As if Iraq has not had enough trouble and strife, Wajeeh Lion Substack explains their peril to those of us who maybe, like me, were ignorant of the US Sword of Damocles held over them:

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more

A Dangerous Game of Political Chicken Threatens to Bankrupt Iraq

Wajeeh Lion

Apr 27READ IN APP

​The clock has officially run out in Baghdad. As of late April 2026, Iraq has blown past its constitutional deadline to form a new government, plunging the nation into a perilous political freeze. To understand the paralysis gripping the country right now, you do not need a degree in international relations or game theory. At its core, the crisis is a high-stakes game of political chicken between two powerful men, complicated by the United States holding the country’s purse strings and Iran watching closely from the shadows.

​The deadlock centers on the dominant political coalition in parliament, which had exactly fifteen days following the election of a new Iraqi president earlier this month to agree on a prime minister. That deadline came and went in total silence. The group is fundamentally paralyzed because two political heavyweights refuse to step aside. On one side is Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, the current caretaker prime minister who is determined to keep his job. On the other side is Nouri al-Maliki, a formidable former prime minister fighting aggressively for a political comeback. Neither man is willing to back down, knowing that surrendering would look like a massive public defeat. Yet, if neither yields, their political coalition risks fracturing entirely, leaving the government stuck in a constitutional void.

This is not merely a local political dispute. The United States has inserted itself forcefully into the outcome, utilizing a unique and devastating point of economic leverage. Because of how Iraq’s economy is structured, the revenue it generates from selling oil is held at the Federal Reserve in New York. To keep the Iraqi economy functioning, the U.S. Treasury physically flies pallets of U.S. dollars to Baghdad’s Central Bank. Following recent regional conflicts, the U.S. government issued a stark, public ultimatum: if Maliki is reinstated as prime minister, Washington will cut off those dollar shipments. American officials view Maliki as too closely aligned with Iran and blame his past policies for fueling regional instability. Without those regular dollar shipments, Iraq’s economy would collapse almost overnight. This puts the Iraqi political establishment in an agonizing bind. While certain factions desperately want Maliki back in power, absolutely no one wants to be responsible for bankrupting the country.

​Adding fuel to the fire is the chaos unfolding just outside Iraq’s borders. Following the late-2024 collapse of the Syrian government to extremist groups, Iraqi leaders are terrified that violence will spill over their borders, mirroring the devastating invasions of a decade ago. Furthermore, Iraq remains the primary proxy battleground for influence between Washington and Tehran. While the United States threatens economic ruin from afar, Iranian generals have recently traveled to Baghdad to exert direct pressure on politicians, demanding a leader sympathetic to their interests. This intense regional anxiety makes Iraqi politicians feel an acute need for a strong, decisive leader, yet they cannot agree on who that should be without severely angering one of the competing global superpowers.

​So, how do Maliki and Sudani avoid crashing the entire system? In high-stakes political standoffs, the most logical exit strategy is a compromise candidate—a third party whom neither side adores, but both can tolerate. Behind closed doors, intense negotiations are reportedly underway to elevate an independent constitutional expert and businessman named Ali Shakir Mahmoud Al-Zaidi. For the United States, Al-Zaidi is an acceptable choice simply because he is not Maliki, which would keep the crucial dollar shipments flowing. For Iran and the Iraqi coalition, he is acceptable because he remains deeply integrated within their established political network. Elevating a middle-ground figure like Al-Zaidi would allow both Maliki and Sudani to save face without triggering an economic catastrophe.

​Because the stakes are so incredibly high, the Iraqi media landscape is currently flooded with disinformation designed to manipulate the negotiations and cause panic. Rumors frequently circulate that either Maliki or Sudani has secretly dropped out, or that the United States has already suspended the vital dollar shipments. In reality, both men remain officially in the race, and the Central Bank of Iraq has been forced to step in and confirm that the money is still flowing, proving the rumors were merely psychological tactics meant to force a rushed decision.

​Even if a compromise is reached, the situation remains incredibly precarious. Iraq’s highest religious authority, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, possesses the power to make or break a politician with a single statement, yet he has remained notably quiet during this crisis. Furthermore, with the legal deadline now missed, the highly politicized Iraqi Supreme Court may be forced to step in to interpret the law, potentially sparking even more bitter disputes over who actually has the power to appoint the next leader. Finally, heavily armed, Iran-backed militias could still lash out with violence if they feel a compromise candidate threatens their grip on power.

​For now, Iraq is holding its breath. The country’s political elite must untangle their bitter rivalries and find a workable compromise in the coming days, or they risk dragging the entire nation over an economic cliff.