SAVAYA MET WITH THE FRAMEWORK LEADERS AND DELIVERED TRUMP’S MESSAGE TO THEM.
On Monday, Amer Al-Fayez, a leader in the Coordination Framework and head of the Tasmeem bloc, revealed that Trump’s envoy, Mark Savaya, met with the framework’s leaders individually, noting that he delivered clear messages to them rejecting the Trump administration’s refusal to grant any high-ranking position in the government and parliament to figures affiliated with one of the Iraqi factions.
PARLIAMENT DENIES POSTPONING THE SESSION TO ELECT THE PRESIDENT.
The House of Representatives denied postponing Tuesday’s session dedicated to electing the President of the Republic. The media office of the House of Representatives stated in a statement that “Tuesday’s session to elect the President of the Republic is scheduled to take place as planned, and the news circulating about its postponement is false.”
The source told Shafaq News Agency that “the coordination framework held an important meeting on Monday, at the headquarters of the National Approach Party, to discuss the issue of the presidency and to deliberate on the available options, in preparation for reaching a final unified decision on who will be nominated to fill this position.”
(The constitutional deadline expires this week to seat the president)
Why is the U.S. threatening Iraq over Iranian militias?
The U.S. has made clear that Iraqi sovereignty means excluding Iran-backed militias from government. Continued militia influence risks sanctions, loss of dollar access, and delays to economic normalization.
Introduction: Sovereignty Comes With Responsibility
“The United States supports Iraqi sovereignty… That leaves absolutely no role for Iran-backed militias.”
That statement alone tells you everything you need to know.
Sovereignty does not mean serving Tehran. Sovereignty means serving the Iraqi people.
And all of this pressure is intensifying as Iran’s own regime shows signs of cracking internally. This is maximum pressure — financial, political, and strategic — coming from every direction.
Financial Times Confirms Escalation: Dollar Supply at Risk
In the article titled:
“FINANCIAL TIMES: WASHINGTON THREATENED TO CUT OFF DOLLAR SUPPLIES TO IRAQ IF BAGHDAD REFUSED TO REPLACE ADNAN FAIHAN”
we learn that Washington is now directly pressuring senior Iraqi politicians to form a government free of armed factions.
“The United States supports Iraqi sovereignty, and the sovereignty of every country in the region. That leaves absolutely no role for Iran-backed militias that pursue malign interests, cause sectarian division, and spread terrorism across the region,” With sovereignty means responsibility to serve the Iraqi people not the Iranian regime which desperately now needs Iraqi support. Remember too that all of this come on the heels of what is now going on in Iran as the current regime is about to break. This is maximum pressure from the US from all directions.
In the article titled “FINANCIAL TIMES: WASHINGTON THREATENED TO CUT OFF DOLLAR SUPPLIES TO IRAQ IF BAGHDAD REFUSED TO REPLACE ADNAN FAIHAN” we learn at the Financial Times reported on Friday that Washington is pressuring senior Iraqi politicians to form a government that is free from armed factions. There is one person especially they want out. His name is Adnan Faihan. He is a former member of the Asaib Ahl al-Haq, which has been designated by the Trump administration as a terrorist organization. Go figure?
I quote from the article – “tensions have escalated with Washington following the election of Adnan Faihan, a former member of Asaib Ahl al-Haq, as first deputy speaker of parliament last month.” According to the news, “The US embassy was furious and said this was hostile behavior and an act of defiance, and they demanded his replacement.” Can everyone see now where this is going and what it is going to lead to? How many more articles do we need to see to understand the US is NOT going to back down on elimination of these Iranian-backed militia members and politicians in the Iraqi government. It may be months before this government is formed correctly or it may happen sooner that we think depending on what Iraq decides to do.
Why does Iran need Iraq as its “puppet” state?
Iran’s stance is that it views Iraq as vital for keeping its economy afloat amid sanctions and long used Baghdad’s banking system to skirt the restrictions, US and Iraqi officials have said. Successive US administrations have sought to choke that dollar stream, placing sanctions on more than a dozen Iraqi banks in recent years in an effort to do so. But there is about to be sanctions like Iraq has never experienced before if they do not bend to these Iranian backed politicians. Washington has never yet curtailed the flow of dollars from the oil revenues of Iraq, sent via the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to the Central Bank of Iraq. As you might recall the US has had de facto control over Iraq’s oil revenue since it invaded the country in 2003.
So, all my readers should realize after learning of the complete news, not just one sided, that the drama of this election is far from over. These are pivotal weeks ahead. These coming weeks could either move our investment in the correct direction of sooner than later or it could push it to much, much later, like years away. I just have to be honest with everyone from the news we are getting from Iraq.
___________________________
What else do we know…..
In a recent article titled “BREAKING | SOURCES TO IRAQ OBSERVER: TRUMP’S ENVOY TO IRAQ, SAVAYA, HAS ALREADY ARRIVED IN BAGHDAD AND MET WITH AL-SUDANI AT A WORKING DINNER” we learned that the US President Donald Trump’s envoy to Iraq, Mark Savaya, has already arrived in Baghdad and met with Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani for a working dinner on last Thursday evening. What do you think they mainly talked about? Conversation from sources told us it focused on combating the rampant corruption in the Iraqi state and drying up its sources. No official statement has yet been issued by the Iraqi government regarding the start of the visit and its agenda. I will try to give you today yet more of what I have learned so far since last Thursday.
Please take a peek at the article titled “WASHINGTON THREATENS BAGHDAD WITH THE “NUCLEAR OPTION” (in a matter of speaking): REPLACE FAYHAN AND DISARM THE FACTIONS IMMEDIATELY”. In it we learned that an Iraqi newspaper quoted informed sources stating that American officials, during their meeting with prominent Iraqi political leaders tasked with forming the next government in recent weeks, pushed for the presentation of a credible plan to disarm Iranian-backed armed groups quickly.
The news also quoted a source as saying that the coordinating framework, including the main militias backed by Tehran, offered to announce a phased disarmament plan over two years after the formation of the government, hoping that the issue would “lose momentum” before its implementation. However, the report said that Washington demanded immediate action not years away. We know that these Iranian-backed politicians will say one thing and do another. Nori al-Maliki’s last administration was full of saying what you wanted to hear and then he did what he wanted later. So, will the US be fooled again with their lies? Remember it was the US that had bad intelligence on Nori al-Maliki and supported his election at the second prime minister of Iraq in disregard to the election results and the winning political block to select the next prime minister. Remember Dr Ayad Allawi? He was interim prime minister of Iraq from 2004 to 2005 and then ran for the prime minister against Maliki in the 2006 election cycle. Allawi won the majority of votes and was selected by the majority political block as their nominee; however, the sleaze-bag Nori al-Maliki was seeded instead due to a technicality. This is when all the trouble began with Iraq right from this moment on and the corruption began. As we can prove he also blocked the reinstatement of 2013 with false accusations of Central Bank corruption. This is also when Dr Siani Shabibi was ousted as head of the CBI. Maliki served two terms and ended in 2014 as the prime minister. He had to be forcefully taken out of office as he refused to concede his office. He wanted another dictatorship and to be the next Saddam Hussien. He tried to use the ISIS invasion as his fear factor to do so. He is an opportunist and will step on anybody, kill anybody to gain control of Iraq again.
________________________________
Lastly let’s look at more positive news for today in the article titled “BAGHDAD TODAY INVESTIGATES: IRAQ’S BUDGET HAS NO DEFICIT… REVEALING THE “FIGURES” THAT CITIZENS ARE NOT MEANT TO SEE – URGENT” I have said previously that Iraq has no deficit only stolen money. This article takes a hard look at the revenue streams. Why do some politicians keep looking at deficits and the glass is half empty when we can clearly see that there is more than enough revenues only they need to align good sound practices to collect these revenues and put them into the Federal coffers, thus not steal the funds.
But, in this regard, we must also take a hard look at the US and all the stolen money exposed by DOGE and since. Even with measures in place in the US the money flows into notorious hands if not audited and carefully managed. Iraq, as new as it is, is even more susceptible to these dangers of stolen money. But this will change as it is changing also in the US.
In another article they expose yet another reason why these hoards of cash are not in the banks that the CBI keeps telling us about in many articles of the past. It is titled “AN ECONOMIST SAYS BANKS’ MANIPULATION OF PROFITS IS EXACERBATING THE “HOARDING CRISIS” AND LIQUIDITY SHORTAGE.” Oh… so it this issue much more complicated than most believe? These practices we learn about today have led to a loss of confidence in the public banking sector, encouraging citizens to hoard their money at home and in businesses, away from the formal banking system
In the article we learn that economic expert Salam al-Zubaidi warned on Thursday of the repercussions of some state-owned banks altering the terms of agreements with depositors. I quote –“He emphasized that this ill-considered measure has resulted in reduced profits for citizens and discouraged them from depositing funds, exacerbating the phenomenon of hoarding and the country’s liquidity crisis.”
I quote from the article again – “There are numerous complaints from citizens regarding the reduced profits they receive when depositing their money, which contradicts the initial terms of the agreement with the bank.” and that “the main problem lies in the ill-conceived management decisions that unilaterally change previous contracts.”
I quote “these practices have led to a loss of confidence in the public banking sector, encouraging citizens to hoard their money at home and in businesses, away from the formal banking system.” He pointed out that this “hoarding” poses a significant challenge to the Iraqi economy, as approximately 87% of the circulating cash (around 95 trillion dinars) remains outside the formal banking system. This phenomenon of hoarding money has caused a major liquidity crisis and negatively impacted banks’ ability to finance and lend, thus harming overall economic growth in the country.” Looks like yet another banking reform is needed….. will it ever end?
IRAQ FACES ITS TOUGHEST TEST YET: US THREATS TO CUT OFF OIL REVENUES PLUNGE THE COUNTRY INTO A COMPLEX CRISIS.
Abbas al-Jubouri, head of the Al-Rafid Center for Political and Strategic Studies, warned on Sunday (January 25, 2026) of serious repercussions that the Iraqi state may face if political forces proceed with including armed factions in the next government formation, in light of clear American threats to cut off or restrict the revenues of Iraqi oil sales deposited in the United States.
Al-Jubouri told Baghdad Today that “activating this threat is not just a symbolic or political measure, but rather a very dangerous economic pressure tool, given that Iraq relies primarily on the American financial system to pass its oil revenues, which makes the national economy vulnerable to severe shocks that may affect salaries, service projects, cash reserves, as well as the stability of the dinar exchange rate.”
Can parliament block Nouri al-Maliki from becoming prime minister? Yes. Beyond political nominations, Iraq’s parliament must ratify the prime minister. Deep divisions, veto threats, Kurdish opposition, and U.S. sanctions pressure over Iranian militias make a third Maliki term highly unstable and unlikely.
Introduction: The Circus Isn’t Over Yet
Just remember:
👉 The circus is not over until the fat lady sings.
Despite headlines suggesting inevitability, there are multiple layers of resistance building against Nouri al-Maliki becoming Iraq’s next prime minister — and many observers are overlooking one critical factor:
Parliament still has to ratify the nominee.
And that may be where this entire plan collapses.
The Overlooked Element: Parliament’s Power to Veto
Many focus on nominations and political blocs, but the Iraqi constitution is clear:
“SHARP DISAGREEMENTS WITHIN THE HALBOUSI COALITION OVER THE VETO OF A THIRD TERM FOR MALIKI”
we learn that Maliki’s path faces serious resistance even inside alliances previously considered supportive.
Deep Divisions Inside the Halbousi Alliance
According to informed sources:
“There are deep disagreements within the leadership of the Halbousi Alliance due to what some have termed a ‘veto’ on a third term for Nouri al-Maliki.”
Another key revelation states:
“Important figures within the Halbousi Alliance were dissatisfied with the statement issued by the National Political Council, which implicitly vetoed a third term for Maliki.”
This tells us one thing clearly:
👉 Support for Maliki is far from unified.
The Real Question: What Will the United States Do?
Now comes the wildcard.
How will U.S. President Donald Trump respond if Maliki is officially announced?
Will Washington oppose it openly? Will pressure escalate quietly behind the scenes? Or is there something unfolding that we don’t yet see?
One thing is certain: The U.S. does not want a weak, Iran-influenced Iraqi government.
Timing Matters: Trump Wants Progress — Not Delays
President Trump has been clear in his strategic posture toward Iraq:
Move Iraq forward
Stabilize governance
Reduce Iranian influence
Enable economic normalization
He does not have unlimited time.
With only a limited term remaining, Washington wants results, not regression.
A Maliki return would almost certainly be seen as a setback, not progress.
Why a Maliki Government Would Delay Reinstatement
Let’s be honest:
Maliki = instability
Instability = no U.S. approval
No U.S. approval = no reinstatement
No matter what other “intel gurus” claim, the U.S. will not sign off on reinstatement without a stable government.
And stability means:
No armed militias in government
No Iranian dominance
No rigged parliament
The Bigger Issue: Iranian Militias Inside Parliament
Here’s where things get even more serious.
In the article:
“US, IN CONTROL OF OIL DOLLARS, HEAPS PRESSURE ON IRAQ OVER IRANIAN INFLUENCE”
we learn that the U.S. explicitly warned Iraqi leaders months before the election:
No armed groups in the new government.
That message could not have been clearer.
The Reality: 58 Iran-Linked MPs Elected
Despite U.S. warnings, the recent election resulted in:
58 members of parliament linked to Iranian militia factions
One deputy speaker of parliament with similar affiliations
From Washington’s perspective, these individuals:
Undermine sovereignty
Serve Iranian interests
Threaten financial stability
U.S. officials reportedly stated:
“Engagement with the new government would be suspended if these members are represented.”
Why This Matters for the Dinar Reinstatement
The U.S. holds a powerful lever:
➡️ Over $100 billion in Iraqi oil revenues held in New York banks.
Oil sales remain dollar-denominated, even after UN sanctions were lifted in December 2022.
Ask yourself:
What happens if the U.S. restricts dollar access?
How does Iraq pay its budget?
How does it fund salaries, imports, and infrastructure?
This leverage is intentional — and effective.
Sovereignty vs Reality
The Coordination Framework argues:
“Iraq is a sovereign nation and can choose its leaders freely.”
But Washington’s response is blunt:
👉 Sovereignty does not exist when foreign militias control the system.
Iranian influence disqualifies the claim of independence.
End of discussion.
What This Means Going Forward
This election cycle is about far more than Maliki.
It is about:
Parliament integrity
Iranian militia infiltration
U.S. financial leverage
Iraq’s economic future
A puppet prime minister plus a compromised parliament equals disaster.
Checks and balances matter — and right now, they are under threat.
Q&A: Key Questions Answered
Can parliament veto Maliki’s nomination?
Yes. Parliament has full authority to reject a third term.
Is the Halbousi Alliance unified behind Maliki?
No. Deep internal disagreements exist.
Does the U.S. oppose Iranian militias in government?
Absolutely. This has been clearly communicated.
Would a Maliki government delay reinstatement?
Highly likely due to instability and U.S. opposition.
Does the U.S. still control Iraq’s oil revenue?
Yes. Over $100 billion remains under U.S. control in New York.
Final Thoughts
This is not over. Not even close.
If the Coordination Framework pushes Maliki forward, they may:
Expose their own corruption
Trigger U.S. retaliation
Collapse their political credibility
Sometimes pressure reveals truth.
So for now, we wait. We watch. And we let the drama unfold.
There is also yet another element that may block Maliki from becoming the next prime minister. Many overlook this element. Remember that Parliament also has to ratify the nominee when announced. So, in this next article titled “SHARP DISAGREEMENTS WITHIN THE HALBOUSI COALITION OVER THE VETO OF A THIRD TERM FOR MALIKI” we learn that parliament may not go along with Maliki for a third term and may use the power of veto on his nomination.
I quote from the article – “Informed sources revealed on Sunday the existence of deep disagreements within the leadership of the Halbousi Alliance due to what some have termed a “veto” on a third term for Nouri al-Maliki.” – “The source told Al-Maalouma that “important figures within the Halbousi Alliance were dissatisfied with the statement issued by the National Political Council, which implicitly vetoed a third term for Maliki, despite the support of the Alliance’s constituent forces for him as a candidate to form the next government.”
Just remember that the circus is not yet over until the fat lady sings….lol…lol..lol..
Now the surprise will be to see how the US president Donald Trump feels about this announcement of Nori al-Maliki as the next prime minister. Will he oppose it or is there something that we don’t know about. Is God going to use Maliki to wake up the Iraqi politicians as he did in the US using the Biden era? How bad could it get in the next four years? Will God let Iraq suffer for this time again? Will we have to wait another four (4) years and even what state will Iraq be in after four more years of Maliki?
There is not much more I can say about this recent announcement about Maliki the peanut head guy as the nominee. We can see today through the news from Iraq that the Coordination Framework fully intends to nominate him for prime minister. This is where they are going to make their huge mistake and expose their own corruption. God works in strange ways. Let’s just sit tight and watch the drama play out. Like you, I feel this will be a set back in our timing of the reinstatement if this does occur. We all know president Trump wants to move Iraq along while he can and he only has another three years in office as president. He wants the reinstatement as bad as we do.
The election drama continues….
Oh… but wait there is more drama playing out in parliament too from this election cycle. There is much more than just the prime minister nominee to worry about.
So, there is also yet another issue lingering that needs to be addressed for this election cycle. It is just as important as the Maliki drama, if not more important. Having an Iranian pacifier as a puppet prime minister, than also a rigged parliament to vote his way on bills is not good for Iraq. They need checks and balances in the government. If we read the article titled “US, IN CONTROL OF OIL DOLLARS, HEAPS PRESSURE ON IRAQ OVER IRANIAN INFLUENCE” we learn more.
In this recent article we learn that the US has threatened senior Iraqi politicians with sanctions targeting the Iraqi state — including potentially its critical supply of oil revenue sourced via the Federal Reserve Bank of New York — should Iran-backed armed groups be included in the next government, four sources told Reuters. This threat was given months before the election. However Iraq did not pay much attention to it.
The US stance was simple “No armed groups in new government”. Can it get any clearer? So, in the newly elected representatives in parliament are there any members of armed militia groups? Let’s explore both sides to this story today. Who is on the right side and who is wrong?
So, YES there is many Iranian militia faction members from the recent November election cycle elected into office to replace other members in the chamber of parliament. In fact there is 58 members total to be exact , plus one deputy head of parliament. The US views all of these new members as linked to Iran. The fear is they will influence Iraqi politics to extent to benefit Iran rather than the people of Iraq. “The American line was basically that they would suspend engagement with the new government should any of those 58 MPs be represented.” No remember that the US is absolutely not going to signoff on the reinstatement of the dinar unless there is a STABLE government in place. Do you think this is a stable government? I don’t care with what any of these other intel gurus are telling you. They are full of sh-t! Oh… their secret sources have been so accurate with their stupid lies of every day and every weekend RV scenarios. How can anyone even believe their crap any more. You have to be an idiot just like them to follow them.
But I am showing you today evidence and facts and trying to help you understand that there is much more to it to the US plans to shut down this Iranian influence. It gets complicated real fast but not really if you try to clarify it and understand it.
Remember the US has leverage over Iraq as they maintain control of over 100 billion dollars of Iraqi oil revenues in the banks in NYC. Oil is still mandated to be sold in US dollars even though we learned that the UN sanctions have been lifted since December 2022. So, I guess maintaining this leverage of not releasing these funds to Iraq was a good choice by the US? Can you imagine if the US were to cut of all dollars to Iraq? How would Iraq pay its bills as in the budget?
So, the Iraqi Coordination Framework stance is that Iraq is an independent state. a sovereign nation and so they can do as they please electing officials in their government. But as we find this stance is not actually a correct stance, says the US administration. It is not correct as there is Iran influence and this does not meet the requirement of “sovereignty” and “independence”. Sorry Iraq!!!!
Another blow to the constitution: The failure to elect a president brings back the scenario of coldly disregarding constitutional requirements.
The constitutional process in Iraq has suffered another setback with the postponement of the presidential election session, despite the country nearing the end of the constitutional deadline. This comes at a time when Parliament was expected to resolve this sovereign issue, amidst escalating political disputes, particularly within the Kurdish political bloc, and conflicting interpretations regarding adherence to constitutional timelines.
In a move that has raised widespread questions, the parliamentary session designated for electing the president did not convene, even though the constitutional deadline is in its final stages. This has revived fears of a repeat of past instances where deadlines were exceeded.
The Parliament's media office announced the postponement of the presidential election session in a brief statement, without specifying a new date. Some members of Parliament stated that the postponement was due to the lack of necessary political consensus to hold the session, which has opened the door to various interpretations regarding the future of the process and the possibility of circumventing constitutional deadlines.
A Kurdish request for postponement: According to official documents, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) submitted a request to postpone the session due to ongoing disagreements within the Kurdish political bloc regarding the presidential candidate.
The lack of a final consensus that would allow for a decisive election session prompted the postponement to avoid the session's failure or its holding without results.
The core of the crisis lies in the continued division between the two main Kurdish parties. The KDP has put forward its candidate, Fuad Hussein, while the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) insists on its candidate, Nizar Amidi. Political mediation efforts have thus far failed to unify positions or agree on a compromise candidate, leaving the presidency hostage to the Kurdish-Kurdish dispute and its repercussions on the power balance in Baghdad
Political analyst Ali Nasser, familiar with the issue of exceeding deadlines, stated that “adherence to constitutional deadlines has not been consistent in past sessions, as we have witnessed, on more than one occasion, exceeding these deadlines, sometimes by several months.”
Nasser added to Iraq Observer that “what distinguishes the current phase from its predecessors is the clear emphasis by the head of the Supreme Judicial Council, Faiq Zaidan, on the necessity of adhering to important constitutional deadlines, even though the Iraqi constitution does not explicitly stipulate penalties for exceeding these deadlines.”
Nasser explained that “divisions within the Kurdish political bloc have directly impacted the selection of the president, given the lack of a unified candidate from the two main parties,” noting that “these divisions coincided with the nomination of Nouri al-Maliki for the premiership, which has added a new layer of complexity to the political landscape.”
He added that “the agreements were supposed to be decided first within the Kurdish house, before moving on to discussing them with the Coordination Framework as the representative of the largest bloc, but the recent meetings, whether between the Coordination Framework and the Democratic Party, or with the Patriotic Union, did not result in setting clear deadlines or agreeing on final names.”
In this context, constitutional experts explain that Article (72/First/B) of the Constitution set the deadline for electing the President of the Republic at thirty days from the date of the first meeting of the new House of Representatives. Since the House held its first session on December 29, 2025, the last day of the constitutional deadline is January 29, 2026.
They emphasize that the calculation of the period begins from the date of the meeting, not from the date of the vote, and that any interpretation to the contrary leads to an unjustified extension of a deadline explicitly stipulated in the constitution, noting that the procedural deadlines for nomination, objection and judicial resolution are part of this deadline and not added to it.
With open scenarios and the country entering the final days of the constitutional deadline, fears are growing that the continuation of political disputes will lead to a new postponement, which may open the door to another jump over deadlines, not only in the election of the President of the Republic, but also with regard to the appointment of the next Prime Minister, in a scene that indicates the weakness of political consensus, and the difficulty of managing constitutional entitlements within their specified timeframes. link
In the article titled “FINANCIAL TIMES: WASHINGTON THREATENED TO CUT OFF DOLLAR SUPPLIES TO IRAQ IF BAGHDAD REFUSED TO REPLACE ADNAN FAIHAN” we learn at the