Hamid Khoshayand – Regional Affairs Expert

The Popular Mobilization Forces were the “main and central” force in the fight against ISIS in the country, saving the Iraqi government from inevitable collapse. Without the Popular Mobilization Forces, the destruction of ISIS in Iraq would have been impossible and, in the most optimistic case, a challenging, lengthy, and costly process.

In a situation where ISIS occupied almost half of Iraq, the formation of the Popular Mobilization Forces, which has a “popular origin,” filled an important military and security “vacuum” in Iraq that was caused by the inefficiency of the military and security structures in the post-Saddam era and was designed by foreign actors, including the United States. As a result, the most important weakness of Iraqi society, which was the lack of morale and resolve to confront ISIS terrorists, was eliminated.

Contrary to the psychological and media creations of the United States and its regional and international partners, which are trying to present a “sectarian” and “inverted” image of the Popular Mobilization Forces in order to “weaken” and “threaten” its position and status, the Popular Mobilization Forces are a “great capacity” and a “valuable asset for ensuring the security and stability of Iraq.”

This popular organization, which has a successful experience in fighting ISIS and Takfiri terrorism in Iraq and has a brilliant and outstanding performance in defending security, national interests, territorial integrity, and holy places, is the embodiment and, in fact, the main founder of a category called “people-based security” in Iraq. This has created important achievements in the field of protecting Iraq from internal and external threats in recent years by reducing Iraq’s military and security costs.

The role of the Popular Mobilization Forces in maintaining Iraq’s “existence” and “independence” is effective and fundamental. Maintaining territorial integrity is the foundation of a country’s independence. Within three days, ISIS was able to occupy 108,000 square kilometers, equivalent to 40 percent of Iraq’s territory, including the six provinces of Nineveh, Salahuddin, Anbar, part of Diyala province, and part of Kirkuk and the outskirts of Baghdad, and reach behind the walls of Baghdad.

In a situation where a significant part of a country’s territory is occupied by the world’s most feared terrorist group, the preservation of that country’s independence, territorial integrity, and even political existence are severely questioned.

In such a situation, the Popular Mobilization Forces were able to restore Iraq’s independence and territorial integrity by defeating ISIS and liberating the occupied areas. At the same time, the Popular Mobilization Forces are considered a strong barrier against the “violation of Iraq’s independence” by the United States, which has been pursued since the 1990s.

In the context of “countering US strategies and policies” in Iraq and expanding the US presence and influence in this country, the Popular Mobilization Forces have also been an important obstacle and deterrent. Major General Yahya Rasoul, a veteran army commander and military spokesman for the Commander-in-Chief of the Iraqi Armed Forces, who is present in all military negotiations between the United States and Iraq and has good relations with Washington, especially the Pentagon, admitted in an interview that among the four Iraqi armed forces, the only combat organization that is independently a “barrier to US influence” is the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF).

In recent weeks, the PMF has once again been the focus of attention in political circles and US and Israeli psychological operations, and various speculations have been raised about US efforts to disband or limit its power in Iraq.

Regarding the existing speculations, there are two points worth considering that should be taken into account in analyzing this issue:

First, the disbandment of the PMF and other resistance groups is among the “permanent desires and wishes” of the US government, the Israeli regime, and other Western governments, and it is not a new issue. The important thing here is “vigilance” and “resistance” to such pressures, which fortunately can be seen at various levels in Iraq. So far, neither the authority nor the Iraqi government nor the political currents have succumbed to American pressure on the Popular Mobilization Forces.

Two: What has been proposed by the United States in recent weeks is, in fact, part of a “psychological operation” against the Iraqi resistance. Apparently, the United States and the Israeli regime, with their success in overthrowing the Bashar al-Assad government in Syria, have concluded that with the techniques of “psychological and perceptual warfare” in Iraq, they can also achieve field successes similar to what they gained in Syria while weakening the position and standing of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces; unaware that the Iraqi society is different from the Syrian society in every respect, especially in terms of strong resistance motives and the existence of a religious context and anti-American and anti-Zionist approaches.

In any case, what is clear is that since the formation of the Popular Mobilization Forces, the US government has always been dissatisfied with them and their activities, which in some way hinder the advancement of the White House’s goals and strategies in Iraq. Thus, the government has sought to dismantle them through various security and political mechanisms.

This is while the Popular Mobilization Forces’ role in recent years in the Iraqi political scene has become completely “institutionalized,” and there is no possibility of “eliminating” or “limiting its power.”