Efforts to pass new amendments to Iraq's Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) Authority Law have stalled due to deep political divisions and explicit opposition from the United States, raising expectations that the legislation will be postponed until the next parliamentary term.
The revised law, initially slated for a vote during the current legislative cycle, will be delayed amid unresolved disagreements within the Shia bloc over the force's future role and command structure.
The current draft seeks to formally integrate the PMF into Iraq's armed forces under a hierarchical military leadership, according to local reports, but influential factions within the PMF oppose this model.
Without political consensus, the law is likely to be deferred or negotiated through political trade-offs in the future.
The delay follows recent remarks by Parliamentary Speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, who confirmed that the United States has clearly expressed its rejection of the bill in its present form.
Political sources said that Washington is applying diplomatic pressure to block the legislation, fearing it would solidify the PMF's autonomy from the Iraqi army and confer legal legitimacy on factions the US designates as terrorist groups.
This aligns with a statement released by the US State Department following a recent phone call between Secretary Marco Rubio and Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani.
In the statement, Washington voiced "serious concern" about the draft law, warning that such legislation would "entrench Iranian influence and armed militias, undermining Iraq's sovereignty."
The controversy unfolds nearly nine years after Iraq's parliament first passed the original PMF law in November 2016 in response to the Islamic State's (IS) takeover of Mosul and large swaths of the country.
That law, however, lacked structural detail, prompting some political factions to push for a comprehensive overhaul defining the PMF's place within Iraq's security apparatus.
The PMF was established in mid-2014 by government decree following a fatwa by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani urging volunteers to defend Iraq. Thousands of fighters from pre-existing Shia armed groups joined under the PMF umbrella.
The current debate over the amendments comes as the Iraqi parliament struggles to maintain quorum, with a significant number of lawmakers skipping recent sessions to prevent the bill's advancement.
The catalyst: A deadly confrontation
The crisis reached a boiling point on 27 July when Kataib Hezbollah, one of Iraq's most prominent Iranian-backed militias operating under the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) umbrella, stormed the Agriculture Ministry in Baghdad following the dismissal of a director with ties to the group.
The violent confrontation resulted in the deaths of a civilian and an internal security officer, marking a dangerous escalation between the government and militia forces.
The incident crystallised the broader struggle over militia autonomy when government spokesman Sabah al-Numan formally accused PMF units 45 and 46, both linked to Kataib Hezbollah, of acting without official authorisation and using weapons against state security personnel.
This direct confrontation between government forces and Iran-aligned militias represents the most significant internal challenge to Iraqi state authority since the defeat of IS.
Kataib Hezbollah's response was swift and defiant. The group rejected the government's investigation results, describing them as "fabricated and exaggerated," while calling for the formation of a "neutral committee" to review the incident.
More provocatively, the militia reiterated its demand for the complete withdrawal of American forces from Iraq by the end of September, threatening continued resistance "regardless of the cost and sacrifices".
The legislative battle: PMF restructuring law
The controversial Popular Mobilisation Forces restructuring law has become a litmus test for Iraq's political direction, according to experts.
The legislation, currently stalled in parliament after its second reading in July, would grant the PMF greater autonomy and resources - a move strongly supported by Iran but vehemently opposed by the United States.
The timing of the militia confrontation with the government coincided suspiciously with intense American diplomatic pressure to prevent the law's passage.
State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce warned that enacting the legislation would "change the nature of bilateral security partnership with Baghdad," while her colleague Michael Mitchell suggested economic sanctions could follow if Iraq proceeds with the law.
Former Deputy Prime Minister Baha al-Araji defended the legislation, arguing it was designed to ensure PMF loyalty to the state rather than to political parties or factional leaders.
The law, he claimed, includes organisational structures that would establish independent leadership after elections, aimed at preventing political exploitation of militia forces.
However, the government's position appears increasingly aligned with American concerns. Political analyst Ayed al-Hilali, close to the prime minister's office, suggested to The New Arab that the law may pass only after significant modifications and delays - effectively neutering its original intent to empower the militias.
"This law may pass, but only after amendments and regulations that could lead to a delay in its approval."
Al-Hilali believes that this move serves as an "alternative solution to legislation that might grant legitimacy without oversight," among other options still being discussed within government corridors.
The most prominent of these is "reintegrating the brigades into state institutions while providing incentives and rehabilitation for Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) members".
The government's steps in this regard, to eliminate the PMF restructuring law and ease American pressure, have been justified as falling "within the framework of commitment to the structures of a modern state," as he puts it.
Iranian strategic calculations
Iran's rejection of any possible disarmament initiatives in both Iraq and Lebanon reflects a broader regional strategy to maintain proxy forces as deterrents against Israeli and American military action.
The recent visit by Iranian Supreme Leader advisor Ali Larijani to Baghdad reportedly focused on pressuring Iraqi Shia forces to advance the PMF law, demonstrating Tehran's direct involvement in Iraqi legislative affairs.
Former Iraqi diplomat Ghazi Faisal characterises Iran's position as fundamentally strategic, adding to The New Arab that maintaining armed proxies serves multiple purposes: regional deterrence, leverage against American forces, and insurance against future threats to Iranian interests.
The Islamic Republic's investment in Iraqi militias represents decades of relationship-building that cannot be easily abandoned.
Ali Akbar Velayati, another Iranian advisor, explicitly stated that Iran and Iraq would jointly resist any attempts to disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon or the PMF in Iraq, revealing the interconnected nature of Iran's regional proxy strategy.
This coordination suggests that the Iraqi militia question cannot be resolved in isolation from broader Middle Eastern dynamics.
The Shia political fracture
The crisis has exposed significant divisions within Iraq's Shia political establishment. While the Coordination Framework, the dominant Shia alliance, initially supported the PMF law, internal disagreements have emerged as American pressure intensifies.
A political source close to the Coordination Framework revealed that several factions were determined to pass the law quickly.
"Many of these forces were determined to pass the law as quickly as possible, as they see the current parliament as a historic opportunity that will not be repeated to enact it, given that the Shia lawmakers affiliated with the Framework and their allies can form a majority of half plus one - the number required to pass such laws," the source told The New Arab.
He added that the “influential blocs within the Coordination Framework are apprehensive about the next parliament amid regional and international changes and are concerned about its outcomes, as they may not achieve the same number of seats they secured in the current parliament after the withdrawal of the Sadrist movement, which holds 72 seats".
The path forward: Limited options
Iraq's options for resolving this crisis remain constrained by competing pressures and limited state capacity. The government faces three primary paths: full confrontation with the militias, risking civil conflict, complete accommodation, potentially triggering international sanctions, or a precarious middle course that satisfies neither side completely.
Parliamentary dysfunction has effectively shelved the PMF law as opposition groups deliberately break quorum to prevent voting, while the government explores alternative solutions, including militia integration into regular security forces with retraining and incentives for individual fighters.
The stakes extend beyond immediate political considerations to Iraq's long-term viability as a sovereign state. The country's ability to assert control over armed groups operating within its territory will determine whether Iraq can achieve genuine independence or remain perpetually caught between competing regional powers, with its citizens paying the price for this geopolitical tug-of-war.
As tensions continue to escalate, Iraq's Shia militia dilemma represents a microcosm of broader Middle Eastern instability, where state sovereignty repeatedly clashes with proxy warfare, sectarian loyalties, and great power competition.
The resolution of this crisis will likely shape Iraq's trajectory for years to come, determining whether the country can finally emerge from the shadow of foreign influence to chart its own course.
This story was published in collaboration with Egab