Why Iraq Wants All Weapons Under State Control

Iraq may be entering one of the most dangerous — and potentially historic — turning points since the defeat of داعش (ISIS).

Behind the scenes, negotiations are reportedly taking place between Iraq’s political leadership, powerful armed factions, and international stakeholders over a question that has haunted the country for years:

Who truly controls the weapons inside Iraq?

According to reports from Shafaq News, several Iraqi armed groups that once completely rejected disarmament are now showing “flexibility” about handing over weapons to the Iraqi state. Government sources say a phased process could begin after Eid Al-Adha and after the completion of Iraq’s cabinet formation. (Shafaq News)

If implemented, this would represent one of the biggest structural changes in Iraq’s post-2003 history.

For more than two decades, Iraq has operated with overlapping centers of military power. Following the fall of Saddam Hussein and later the rise of ISIS in 2014, dozens of armed factions emerged. Some groups became heroes during the war against ISIS and were eventually incorporated into the Popular Mobilization Forces, or PMF. But even after becoming officially connected to the Iraqi state, many factions maintained separate command structures, independent influence networks, and their own weapons systems. (Foreign Policy Research Institute)

Now Iraq’s leadership appears determined to move toward something many governments have demanded for years: one state, one military structure, and one monopoly on force.

Prime Minister-designate Ali Al-Zaidi has reportedly made state control of weapons a centerpiece of his political platform. His proposed government agenda emphasizes placing all weapons exclusively under state authority while strengthening Iraq’s security institutions. (دايلي بيروت - Daily Beirut)

According to multiple regional reports, Iraqi officials are discussing several options. Some factions could transform fully into political organizations. Others may be absorbed into official Iraqi security institutions or integrated deeper into the PMF under centralized government supervision. A special committee involving senior Iraqi political and military figures is reportedly examining how to register weapons, reorganize armed groups, and transfer control to the state. (Shafaq News)

But beneath the public statements lies an extremely fragile reality.

Not all factions agree.

Some powerful Iran-aligned groups continue to reject disarmament entirely. Leaders associated with Harakat Al-Nujaba and other factions have publicly declared their weapons a “red line,” arguing that Iraq still faces external threats and foreign military influence. Several groups insist there can be no discussion about surrendering weapons while foreign troops remain inside Iraq. (Arab News)

At the same time, the United States and several Western governments are increasing pressure on Baghdad to bring all armed groups fully under state control. Washington has repeatedly warned that Iraq’s long-term stability, financial relationships, and international partnerships depend on reducing the power of armed groups operating outside formal military command. (Shafaq News)

The urgency surrounding the issue intensified after recent regional conflicts exposed how vulnerable Iraq remains to becoming a battlefield for outside powers. Reuters recently reported that Gulf tensions escalated so severely that Saudi Arabia allegedly carried out strikes against militia targets inside Iraq during the regional conflict involving Iran. The report highlighted growing Gulf frustration over armed groups operating with significant independence inside Iraq. (Reuters)

This is why many analysts believe the current negotiations are not simply about weapons. They are about Iraq’s future identity as a sovereign nation.

If Iraq successfully centralizes military authority, the country could dramatically improve investor confidence, expand foreign partnerships, strengthen banking reforms, and accelerate massive infrastructure projects like the Development Road Project and the Grand Faw Port initiative. Political stability could also improve Iraq’s ability to attract international capital from Europe, the Gulf States, and Asia.

But failure could create even deeper divisions between political factions, increase tensions with regional powers, and further complicate Iraq’s relationship with both Washington and Tehran. Some experts warn that partial disarmament without genuine integration could leave Iraq trapped between competing centers of power rather than solving the problem entirely. (Arab News)

Even Iraq’s influential Shiite cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr recently called for all armed factions — including his own movement — to eventually come under state authority if other groups do the same. That statement alone signaled how seriously the debate has evolved inside Iraq’s political system. (Shafaq News)

For years, many Iraqis believed this moment would never come.

Now, for the first time in a long time, conversations that once seemed politically impossible are openly taking place behind closed doors in Baghdad.

And whether these negotiations succeed or fail may determine not only Iraq’s security future — but also its economic future, foreign investment opportunities, and role in the rapidly changing Middle East.