The controversy behind Iraq’s concerns over Gideon Sa’ar’s UNSC letter
Though overshadowed by the announcement of a truce in Lebanon, a string of rather ridiculous incidents involving Iraq throughout the last week provide hints about the fundamental dynamics of Israel’s regional conflict with Iran and its supporters. Despite their humorous nature, these incidents highlighted the Iran-led regional project’s advantages as well as its stark shortcomings. The operations of pro-Iranian militias in Iraq, whose land is being exploited to threaten Israel, prompted Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar to write to the president of the UN Security Council on November 18 and demand immediate action. Sa’ar urged the Iraqi government to “avoid the use of its territory as a base for attacks against other nations,” warning that Israel had the UN Charter’s right to self-defense.
Context of Gideon Sa’ar’s UNSC letter
The message sparked an unexpected surge of anxiety in Iraq about the potential for an impending Israeli strike. In response to Sa’ar’s letter, the Iraqi government issued a message to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the Arab League, and the UNSC through its Foreign Ministry. In a letter, the Iraqi government referred to Iraq as “the cornerstone of stability in the region and world,” a description that is somewhat at odds with actual events.
“The Zionist entity’s letter to the Security Council is part of a systematic policy aimed at creating claims and excuses in an attempt to expand the conflict in the region,”
the statement said. The letter also mentioned that Iraq had been eager to show “restraint” when it came to attacking a neighbor using its airspace. In the Saudi publication Sharq al Aawsat, published in London, the letter was accompanied by swift adjustments to Shi’ite forces’ ground deployments in preparation for an anticipated Israeli strike. The militias had congregated in the Sinjar region of central Iraq, which is a crucial route for Iran’s armaments supply line to its ally militias in Syria and Lebanon, according to Ghazi Faisal, a former Iraqi diplomat who spoke to the publication.
Iraq’s diplomatic response to the letter
The Arab League then released a statement denouncing Israel’s purportedly impending plot to invade Iraq, maybe in an attempt to counter the widespread perception that it is irrelevant. It denounced Israel’s intention to “expand its aggressive practices in the region, including Iraq,” during an emergency meeting on Sunday. The “danger of an all-out Israeli escalation that risks sparking a broad regional war that threatens security and stability in the region” was highlighted in the Arab League’s emergency resolution. The Middle East Monitor website, which is sponsored by Qatar, was soberly informed by Qatari Ambassador to Egypt Tariq al-Ansari that “the resolution was adopted unanimously, with the backing of all Arab delegations, to show support for Iraq.”
Key issues raising Iraq’s concerns
You could think it’s all for naught. Nevertheless, a significant change in the dynamics surrounding Shi’ite militia attacks on Israel coincided with the rush of letters and counterletters. According to Washington Institute for Near East Policy research published on November 26, there has been a dramatic drop in Iraqi Shi’ite militia activity in the last week, followed by a slower drop in the preceding month. According to the Washington Institute analysis, the number of alleged attacks by Iraqi Shi’ite militias on Israel peaked at 41 during the week of October 29–November 4, 2024. Following that, they fell to around 30 the following week, to about 20 the week after, and then to six reported assaults in the week after November 18.
Historical tensions between Israel and Iraq
According to the report, “the Iraqi muqawama are terrified, as they should be, of Israel turning its intelligence gaze upon them in the same way it has focused on Palestinian groups and Lebanese Hezbollah.” This is the honest explanation for the drop in Iraqi assaults. In a message posted on its Telegram channel, Kaf, Ktaeb Hezbollah commander Ahmed al-Hamidawi seemed to implicitly accept his movement’s submission to Lebanese Hezbollah’s right to reach a separate truce with Israel (as eventually took place), according to the think-tank research. Hamidawi asserts that “our brothers in Hezbollah have the final say because they are more conscious of their immediate and long-term interests.” What lessons can be drawn from the Iraqi system’s somewhat frantic reaction to a single letter from Israel’s foreign minister? First of all, staff members of Israel’s relatively marginalized, underfunded, and impotent Foreign Ministry could find solace in the knowledge that at least one person seems to be taking their boss’s statements seriously.
