The PMF Law Putting Iraq in Washington’s Crosshairs

A political storm is brewing in Baghdad. The United States has issued a direct warning to Iraq’s leadership, urging them to reconsider new legislation that could formally expand the role of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) within the country’s security structure.

At the center of the debate are two proposed laws. The first would redefine the PMF’s role in Iraq’s defense strategy, while the second would provide retirement benefits for its fighters. Supporters say these measures would honor those who took up arms to defend Iraq from ISIS and place the PMF fully under the authority of the prime minister. Critics, however, believe the laws would solidify Iran’s influence in Iraq’s political and military landscape.

The PMF was born out of crisis in 2014, when ISIS swept across large parts of Iraq. It quickly became a key player in the fight against the terror group. In 2016, the PMF was officially incorporated into Iraq’s armed forces. But many of its factions have continued to operate with considerable independence—some maintaining strong ties to Tehran. Groups like Kata’ib Hezbollah and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, both considered terrorist organizations by Washington, remain influential within the PMF’s ranks.

U.S. chargé d’affaires Steven Fagin raised the issue directly with Iraq’s First Deputy Speaker Mohsin al-Mandalawi on August 2. His message was clear: these laws could undermine Iraq’s sovereignty and give armed factions even more political and military clout. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the warning, telling Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani that the legislation risks “institutionalizing Iranian influence.”

Not everyone in Iraq’s parliament is on board. Kurdish and Sunni lawmakers walked out of a recent session in protest, claiming the bill had been added to the agenda without proper discussion or agreement. Despite this, the proposals have already passed a second reading, and supporters are pushing hard for a final vote.

For many Iraqis, the debate cuts to the core of the country’s future. Should the PMF be fully recognized and funded as a permanent pillar of national defense? Or would that come at the cost of Iraq’s independence and its ability to balance foreign influence?

The final vote has yet to be scheduled, but one thing is certain: the decision will carry consequences not only for Iraq’s security, but for its fragile relationship with both Washington and Tehran.