knights is quoted again in the AP story, saying that in the recent war, key Iraqi militia leaders appeared to step back from the latest phase and didn’t appear to be directly involved in operations.

The AP report adds a specific example from Baghdad’s upscale Jadriya neighborhood, saying that in one strike three Guard advisers were killed at a house used as their headquarters during a meeting, according to the second militia official.

Rudaw’s version of the same AP reporting similarly highlights al-Kaabi’s acknowledgment of coordination and repeats Knights’ assessment that prominent faction leaders withdrew while American attacks killed mid-level leaders.

Across the different publications, the core AP narrative about Iran’s autonomy shift is consistent, but the emphasis varies, especially around the diplomatic pressure on Iraq and the implications for U.S. strategy.

The Associated Press, as republished by The New Indian Express and Standard Democrat, centers on the decentralized command structure and the Kurdish message delivered “Days into the war” after Feb. 28 strikes, while also stressing that U.S. sanctions were imposed on Friday on “seven commanders and senior members of four hard-line Iran-backed Iraqi militia groups.”

The New Indian Express

Times Now’s version adds a specific diplomatic detail not foregrounded in the AP text excerpt, saying Iraq’s ambassador to the U.S. was summoned to Washington to hear U.S. condemnation and quoting State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Bigot: “The Deputy Secretary affirmed that the United States will not tolerate any attacks targeting its interests and expects the Iraqi government to take all necessary measures immediately to dismantle Iran-aligned militia groups.”

Rudaw’s version, while also based on AP, frames the Kurdish warning as a “clear message” and repeats the line that Kurdish officials “should not come to Tehran to complain, because we cannot do anything,” and it also explicitly names the political deadlock context by saying Sudani is acting prime minister as a new government has not yet been formed due to political deadlock.

The AP and republishers emphasize Washington’s expected intensification militarily and politically, while Times Now adds the idea that the U.S. may attempt to isolate hard-line factions such as Kataib Hezbollah and Harakat al-Nujaba from those more integrated into Iraq’s political system.

Even within the AP-derived accounts, the language around the militia autonomy is repeated verbatim in multiple places, including the quote about operating “according to their own field assessments without referring back to a central command,” which appears in Associated Press, The New Indian Express, and Standard Democrat.

The result is that readers see the same underlying events—Feb. 28, the Kurdish warning, sanctions on seven commanders, and al-Kaabi’s coordination statement—while each outlet chooses different angles for what comes next.

The AP report frames the stakes as a paradox inside Iraq’s political system, where the government says it cannot control factions that are tied to political parties that brought it to power.

“BAGHDAD (AP) — Iran has increased the autonomy of its field commanders overseeing militias in Iraq, enabling some groups to conduct operations without prior approval from Tehran”

Times Now

It says the Coordination Framework, an alliance of influential pro-Iran Shiite factions, helped install Mohammed Shia al-Sudani as prime minister in 2022, and that he now serves as caretaker premier amid a prolonged political deadlock.

Times Now

The Associated Press also describes the Popular Mobilization Forces as the institutional home for the militias carrying out attacks on U.S. targets, saying they were created after the fall of Mosul in 2014 to formalize volunteer units that were critical in defeating the Islamic State.

The AP report adds that the PMF has evolved into a powerful force that surpasses the Iraqi army, with fighters receiving state salaries and access to government resources, including weapons and intelligence.

In the same AP account, Washington’s approach is described as intensifying militarily and politically even if a ceasefire agreement holds, particularly as militias gain more operational independence.

Times Now’s republished AP story similarly says U.S. officials anticipate escalation of military and political actions against these groups, and it quotes Tommy Bigot’s warning that the United States “will not tolerate any attacks targeting its interests.”

Rudaw’s version concludes by saying Washington is expected to intensify efforts to isolate hardline wings such as Kata’ib Hizballah, the Nujaba Movement, and the Sayyid al-Shuhada Brigades from the other groups involved in the Iraqi political process.