An Iraqi MP filed an appeal before the Federal Supreme Court against the creation of positions for deputy prime ministers and three new ministries, amid political objections to the distribution of government positions among major political parties and forces according to the quota system.
Representative Muhammad Jassim Al-Khafaji announced the filing of the appeal before the court, the highest judicial authority in the country, in objection to the vote on appointing 3 deputy prime ministers and creating 3 new ministries in the Iraqi government.
Al-Khafaji said, in a post on Facebook, that the appeal list is based on violating the provisions of the constitution, especially Article 139, included in the transitional provisions, which “stipulates that the Prime Minister shall have two deputies, and only in the first parliamentary session.”
As the new ministers began their duties, objections escalated in Iraqi political circles. The Iraqi Communist Party called on the national and democratic political forces, popular forces, trade unions, federations and protest movements to unite ranks and build the broadest peaceful popular movement against the monopoly of power by ethnic and sectarian quota forces.
The party said, in a statement, that “after more than 5 months of obstruction and struggle over shares and positions, the quota forces returned to sharing power again, and for that reason took over new sovereign positions and new ministries, as if the devastation, corruption, poverty, and deterioration in services they caused to the country were not enough.”
In the same context, the imam and Friday preacher of Najaf, Sadr al-Din al-Qabbanji, criticized the creation of 3 additional ministries and 3 positions for deputy prime ministers, noting that “the religious authority has previously confirmed more than once not to waste public money.”
The Iraqi parliament voted by an absolute majority on the government formation, amid severe crises facing the country due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and the government’s inability to secure monthly salaries on their scheduled dates.
The vote met the demands of the political forces representing the major components, Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish, in exchange for continuing to ignore the rights of the components and small minorities or confiscating their representation, by absorbing some of their parties and presenting them as representatives of this or that component. This led to the outbreak of sharp disagreements within some of these components, in light of what is described as a “divide and rule” policy towards them.
In this context, the head of the Soyana Christian parliamentary bloc, Keldo Ramzi, demanded the right of his bloc to represent Christians within the current government through its candidate, considering that the candidate of the “Babylon” bloc, despite being also Christian, belongs to a non-independent bloc affiliated with a Shiite party.
Ramzi said, in a press statement: “We have exposed those who are trying to pass their candidate under the pretext that he is independent, and we will not accept any candidate who is supported and affiliated with the (Babylon) bloc, or the party that lost the majority of Christian seats.”
He added: “This is our right and we insist on it, and we will not accept that another personality be imposed on us and on the will of this people and the choice of the people, by the group that lost the majority of seats to the Christian component.”
After 6 parliamentary elections, the Iraqi political forces were unable to move to an alternative system of quotas. The only attempt in this direction was the one led by the leader of the Sadrist movement after the 2021 elections, in alliance with the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the “Taqaddum” Party led by Muhammad al-Halbousi.
The Iraqi components that do not have sufficient electoral weight to compete with the major powers for sovereign positions remain the most affected by the continuation of this system.
Former MP Sajjad Salem told Asharq Al-Awsat, “Minorities themselves, or what the political system calls components, have no weight except through their alliances with Shiite political Islam. Minorities have realized this path for years, and are moving towards establishing their presence in state institutions through two paths: either a direct understanding with the Iranian side to exercise its influence on Shiite political Islam and ensure their presence in forming the government, or searching for a sponsor and mantle within Shiite political Islam.
Salem added, “The Turkmen received a ministry after a long absence, as a result of procedures that extended for a long period that guaranteed the satisfaction and acceptance of Shiite political Islam, while Christians and Yazidis were excluded, as a result of the belief of the forces of Shiite political Islam that their political representation falls under the influence of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, or that their current political representatives have not yet normalized their relations with the regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in a way that guarantees their presence in the current government.”
For his part, the former representative of the Christian component, Joseph Saliwa, told Asharq Al-Awsat, “What happened in the last voting session, especially with regard to the Ministry of Immigration allocated to Chaldean-Assyrian Christians, is the result of loopholes in the election law, and part of the conflict between the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the (Babylon) movement supported by the Shiite authority.”
Saliwa added, “Both parties do not represent Assyrian Christians, but rather it is related to partisan disputes in which these blocs took advantage of the (quota) seats in the recent elections.”
The former representative of the Turkmen Front, Hassan Turan, told Asharq Al-Awsat, “The term minorities is unconstitutional, and has been used by the large political blocs to undermine the rights of other Iraqi components. This is what we have seen in our political experience. Representation was limited to the large components, which are Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds.”
Turan added, "The political blocs objected to the Iraqi confederation project proposed by former US President Joe Biden, but they implemented it practically on the ground."
Turan said: “I am surprised that the quotas went beyond even the large sects, and reached within the party, the sect, and the region itself, and this is what we saw in the failure to vote on the ministry designated for Christians.”
For his part, researcher and academic Fares Haram, in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, believes that “the behavior of political forces is not based on the foundations of the state, but rather on mutual loyalties and interests. The most prominent evidence is that if these forces were based on the concept of the state, then objections to the rights of representation of religious minorities in Iraq would not have arisen in the first place.
Haram added, “The impression left by the political forces in Iraqi society is that governance is a monopoly and a spoils, and not a responsibility or service to the country,” indicating that “the root of the problem is how any government absorbs the idea of citizenship, instead of working to consolidate constituent representation.”
Haram continued, "The way in which some figures were appointed who are relatives of political leaders shows the extent to which the sterile approach has penetrated the state administration, and it is a clear continuation of the approach followed by the previous regime."
The Palestinian Fatah movement said on Sunday that the Cairo consultations pave the way for launching a comprehensive national dialogue by reaching understandings with the Hamas movement and the rest of the factions, as part of efforts led by Egypt to end the division and unify the Palestinian political position, according to officials in the movement.
Munther Al-Hayek, spokesman for the Fatah movement and member of the Revolutionary Council, said during radio statements that the meetings conducted by the movement’s leadership with Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and representatives of the reform movement come within preliminary consultations aimed at preparing the atmosphere for dialogue with the participation of the Palestinian factions.
Al-Hayek explained that the Fatah delegation presented to Hamas the initiative of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, which calls for ending the division and activating a central government that represents the Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Jerusalem, in addition to commitment to the program of the Palestine Liberation Organization, international legitimacy and international law, and the adoption of peaceful popular resistance.
Al-Hayek added that the initiative aims to unify the Palestinian position and present a common political vision to the international community, in light of the developments in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. He pointed out that Hamas was responsive to some of the proposals, but requested to return to its leadership and political office to discuss the rest of the items.
Al-Hayek stressed that the details of the points that are still under discussion will not be announced at the present time to avoid causing disagreements in the media, stressing that the preliminary meetings do not represent an alternative to the comprehensive national dialogue, but rather aim to create the conditions for its holding.
For his part, Jibril Rajoub, Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee, said that Egypt intends to send invitations to the Palestinian factions to participate in a national dialogue conference to be held in Cairo during the coming period, without setting a final date for it, according to what the German News Agency reported.
Rajoub stated that the Fatah delegation held meetings in Cairo with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Popular and Democratic Fronts, in addition to representatives of the Democratic Reform Movement, to discuss ways to strengthen political partnership and mechanisms for ending the division.
Rajoub explained that the consultations dealt with the Palestinian political program, forms of national action, and the future of the political system, in addition to the mechanisms for holding legislative and presidential elections and the Palestinian National Council elections. He said that the meetings were characterized by a positive atmosphere, with continued discussion on issues that require consensus between the parties.
Regarding the elections, Rajoub stated that Fatah was preparing to run in the elections, but chose to give priority to the national dialogue in light of the existing obstacles and demands to hold consultations between the factions, stressing that the movement seeks to create conditions for holding the elections as soon as possible with national consensus.
Rajoub stressed that renewing the Palestinian political system requires consensus on the foundations of national partnership, unity of institutions and political representation, considering that addressing the division is not limited to holding meetings, but rather requires reaching implementable understandings.
Regarding the file of internal disputes in Fatah, Al-Hayek said that the movement is conducting contacts to address the dispute with the Democratic Reform Movement, which he described as part of the movement and not an independent faction. He explained that the discussions include the return of members of the movement to the ranks of the movement, while the mechanisms for return and restoration of organizational and functional positions are still under discussion.
Hayek added that dealing with this file requires taking into account the internal regulations and organizational entitlements that the movement has witnessed over the past years, noting that some proposals are still under consultation within the Fatah leadership.
These moves come in light of the continuing Palestinian division between the Fatah and Hamas movements since 2007, amid repeated Egyptian-sponsored efforts to reach national reconciliation and unify Palestinian institutions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Questions are increasing in Lebanon about whether Hezbollah is heading toward internal escalation, in light of the regional transformations and pressures facing Iran. Between the field movements of the “party” supporters, in Beirut and its southern suburbs, and the positions that raise the level of confrontation with the authority, question marks arise as to whether the “party” seeks to establish an equation that prevents the authority from imposing its decisions, or paves the way for escalatory steps at home that keep pace with regional transformations.
In this context, ministerial sources confirm to Asharq Al-Awsat that “the fear of any internal escalation that Hezbollah may resort to exists, but there is no data indicating an imminent matter in this context,” stressing that the security services will continue to perform their role in implementing the government’s decisions, and that “there will be no retreat from this path.”
The sources place Hezbollah's escalatory positions, especially regarding the recently seized shipment of explosives, in the context of the reaction to the measures taken, stressing that these positions will not affect the government's decisions or judicial decisions, and that "there is no direction to withdraw them or to make any concessions to (Hezbollah)."
The sources indicate that a security meeting for the leaders of the security services will be held on Monday afternoon at the Presidential Palace, headed by the President of the Republic, Joseph Aoun. To discuss the latest security developments, most notably the explosive shipments that were recently seized.
On the other hand, officials in the Lebanese state emphasize moving forward in implementing the government’s decisions, and in this context came the position of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Youssef Raji, stressing the state’s adherence to its decisions, during his participation in the 52nd session of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Iraq.
He said that the government took a decision in August 2025 to limit weapons to the legitimate security services and extend state authority over the entire Lebanese territory by its own forces, stressing that “there is no sovereignty with dual weapons, and no stability with an unruly decision outside state institutions.”
While several parties in Lebanon have warned of an internal escalation that Hezbollah may undertake in the next stage, MP Ibrahim Mneimneh believes that the recent movements of Hezbollah supporters may be in preparation for something waiting for a certain moment, considering that they “suggest an attempt by (the party) to restore the situation that existed before the government’s decisions regarding arms exclusivity, and to show that these decisions are (ink on paper) and that they have no real effects.”
Mneimneh does not rule out that these moves are linked to regional calculations or an Iranian move in light of the new equation that is being drawn up in the region.
In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Mneimneh stressed that “the basic issue lies in the state’s position and how it deals with any possible move,” warning that “the continued absence of a serious approach to weapons outside the framework of legitimate institutions will keep Lebanon hostage to this reality.”
Mneimneh calls on the state to “resolve its position and begin implementing its decisions, especially the decision (Beirut is free of weapons),” considering that it is “an essential gateway to restoring the state’s prestige and authority, especially in the capital.” He stresses that the real test remains “how legitimacy deals with any challenge to its decisions, and its ability to move from declared positions to actual implementation.”
In turn, MP Antoine Habashi, a member of the Lebanese Forces bloc, believed that Hezbollah’s threat of internal confrontation and intimidation from the civil war aims to buy time, noting that “any internal fighting at this stage will be tantamount to killing it.”
He stressed “the necessity of implementing decisions without any ambiguity,” stressing that “protecting Lebanon from civil war requires the state to fully restore its sovereign decision and confine weapons to its own hands.”
On the ground, the Lebanese Army has been continuing its security measures for days and its deployment in Beirut in general and the southern suburb and its entrances in particular, anticipating any new movements that the “party” supporters may carry out, especially since investigations into the shipment of explosives that were seized in Dahr al-Baydar, and in the warehouse of spoiled medicines, are still ongoing.
On Friday evening, young men on motorcycles attempted to intercept an Internal Security Forces patrol during a raid on a pharmaceutical warehouse at the entrance to the southern suburb, before the army intervened and the patrol was able to seal the warehouse with red wax.
Although Hezbollah denied its relationship with the warehouse, some information indicates that the son of the party’s Secretary-General, Naeem Qassem, is a partner in the warehouse that contains spoiled medicines. This was confirmed by Representative Paula Yacoubian in an interview on Al-Jadeed TV on Sunday, noting that the second partner is the candidate of the “Shiite duo” for the Pharmacists Syndicate in Lebanon.
Later, Naeem Qassem’s son denied his relationship with the pharmaceutical warehouse, and said in a statement: “This file has become the custody of the competent security and judicial agencies, and the parties concerned with it are authorized to reveal the facts and determine responsibilities.”
The "party" objected to the raid, warning that the security forces would carry out operations in sensitive areas without adopting the "agreed upon mechanism" with the security authorities, in reference to what the situation was like before the recent government decisions related to its weapons.
This was preceded by the “party” announcing its ownership of a truck and the shipment of explosives that the authorities seized at the Dahr al-Baydar checkpoint, which was loaded with about 780 kilograms of explosives, and demanded the release of those arrested and the return of the truck and its cargo, while MP Hassan Fadlallah had said that “(the party) will not tolerate any targeting that implements American demands,” before he placed responsibility on Sunday on the state, asking the authority: “Why are you taking the country? Based on American pressure, into an internal confrontation? Who benefits from it? Will it benefit it and benefit the covenant and the government? Will it benefit her from straining the country and provoking people in this way? Why is there an insistence on providing reasons for internal confrontation?
