Tuesday, February 24, 2026
EXPERT: IGNORING US THREATS COULD PLUNGE IRAQ INTO COMPLEX CRISES
EXPERT: IGNORING US THREATS COULD PLUNGE IRAQ INTO COMPLEX CRISES
Strategic affairs expert Hussein Al-Asaad confirmed on Saturday (February 14, 2026) that the United States’ threats to impose sanctions on Iraq if any new government is formed that does not have its approval must be taken very seriously and carefullyconsidered, given their potential repercussions on the political, economic and financial stability of the country.
Al-Asaad told Baghdad Today that “Washington has multiple pressure tools, starting with financial and banking sanctions, and not ending with economic and trade restrictions, in addition to its direct impact on Iraq’s relationship with international institutions and foreign investments. Any escalation in this matter may negatively affect the value of the national currency, market activity, and the financing of vital projects.”
He explained that “the current stage requires Iraqi political forces to adopt a realistic and balanced approach, based on protecting national sovereignty on the one hand, and avoiding entering into uncalculated clashes with influential international powers on the other, especially in light of the sensitive regional conditions and internal economic challenges.”
He added that “the formation of the government must be based on a broad national consensus and a clear government program that reassures the international community about Iraq’s commitments, while at the same time preserving its independent decision-making. Ignoring or downplaying American warnings may open the door to complex crises, the price of which will be paid primarily by the citizens.”
Al-Asaad concluded by saying that “managing this file requires active diplomacy, responsible political dialogue, and a strategic vision that protects Iraq’s higher interests and prevents the use of sanctions as a tool of pressure that hinders the path of stability and state-building in the next stage.”
From time to time, political and economic warnings are raised in Iraq that any tension with influential international powers, especially in financial and economic matters, may affect market activity, investments, and foreign transactions, prompting some parties to call for a balance that combines preserving national decision-making with avoiding escalation.
MNT GOAT: Crucial Week for Iran: US Military Preparations and Potential Action
Introduction
This week marks a critical juncture in Middle Eastern geopolitics, as the United States finalizes preparations for a potential operation against Iran. With CENTCOM Commander Brad Cooper in Israel, meeting top officials, tensions are rising and analysts are closely monitoring the situation.
Understanding these developments is essential for investors, political analysts, and anyone tracking international security.
CENTCOM Commander Visits Israel
On Saturday, Brad Cooper, commander of the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), arrived in Israel. His meeting with Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir at the Defense Ministry headquarters in Tel Aviv underscores the strategic coordination between the US and Israel.
Key takeaways:
CENTCOM is actively assessing military readiness in the region.
Coordination with Israel ensures intelligence sharing and contingency planning.
US forces are expected to finalize operational plans by the end of the week.
US President’s Position
Despite preparations, US President Donald Trump has not yet made a decisive decision to launch an attack on Iran. The delay indicates careful consideration of:
Regional consequences in the Middle East.
International diplomatic pressure.
Potential impact on US foreign policy objectives.
CENTCOM’s public statements emphasize readiness without immediate action, signaling a wait-and-see approach.
Potential Implications of US Action
Military action against Iran could have far-reaching consequences:
Regional Instability – Potential escalation with Iran’s allies in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
Energy Markets – Threats to the Strait of Hormuz could impact global oil prices.
Investor Caution – Financial markets often react sharply to military tensions.
Global Diplomacy – NATO, UN, and other international actors may engage in crisis management.
Even if no strike occurs, the heightened readiness itself has geopolitical and economic ramifications.
Q&A: Key Questions About US-Iran Tensions
Q1: Has the US decided to attack Iran?
A: No, US President Trump has not made a final decision, although preparations are underway.
Q2: Why is CENTCOM in Israel?
A: CENTCOM is coordinating military readiness and intelligence with Israeli officials in case of any operation.
Q3: Could this lead to war?
A: While preparations indicate a possible strike, a full-scale war is not guaranteed. Diplomacy and strategic calculations remain in play.
Q4: How could this affect investors and markets?
A: Oil prices and regional investments are sensitive to military tensions. Short-term volatility is likely.
Featured Snippet Suggestions
Snippet 1: “CENTCOM Commander Brad Cooper visited Israel to coordinate with military officials as the US finalizes preparations for a potential operation against Iran.”
Snippet 2: “President Trump has not yet made a decisive decision to attack Iran, even as military readiness continues.”
Conclusion
This week represents a crucial moment for Iran-US relations. With CENTCOM preparations in full swing and no final decision from the US President, the region remains on high alert. Monitoring developments closely is essential for anyone following Middle Eastern geopolitics, energy markets, or global security trends.
Follow & Connect With Us
Blog: Dinar Evaluation
Telegram: DINAR Evaluation
Facebook: Dinar Gurus
Twitter: @DinaresGurus
YouTube: DINAR REVALUATION
Hashtags
#IranCrisis #USMilitary #CENTCOM #MiddleEastTensions #IranUSRelations #GlobalSecurity #Geopolitics #MilitaryUpdate #DinarEvaluation #EnergyMarkets
MNT GOAT
"CRUCIAL" WEEK FOR IRAN AND THE POSSIBILITY OF A US ATTACK" Brad Cooper, commander of the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), arrived in Israel on Saturday and met with Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir at the Defense Ministry headquarters in Tel Aviv. "US President Donald Trump has not yet made a decisive decision to attack Iran," Cooper said, according to Israel's Channel Cooper also confirmed that the United States will complete the preparations for a
possible operation against Iran by the end of the week.
DONALD TRUMP IS FORCING A RESET IN IRAQI POLITICS
DONALD TRUMP IS FORCING A RESET IN IRAQI POLITICS
(An amazing FACT-filled article worthy of a read all the way through to the end. 
)
On Jan. 27, Donald Trump issued an ultimatum to Baghdad. Noting that Iraqi lawmakers were considering “reinstalling” Nouri al-Maliki as prime minister, Trump delivered an uncompromising verdict: “Because of his insane policies and ideologies, if elected, the United States of America will no longer help Iraq.”
These words were enough to end the prospects of Maliki, who had secured the nomination of the largest parliamentary bloc, the Coordination Framework (CF), to form the next government. This came more than two and a half months after the parliamentary elections on Nov. 11. That spell of political paralysis was not unusual. Under Iraq’s system, elections do not grant the party that wins the highest number of seats the automatic first opportunity to form a government. Instead, this right goes to the largest parliamentary bloc formed after the elections.
Maliki’s State of Law Coalition came in third, with 29 seats. Thanks to intense behind-the-scenes deal-making, Maliki outmaneuvered current Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani (whose party had gained the largest share of the vote) and managed to secure the nomination.
This triumph seemed even more improbable given Maliki’s deep unpopularity and his divisive politics. Initially, though, it seemed that none of this would be enough to block his path to the premiership.
Trump’s intervention immediately changed everything. So why was it so effective?
The reality is that the U.S. still has ample leverage over the government in Baghdad. Washington could start by simply closing the account at the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of New York where Iraqi oil revenues are deposited and protected from the enforcement of numerous compensation judgments stemming from Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait – protection granted under a U.S. presidential order issued in 2003 and renewed annually. Closing this account would deprive Iraq of access to the oil revenues it earns from global markets, quickly triggering a financial collapse.
According to 2025 figures, these revenues account for about 88 percent of Iraq’s federal budget. Even if the Trump administration refrains from such a drastic step, it has other, more gradual options with similar effects, such as imposing sanctions on Iraqi institutions and officials involved in supporting Iranian influence and violating the U.S. sanctions regime against Iran.
There is now a broad consensus in the Iraqi political scene that Maliki has lost any hope of returning to office. Yet he continues to press ahead with his candidacy, claiming a populist mandate to resist “American interference” even while promising to appease the Trump administration.
He has signaled a willingness to dismantle Iran-aligned armed factions, distance Iraq from Iranian influence, and build positive relations with America’s new regional ally, post-Assad Syria. Iraqis remember well, however, that it was Maliki who played a central role in creating the militias and drawing Iraq into Iran’s sphere of influence. He was also, at first, scathing about the rise of ex-jihadi Ahmed al-Sharaa to the Syrian presidency – until he wasn’t.
Trump’s stance echoes an earlier (though subtler) American rejection of Maliki. In 2014, the Obama administration declared that it would halt military aid to Iraq if Maliki won a third term as prime minister. The Americans blamed Maliki’s polarizing politics for weakening Iraq amid the threat from ISIS, which ultimately managed to conquer a third of the country. Washington’s position effectively sidelined Maliki. Over the following four years, under the U.S.-backed premiership of Haider al-Abadi, Iraq managed to regain some stability and liberate its territory from ISIS control in 2017, creating a general sense that the country had overcome the worst and that better years lay ahead.
It soon became clear, however, that the ruling Shiite alliance continued to allow the Iran-aligned militias to expand their political, economic, and institutional influence – not least thanks to Maliki. Today, as a result, members of these factions run ministries, contest elections, and secure increasing parliamentary representation. Iran has effectively achieved dominated Iraq’s political institutions. This is not only bad for Washington; it is bad for Iraqis, too.
The Hamas attack on Israel in October 2023, the strong Israeli response, and Trump’s return to the presidency have all driven a shift in U.S. policy toward Iraq. Until 2025, Washington pursued a strategy of patient – and ultimately futile – cooperative investment in successive Iraqi governments in order to help them thwart Iranian influence. That effort did not bear fruit.
Now the Americans have abandoned that supportive approach in favor of peremptory demands:
Iraq must dismantle Iranian influence within its borders and can expect negative consequences if it fails to do so. This is precisely the message Secretary of State Marco Rubio conveyed to Al-Sudani in a series of phone calls last year. Trump’s public no-confidence measure represents the culmination of this pressure-based strategy, one that places full responsibility for Baghdad’s choices squarely on Iraq itself.
Although Maliki remains committed to his candidacy, the Iraqi political class understands that defying the Trump administration would amount to political and economic suicide. The ex-prime minister’s chances have evaporated.
Yet the latest news has merely served to obscure the deeper question: Is there any potential prime minister actually capable of dismantling Iranian influence? The natural addressee of this question is none other than the Shiite alliance itself. Only by agreeing on this objective would it be in a position to provide the necessary political cover and institutional support for the next prime minister to carry out this task. The key question, then, is whether Trump’s rejection of Maliki will finally push the alliance to do the right thing.
MNT GOAT: Understanding the Iraqi Dinar: Program Rate vs FOREX Rate Explained
Introduction
The Iraqi Dinar (IQD) continues to be a hot topic among currency traders, investors, and global watchers. With all the chatter about the Central Bank of Iraq’s (CBI) independence and rate adjustments, it’s easy to get confused about what these rates really mean.
Many people mix up the program rate and the FOREX rate, thinking they are the same. But they are very different. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for anyone looking to invest or monitor the dinar’s future.
What is the Program Rate?
The program rate is the official in-country rate set by the CBI. It is tied to a de facto peg, usually to the US dollar, and can be adjusted up or down at any time by the CBI.
Key points:
Determined internally by the CBI.
Can fluctuate independently of the FOREX market.
Does not indicate the dinar’s international trading rate.
Think of the program rate as a controlled domestic benchmark. Even if it rises or falls, it doesn’t mean the dinar is trading internationally at that level.
What is the FOREX Rate?
The FOREX rate is the international exchange rate at which the Iraqi Dinar can be traded on global currency markets.
Key differences:
Reflects real demand and supply in global markets.
Comes into play only when the dinar is returned to FOREX trading.
The program rate will disappear once the FOREX rate is reinstated.
In simpler terms, the FOREX rate is the true market value of the dinar outside Iraq.
Program Rate vs FOREX Rate: Apples and Oranges
Many investors confuse these rates, assuming the program rate directly affects FOREX trading. Here’s why they are fundamentally different:
| Feature | Program Rate (In-Country) | FOREX Rate (Global Market) |
|---|---|---|
| Controlled by CBI | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
| Pegged to USD | ✅ Yes | ❌ Not necessarily |
| Adjusted anytime | ✅ Yes | ❌ Market-driven |
| Reflects global value | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
When the dinar returns to FOREX, the program rate will align with the FOREX rate, and the old controlled in-country system will vanish.
The Role of New Dinar Denominations
Before the FOREX reintroduction, new lower denominations must be rolled out. This is a crucial step to ensure smooth transition and proper circulation.
Investors often overlook this, assuming the current in-country program rate will directly determine international value. The truth is, these are two separate systems, and conflating them leads to unrealistic expectations.
Q&A: Common Questions About Dinar Rates
Q1: Can the CBI adjust the dinar rate anytime?
A: Yes, the CBI can change the program rate up or down at any time. This does not affect the FOREX rate.
Q2: Will there ever be two rates at the same time?
A: No. The dinar can only have one official rate. When it returns to FOREX, the program rate will merge with the international rate.
Q3: Does a higher program rate mean the dinar is stronger globally?
A: Not necessarily. The program rate is a domestic tool and does not reflect real market value.
Q4: What triggers the FOREX rate introduction?
A: Typically, the release of new denominations and official approval from the CBI. Once on FOREX, the market determines the value.
Featured Snippet Suggestions
Snippet 1: “The program rate is the official in-country rate set by the Central Bank of Iraq, while the FOREX rate reflects the dinar’s true value in international markets.”
Snippet 2: “Once the Iraqi Dinar returns to FOREX trading, the program rate disappears and the official rate aligns with global market demand.”
Conclusion
Understanding the difference between the program rate and FOREX rate is critical for anyone tracking the Iraqi Dinar. While the CBI can adjust domestic rates at will, these do not determine the dinar’s global market value. True value is only established when the currency returns to FOREX trading, accompanied by the rollout of new denominations.
Stay informed, and don’t confuse in-country adjustments with international market potential.
Follow & Connect With Us
Blog: Dinar Evaluation
Telegram: DINAR Evaluation
Facebook: Dinar Gurus
Twitter: @DinaresGurus
YouTube: DINAR REVALUATION
Hashtags
#IraqiDinar #DinarUpdate #FOREXRate #CurrencyInvestment #DinarRevaluation #CBI #ProgramRate #ForexTrading #InvestSmart #DinarNews #DinarInsights
Mnt Goat ...my CBI contact...said we would hear all kinds of comments about the independence of the CBI and how they can adjust the rate anytime they want. Yes this may be true but...Some don’t even realize there are two types of rates, one is the program rate and the other the FOREX rate...the ‘program’ rate tied to the de facto peg can be changed upwards or downwards by the CBI any time. This does not mean allowing the dinar back on FOREX...
When the dinar goes back to FOREX it will be re-pegged and off the sole peg to the dollar and the program rate will go away. The newer lower denominations would have to first be rolled out. We are talking apples and oranges when we talk about these two rate types...The dinar can only have one ‘official’ rate. There is no such thing as an in-country rate and then a FOREX rate at the same time...When the dinar does go back to FOREX, the in-country rate (program rate) will change to the FOREX rate.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)