Iraq’s foreign minister says outside parties are using Iraqi soil to attack its neighbours

What did Iraq’s foreign minister actually say on Saturday?

On Saturday 7 November, Iraq’s Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein told Al Jazeera that Baghdad holds evidence that outside parties have been using Iraqi territory to launch attacks against neighbouring countries, and that an investigation into strikes on Gulf states launched from Iraqi soil is already under way. The interview, published on Saturday afternoon as an exclusive for the channel, landed in the middle of a war that has already cost Iraq dearly: the United States launched its war on Iran in February, the Strait of Hormuz has been closed and reopened in turns, and on Saturday itself an oil tanker was reported on fire in the eastern strait after hitting a mine, while American strikes continued on the Iranian island of Qeshm. Hussein used the interview to draw a line around his country, warning of the potential for a renewed war in the region while insisting that Baghdad wants its disagreements with Saudi Arabia settled through dialogue rather than escalation.

What exactly did Hussein put on the record?

The minister confirmed that Baghdad is investigating attacks launched from Iraqi territory against Gulf states, and he tied the inquiry to the search for a settlement with Riyadh. Saudi Arabia has accused Iran-aligned groups in Iraq of attacking its oil infrastructure, and in September Baghdad itself confirmed that drone attacks on the kingdom’s East-West pipeline originated from Iraqi territory. Hussein also said Baghdad is negotiating with Iran-aligned armed factions to bring their weapons under state control through dialogue rather than force, with Baghdad in contact with Tehran about the weapons held by Iraqi factions. Washington, he added, has formally asked Iraq to close all but two of its border crossings with Iran, a demand that turns the frontier into the sharpest edge of the story, since Iraq has already closed the Sheeb crossing with Iran once this year. On the economy, Hussein put the cost of the war at about $60bn in lost oil revenue since exports through the Strait of Hormuz were suspended, while adding that shipments have resumed after understandings with Washington and Tehran; about 90 percent of Iraq’s oil exports normally pass through the strait, and oil funds about 90 percent of the federal budget. On security, he said Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Türkiye have formed a committee to fight the presence of ISIL in Syria, where affiliated groups are positioned on the Syrian side of the border with Iraq.

The interview did not arrive in isolation. On Thursday, Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi told US President Donald Trump by telephone that Iraqi territory will not be used to launch attacks against neighbouring countries, and on the same day Hussein told Dijlah TV that renewed American strikes on Iran are not a secret, warning Iraqi armed groups against joining any Iranian retaliation. Pushing Iraqi society into the war would lead to a disaster, he said, because neither Iraqi society nor the armed forces are prepared for war. The full Al Jazeera interview is due to air at 18:00 GMT on Sunday.

Which questions did the interview leave unanswered?

Hussein did not name the external parties he accused of using Iraqi soil, and he did not describe the evidence Baghdad says it holds, so the central claim remains an assertion from a minister rather than a documented case the public can examine. It is also unclear whether Riyadh will accept dialogue as the answer, since the kingdom blames Iran-aligned groups in Iraq and has not yet responded publicly. The disarmament track is equally open: Hussein insists the factions’ weapons must come under state control through dialogue, yet three of the largest groups, Kata’ib Hezbollah, Harakat al-Nujaba and Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada, have refused to disarm under the prime minister’s plan, which sets 30 June 2027 as the deadline, and nothing in the interview showed that refusal softening. Nor is it known whether Baghdad will carry out Washington’s request to close all but two border crossings with Iran, what the two crossings kept open would be, or how the closure would affect trade and the communities that live from it. And the full interview, airing on Sunday evening, may add detail that Saturday’s published excerpts do not contain, so the record is still incomplete.

Why does one minister’s warning carry the weight of a whole region?

Iraq sits between the two sides of a war it did not choose, and Hussein’s interview is the clearest statement yet of how narrow the ground under Baghdad’s feet has become. The country has lost about $60bn because the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway that carries about 90 percent of its oil exports, was shut during the fighting, and oil pays for about 90 percent of the federal budget, so every week of war is a week in which the state’s finances bleed. At the same time, attacks launched from Iraqi soil have turned sovereignty from a slogan into a test: if Baghdad cannot stop its soil being used to strike Saudi Arabia, Riyadh will hold it responsible, and force against the factions risks a confrontation at home it has spent years avoiding. The interview therefore matters because it shows a government trying to hold three relationships at once, with Washington, which wants the border sealed and the factions disarmed; with Tehran, which wants friendship without interference; and with Riyadh, which wants the attacks to stop, while warning openly that a renewed war would be a disaster for a country that is not prepared for one.

How does Baghdad keep its balance when both sides pull at it?

The interview is best read as a balancing act performed in public, and its careful wording is the point. Hussein accuses unnamed external parties rather than naming Tehran, he promises an investigation rather than a crackdown, and he insists on dialogue with the factions rather than force, because each of those choices keeps a door open that a blunter statement would close. Naming Iran would turn a manageable dispute with Riyadh into a confrontation with Tehran; moving against the factions by force would risk the very civil strife Baghdad fears; and refusing Washington’s border demand outright would cost Iraq the American understanding that helped reopen the strait. The border is where the pressure is most concrete: closing all but two crossings would be a visible concession to Washington, yet it would also choke the trade that border communities depend on, and the earlier closure of the Sheeb crossing showed how quickly such a decision bites. Dialogue with the factions is the slowest path, but it is also the only one that does not ask a government without a war-ready army to fight a war at home while a war rages next door. The interview’s real message, then, is that Iraq intends to survive this war by talking to everyone and fighting no one.

What happens next if the balancing act fails?

If the balance slips, the costs arrive in a sequence that is already visible. The first is economic: any renewed closure of the Strait of Hormuz would cut the channel that carries about 90 percent of Iraq’s oil exports, and a state that funds about 90 percent of its budget from oil cannot absorb another $60bn-scale loss without cutting the spending that holds its politics together. The second is diplomatic: if attacks from Iraqi territory strike Saudi infrastructure again, Riyadh’s patience for dialogue will wear thin, and the kingdom’s accusations against Iran-aligned groups would harden into demands Baghdad cannot meet without confronting the factions. The third is domestic, and it is the one Hussein fears most: a forced disarmament timetable, such as the deadline of 30 June 2027 that three major factions have already rejected, could turn a negotiation into a standoff, and a standoff into the internal fighting that would hand every outside party exactly the battlefield Iraq is trying to deny them. There is also the Syrian border, where the new committee against ISIL must hold a frontier armed groups already cross, and the contest over the strait itself, where tankers and mines decide whether Iraq’s oil reaches its buyers.

What should readers watch for on Sunday and after?

The first test comes on Sunday at 18:00 GMT, when the full Al Jazeera interview airs and may name names, describe evidence, or add detail that Saturday’s excerpts did not carry. The second is Riyadh’s response, which will show whether dialogue is a real channel or a polite holding position. The third is the border itself: whether Baghdad moves toward Washington’s request to keep only two crossings with Iran open, and which two they would be. The fourth is the factions, whose answer will decide whether dialogue stays credible or the June 2027 deadline becomes a countdown to confrontation. And behind all of them sits the American decision on further strikes against Iran, which Hussein has already described as no secret; the event that would turn every one of these questions from diplomacy into emergency.