State of Law says no US veto on Maliki nomination

BAGHDAD — A senior figure in Iraq’s State of Law Coalition said the absence of a U.S. veto on Nouri al-Maliki’s bid for the premiership amounts to tacit acceptance, linking the position to U.S. interests in restricting weapons to state control.

Aqeel al-Fatlawi, spokesperson for the coalition, said in an interview on Alawla TV that “the absence of a U.S. ‘veto’ on Mr. al-Maliki amounts to acceptance,” adding, “I believe this acceptance stems from U.S. interests in the region, which require moving toward restricting weapons to the hands of the state.” He said, “Mr. al-Maliki is the person most capable of performing this role and regulating the conduct of armed factions, and this aligns with the U.S. preference.”

In recent remarks on Jan. 26, 2026, U.S. Ambassador Tom Barrack reiterated Washington’s position on Iraq’s government formation, saying after a phone call with Kurdistan Democratic Party leader Masoud Barzani that “the U.S. position remains clear: a government installed by Iran will not be successful, neither for Iraqi or Syrian aspirations for a brighter future, nor for an effective partnership with the United States,” while also stressing the importance of maintaining a ceasefire in Syria and ensuring humanitarian assistance, particularly for Kobani.

Aqeel al-Fatlawi, spokesperson for the State of Law Coalition, in an interview on Alawla TV:

The absence of a U.S. veto on Mr. al-Maliki amounts to acceptance. I believe this acceptance stems from U.S. interests in the region, which require moving toward restricting weapons to the hands of the state. Mr. al-Maliki is the person most capable of performing this role and regulating the conduct of armed factions, and this aligns with the U.S. preference.

We do not know the reason for Mr. al-Halbousi’s objection and his attempt to mobilize opposition to Mr. al-Maliki’s nomination. This, in itself, is natural and acceptable. What is unacceptable, however, is that some bloggers who claim affiliation with Taqaddum wrote statements that went beyond norms, propriety, and at times even basic ethics. We sent messages to Taqaddum to inquire about their affiliation, and we received a response stating that these individuals represent only themselves and do not represent Taqaddum.

At this stage, we cannot afford to disregard a bloc such as Taqaddum, especially since we have ‘very, very good’ relations with our brothers in Taqaddum at the level of lawmakers and leaders. We hope positions will change, whether in the near or distant future.

There is no constitutional opportunity to object to Mr. al-Maliki’s nomination, because he is the nominee of the largest bloc.