An Iraqi court ordered the arrest of a provincial leader on Monday after he threatened road blockades and even separation from Iraq over the closure of a border crossing with Iran, revealing tensions over Baghdad's efforts to curb Tehran’s influence on Iraqi security decisions.
Mustafa Duair, head of the provincial council in Maysan, a southeastern governorate bordering Iran, threatened civil disobedience unless the Al Sheeb crossing was reopened.
Baghdad has cited technical problems for the closure, while Tehran has pointed to US pressure.
The Iran-aligned Badr Organization defended Duair, turning the dispute over a border crossing into a broader challenge to the central government's authority from within Iraq's Shiite political establishment.
Risks of another battlefield
In September, Iraqi authorities seized a drone launcher allegedly used to attack Saudi Arabia's East-West oil pipeline. Saudi officials had traced the attack to the province, close to the Iranian border.
Asharq Al-Awsat reported Saturday that Iraqi officials suspected Israel had struck two depots storing Chinese-made portable air-defense systems allegedly supplied by Iran to allied Iraqi militias.
The reported shipments and Israeli involvement remain unconfirmed, but the allegations underscore the risks Baghdad faces when armed factions acquire weapons and pursue military agendas outside state control.
Ammar al-Hakim, a veteran leader with longstanding ties to Tehran, acknowledged sympathy for Iranians facing sanctions but warned in a September interview that Iraq must protect its own citizens from the same penalties.
“The feeling that the Islamic Republic has been treated unjustly under this siege of sanctions is valid and justified. But countries cannot be governed by wishes and emotions,” Hakim said.
On Monday, a spokesman for his Hikma Movement warned that breaking a militia de-escalation agreement could plunge Iraq into a “tunnel of sanctions.”
Baghdad pushes for greater control
Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi has set June 2027 as the deadline for bringing armed factions under state authority, although some Iran-backed groups continue to resist.
He has also replaced several security chiefs since taking office in May. On Monday, Zaidi dismissed intelligence chief Hamid al-Shatri, who was appointed by his predecessor and had himself been considered for prime minister. No official explanation was given for his dismissal.
The push for greater state authority aligns with Washington's longstanding demands that Baghdad curb independent militias.
Zaidi has also sought closer economic and political ties with the United States, with more than $60 billion in commercial agreements and memorandums announced during his July visit to Washington.
But Zaidi still relies on a coalition that includes Iran-aligned parties. He insists Iraq will not become involved in the Iran war and wants Baghdad to act as a mediator, while acknowledging that disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has damaged Iraq's economy.
Iraq’s leaders are emphasizing national authority and economic interests over involvement in Tehran's confrontations, but the reaction to the Maysan border closure shows how difficult asserting that authority over Iran-aligned factions remains.
Hardliners in Tehran are hailing a surge in global oil prices as evidence that pressure on shipping is paying off, even as moderates warn that the same confrontation is inflicting mounting damage on Iran's economy and strengthening the case for a deal with Washington.
Crude prices rose above $116 a barrel on October 24 following reports of two attacks involving supertankers near Oman, prompting hardline newspaper Kayhan to portray the increase as vindication of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy's strategy of asymmetric pressure around the Strait of Hormuz.
Under the headline “Minefields near Musandam Prove Diplomacy Is Obsolete,” Kayhan argued that disruption to shipping and the resulting pressure on global energy markets had strengthened Iran's bargaining position rather than demonstrated the need for compromise.
The newspaper accused moderates and more pragmatic conservatives of “begging for an agreement,” singling out the centrist Sazandegi newspaper, which supports reaching a deal with the United States.
But the same confrontation is taking a growing toll on Iran's economy.
Moderate daily Shargh warned that higher crude prices offer little relief to private-sector manufacturers facing bankruptcy and argued that keeping negotiations with Washington alive is essential to Iran's economic survival.
The economic daily Donya-ye Eghtesad has also highlighted pressure on factories in industrial centers including Isfahan, Tabriz and Arak, reporting an unprecedented wave of corporate bankruptcies as the maritime blockade continues.
The competing assessments expose an increasingly important argument in Tehran: whether the economic disruption caused by the confrontation is leverage to be exploited or damage Iran can no longer afford.
Signs of diplomatic movement
The debate comes as signs of diplomatic movement feed cautious optimism among some Iranian political figures that an agreement with the United States may be becoming more likely than another round of war.
Former deputy parliamentary speaker Ali Motahari gave voice to that view on Monday, saying that for the first time in several weeks, the prospects of an agreement with Washington appeared greater than the likelihood of renewed conflict.
Speaking to reporters in Tehran, Motahari argued that war was becoming less likely because the United States was facing multiple problems and might therefore be prepared to accept some of Iran’s conditions.
Monday’s high-level talks with regional powers have added to that sense. Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman, Pakistani army chief Asim Munir and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin are in Tehran to meet national security chief Mohsen Rezaei and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
According to Iranian state outlets, Tehran has reiterated its proposal for reducing tensions in the Strait of Hormuz. Following technical discussions in Doha, it resubmitted a plan to restore shipping through the waterway in stages over seven days.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday that Iranian technical negotiators were examining US counterproposals on procedures for lifting the naval blockade.
Tehran insists the seven-day window will not begin until $24 billion in foreign reserves becomes fully accessible and restrictions on container clearance at Bandar Abbas are lifted.
Iran has also insisted that its seven-point de-escalation plan, based on the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, remain separate from negotiations over uranium enrichment, International Atomic Energy Agency inspections and regional missile defense arrangements.
It remains unclear whether Washington accepts that separation. Tehran's position suggests it is seeking immediate economic relief while avoiding concessions on broader strategic issues.
The divide leaves Tehran confronting an awkward calculation. The disruption around Hormuz may be imposing higher costs on Iran's adversaries just as hardliners intended, but it is also increasing the economic pressure driving others in Tehran toward a deal.
Senior officials from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey opened talks with Iranian authorities in Tehran on Monday, following increased Iran-backed Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia and renewed warnings of military action between Tehran and Washington.
Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman, Pakistani army chief Asim Munir and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin will travel to Tehran, Reuters reported on Monday, citing Saudi and Iranian officials.
Ali Bagheri Kani, deputy secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, confirmed the visit.
The initiative was proposed during Munir's visit to Tehran last week, when he met President Masoud Pezeshkian and other senior officials, according to a senior Iranian official.
Iranian media reported that officials told Munir they would not negotiate with Washington until Tehran's demands were met.
Defense pact faces first major test
The visit marks the first high-level meeting between Iran and all three members of the Mecca defense pact since the escalation of hostilities.
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey signed the agreement in August, establishing that a military attack on one member would be considered an attack on all three.
Pakistan has ratified the pact, while ratification remains pending in Turkey's parliament.
Earlier this month, the three countries agreed to implement their defense commitments and rapidly deploy military personnel and capabilities to Saudi Arabia.
The agreement faces its first significant test following increased Houthi attacks on Saudi territory.
Saudi Arabia announced on Sunday that it had intercepted another wave of missiles and drones.
The visit is intended to reduce hostilities and support mediation efforts by Qatar and Pakistan, Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister for Public Diplomacy Raed bin Khalid Qarmali said earlier.
US-Iran confrontation
Qatari officials also visited Tehran on Sunday for talks with Iranian authorities.
Previous mediation by Qatar and Pakistan helped secure a temporary halt to hostilities, but the agreement collapsed when fighting resumed.
Indirect contacts between Tehran and Washington have continued through both mediators, a process also referenced by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
US President Donald Trump raised the possibility of renewed military operations against Iran on Friday.
Iranian officials have warned that any further attack would trigger a stronger response.
The diplomatic meetings come as Saudi Arabia seeks to prevent the conflict from spreading to its critical infrastructure, putting the Mecca defense pact and regional mediation efforts under growing pressure.
Tehran has offered to reopen the Strait of Hormuz if Washington lifted its naval blockade, Iran’s envoy to Pakistan said Saturday, while an IRGC-affiliated outlet rejected such an exchange and President Donald Trump raised the possibility of strikes as soon as “tomorrow.”
Iran’s ambassador to Islamabad, Reza Amiri Moghadam, said Tehran had conveyed through Pakistani mediators that it was prepared to reopen the strait if Washington ended its blockade of Iranian ports, the Associated Press reported.
Speaking at a seminar in Islamabad, Moghadam said Iranian officials had communicated that position during visits to Tehran by Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir. He accused Trump of rejecting the proposal by insisting the blockade would continue.
Moghadam said Iran remained open to negotiations under a Pakistan-brokered interim agreement reached in June, according to AP’s readout of his remarks.
Pakistan and Qatar helped broker that framework, which envisaged restoring shipping through the strait, lifting the blockade and beginning negotiations on a broader deal covering Iran’s nuclear program.
Al Arabiya separately reported Saturday, citing unnamed sources, that Iran had informed Pakistan it was willing to resume negotiations with Washington and reopen the strait in exchange for the blockade being lifted.
But the IRGC-affiliated Tasnim news agency quoted an informed source rejecting Al Arabiya’s account as “lies and fantasy” and saying Tehran had made no new proposal to Pakistani mediators.
“Iran fundamentally does not accept any equation of the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for the blockade,” the source said, adding that Iran would find ways around the blockade and ultimately break it.
The source said Tehran stood by seven conditions already formally conveyed through mediators. An earlier “seven-day plan” setting out its demands for reopening the strait had been passed to Washington, the source said, adding that insecurity would persist until all Iranian demands were met, including an end to disruption of its ports and shipping.
Tasnim’s denial explicitly targeted Al Arabiya’s report, rather than the ambassador’s remarks reported by AP.
US may attack Iran tomorrow
Trump, meanwhile, kept open the possibility of both military action and an agreement, saying he wanted a permanent solution to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
“Do you really think I’m going to tell you if I’m going to do it?” Trump told reporters Saturday. “There’s a possibility I will. There’s also a possibility we’ll have a nice big beautiful agreement.”
He said Iranian leaders wanted a deal but questioned whether they would abide by it.
“They want to make a deal. But the problem is, will they hold the deal?”
Trump argued that ending the military campaign after B-2 bomber strikes in 2025 would have allowed Iran to rebuild its nuclear capabilities and eventually develop a bomb.
“I’ve got to make it permanent. That’s the only reason I’m doing it as long as I’m doing,” he said.
The Hill reported Saturday, citing two sources familiar with the planning, that the US military had prepared options for renewed strikes on Iran after November’s midterm elections.
One source said US Central Command had follow-up strike plans ready pending White House authorization. Another said multiple options were being presented to War Secretary Pete Hegseth and that Trump would keep his options open until a final decision was required.
A Pentagon official told The Hill the department’s “job is to develop and present military options to the President.”
The Wall Street Journal reported earlier in the day that US naval forces are preparing for possible renewed strikes against Iran, with sailors loading munitions and readying aircraft aboard American warships.
The preparations include the USS George Washington aircraft carrier strike group, as Washington considers further military action against the Islamic Republic.
Pakistan is mediating between Iran and the United States even as it sends troops to defend Saudi Arabia against attacks by Tehran’s allies, placing Islamabad in the conflicting roles of peace broker and military partner to Iran’s rivals.
On Tuesday, Pakistan's military chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and security chief Mohsen Rezaei in Tehran.
Munir has also cultivated a close relationship with President Donald Trump, including meetings at the White House.
Islamabad helped broker the June agreement between Washington and Tehran. The truce did not last, but Pakistan has kept its mediation channel open.
Commitment to Saudi Arabia
Pakistan has taken a direct military role in Saudi Arabia's defense.
Reuters reported in May that Islamabad had deployed approximately 8,000 troops, a squadron of fighter jets and air-defense systems to the kingdom under a bilateral agreement. Saudi Arabia financed the deployment, according to Pakistani officials cited by Reuters.
Pakistan’s commitment to Saudi security deepened in August when Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey signed the Makkah Joint Defense Agreement, treating an attack against one member as an attack against all.
This week, Islamabad announced that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia had completed ratification, while Turkey's remained pending. The partners have also discussed further military mobilization following attacks by Iran-aligned Houthis on Saudi territory.
On Wednesday, Pakistan signed another defense agreement, this time with Turkey, Qatar and Indonesia. The Badr agreement, signed in Doha, offers opportunities for industrial cooperation and defense production.
Together with Makkah, the agreements deepen Pakistan's military, diplomatic and economic ties across countries pursuing different regional agendas.
Pakistan's balancing act
That tension was evident during Munir's Tehran visit. Pakistani government sources told Turkey's state-run Anadolu news agency that the talks focused more on stopping Houthi attacks against Saudi Arabia than on reviving US-Iran negotiations.
Munir pressed Iranian leaders to use their influence over the Houthis, citing Pakistan's commitment to defend the kingdom.
Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states supply much of Pakistan’s energy, while millions of Pakistani workers live in the region. Defense cooperation brings financial support and industrial opportunities, while diplomacy helps protect relations with competing partners.
Pakistan appears to be carving out an unusual role: mediating between Iran and the United States, helping defend Saudi Arabia against the Houthis, and joining new regional defense ventures while retaining direct access to Iranian leaders.
But the same network could become harder to manage if regional tensions escalate. The more security commitments Pakistan assumes, the greater the chance that relationships which currently give Islamabad leverage could eventually force it to choose between them.
China regards its relationship with Iran as largely transactional and is not firmly committed to defending the current Iranian government, according to Tong Zhao, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Speaking to Iran International, Zhao said Beijing shares Iran’s “common displeasure” with the United States and Western systems and values Iran’s geographic position for the Belt and Road Initiative.
Yet he described the partnership as driven by energy security, economic interests and longer-term geopolitical calculations rather than ideological solidarity.
“There is some long-term interest in there for sure,” Zhao said. “But it is a transactional relationship.”
China has become Iran's main economic lifeline under US sanctions, buying nearly all of its exported oil, while Tehran has increasingly looked to Beijing alongside Moscow for diplomatic support in the face of Western pressure.
Energy interests come first
Energy security has provided one of the clearest illustrations of the limits of that partnership.
In a recent meeting between Presidents Xi Jinping and Donald Trump, both sides publicly underscored that the Strait of Hormuz should remain open without any toll system.
“China is protecting its own economic and energy interest first and foremost,” Zhao said. “We do see China’s position evolving when its own domestic calculations about energy and overall supply chain security change over time.”
The 25-year comprehensive strategic partnership signed by China and Iran in 2021 has also under-delivered. Reports at the time suggested Chinese investment of roughly $400 billion, or about $20 billion annually.
Actual flows have been “at least one order of magnitude smaller,” Zhao said, as Chinese banks and companies have sought to avoid US secondary sanctions.
Nuclear weapons, regime change
Zhao said Beijing has come to value nuclear non-proliferation more as its global influence has grown, in part because of its experience with North Korea.
“China doesn’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons, but China eventually is sympathetic to Iran’s cause,” he said. “It thinks that Iran’s need for deterrence, including nuclear deterrence, is ultimately driven by American hostile policy.”
Beijing does not see its role as changing Iran’s calculations and has been reluctant to threaten economic or military cutoffs, Zhao said. Instead, it has emphasized that the US and Israel should alter their policies to reduce Tehran’s incentives for nuclear deterrence.
Opposition to externally imposed regime change is a higher priority for Beijing than the nuclear file itself, he said.
“China’s primary security concern is its own regime security, so it doesn’t want to see the norm of allowing foreign countries interfering in other countries’ internal affairs and toppling governments that they don’t like.”
Beijing’s initial criticism of the US-Israeli war against Iran focused heavily on the killing of the supreme leader, which China viewed as a violation of international norms.
But Zhao suggested Beijing's opposition had limits and would depend in part on whether efforts to remove Iran's government violated what China regarded as established international norms.
Influence at the lowest cost
Beijing has cultivated ties with Saudi Arabia, including joint military exercises and involvement in its missile and nuclear programs, partly as a hedge against uncertainty elsewhere in the region.
China and Russia have meanwhile provided Tehran with diplomatic cover at the UN Security Council, disputing the reimposition of UN sanctions on Iran and most recently opposing efforts to restore international monitoring of their implementation.
Yet China has shown little appetite for becoming a security guarantor for Iran or other regional partners, Zhao said, including through proposals that Iran transfer enriched uranium to Chinese custody.
“China is keenly aware of the potential risks and burdens to play a greater security role,” he said. “Its approach is to develop relations, increasing Chinese influence at the lowest cost.”
That calculation could change as the conflict develops. Zhao said China and Russia could influence its trajectory by supplying air-defense systems or missile-related materials that would help Iran deter or survive future strikes.
But he declined to predict how the confrontation over Iran's nuclear program and the Strait of Hormuz would ultimately end.
“I generally don’t have good answers about how this war will end in the long run,” Zhao said.
