Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. File
| Photo Credit: AP

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani casts his vote in the country’s parliamentary election in Baghdad, Iraq, Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2025.
| Photo Credit: AP

Baghdad:

Iraq’s parliament passed into law on Tuesday a revised bill that had sparked outrage over fears it rolled back women’s rights and permitted underage marriage.

The parliament said on its website that it had adopted “the proposal to amend the Personal Status Law”, as well as “the second amendment of the general amnesty law”.

The amendment to the 1959 Personal Status Law allows people to choose between religious or civil regulations for family matters such as marriage, inheritance, divorce and child custody.

An earlier version of the amendments faced a backlash from feminists and civil society groups over fears it would lower the minimum age for Muslim girls to marry to as young as nine years old.

But a revised version reinstated clauses of the old law that set the age of marriage at 18 — or 15 with the consent of legal guardians and a judge, MP Mohamed Anouz told AFP.

Under the new amendment, couples can opt for Shiite Muslim or Sunni Muslim rules, and clerics and lawyers will have four months to establish community-specific regulations.

In October, Amnesty International warned the amendments could strip women and girls of protections regarding divorce and inheritance.

The parliament also passed a general amnesty law that had sparked disagreements between political blocs. The law grants retrials to those convicted of a number of crimes.

The Taqadom party, the most influential Sunni bloc, welcomed the adoption of the amnesty law.

Iraq’s Sunni community has been the main proponent of revisiting the law, pushing for it to include a full review of all convictions on terror charges.

The law excludes convictions for “terrorist crimes” that resulted in the death of a person or “permanent disability”, or that involved fighting the Iraqi security forces or “sabotage of institutions”, according to Anouz.

But it does allow the judiciary to reopen investigations and start new trials for those who say they confessed “under torture” or were convicted based on “information provided by a secret informer”, Anouz explained.

In recent years, Iraqi courts have ordered hundreds of executions in terror cases, proceedings that rights groups say often lack due process or in which confessions suspected to have been extracted through torture are admissible.

In a country plagued by endemic corruption, those accused of embezzling public funds can also benefit from the amnesty law if they repay the stolen money, Anouz said.

A previous 2016 amnesty reportedly covered 150,000 people.

The new amnesty law excludes rape, incest and human trafficking.

The laws passed Tuesday, each endorsed by the Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish communities, were adopted in one package, with political parties agreeing to avoid any blockage.

But several lawmakers denounced irregularities in the voting process, with some threatening to go to court to have Tuesday’s session invalidated.

MP Nour Nafe claimed the parliament passed the personal status law and the general amnesty “without a vote”.

The MPs “did not raise their hands”, she said on X, adding that some lawmakers had left the room in response to the “farce”.

(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Few could have foreseen Bashar al-Assad’s dramatic ouster as 2024 drew to a close. For years, Syria’s battle lines had been frozen under a fragile ceasefire brokered by Russia and Turkey in 2020. Yet, Assad’s downfall—after his family’s iron grip over Syria for over five decades—has shaken the region to its core. Lina Khatib of London-based think tank, Chatham House, writing in Foreign Policy, likened it to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, calling it “an earthquake in the regional order”.

The reasons for Assad’s collapse are as much about Syria as they are about its ophthalmologist ex-president’s patrons—Russia, bogged down in Ukraine, had neither the resources nor the resolve to back Assad, and Iran’s proxies across the region were severely weakened by Israeli air strikes. Sensing the moment, rebel forces led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a group with roots in Al-Qaeda, mounted a ferocious offensive. Assad’s army, battered by years of corruption, desertions and low morale, folded in the face of the HTS’s blitz. Predictably, Western powers have swooped in to shape Syria’s political future and are now vying to influence the makeup of the next government.

From the relative calm of India or from the peaceful Western European capitals, it’s tempting to ask: why is the Arab world perpetually at war with itself? Why does it spawn so many extremist groups? Why has it been trapped in cycles of violence and instability for decades? To answer these questions, we must look beyond the modern era, all the way back to the 11th century. But for now, let’s stay within the last century to understand how history has shaped the region’s current turmoil.

The Lawrence Syndrome

Years ago, I watched Lawrence of Arabia, a sweeping tale of West Asia’s chaos around the years 1916-17. Hollywood, as we know, isn’t big on sequels. But looking at the current mess in the region, I would certainly say, no, shout, that it’s high time for a sequel to Lawrence of Arabia.

The iconic 1962 film serves as a powerful metaphor for the ongoing struggles in West Asia. The themes of betrayal, tribalism and Western manipulation in the film echo the realities of modern conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya. Set during World War I, the film offers a stark window into the forces that set the stage for the region’s instability. The movie depicts T.E. Lawrence, played by Peter O’Toole, as a British officer cobbling together a front consisting of diverse groups of Arab tribes to fight against the Ottoman Empire, which had governed much of the Arab world for centuries. The British officer on behalf of his government promised the Arabs full independence in return for their support.

However, as history shows, that promise was nothing more than deception. After the war, the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement, signed between Britain and France, carved the region into British and French colonial spheres of influence, betraying the Arabs and ignoring their aspirations for self-determination. This betrayal was not just a diplomatic slight—it planted the seeds of mistrust that continue to shape Arab-Western relations to this day.

The arbitrary borders drawn by colonial powers, with no regard for the region’s ethnic, tribal or religious complexities, created fragile states that were prone to fracture. Syria, Iraq, Libya and Yemen are glaring examples of this legacy: nations artificially built by outsiders, now disintegrating as factions fight for power in structures never designed to hold.

Fragile Tribal Alliances

Memorable but controversial views about the Arabs uttered in Lawrence of Arabia are believed by many in the West even today: “So long as the Arabs fight tribe against tribe, so long will they be a little people, a silly people—greedy, barbarous, and cruel, as you are.” In the film, Lawrence struggles to unite the disparate Arab tribes against the Ottomans. This reflects the tribalism and factionalism that continue to plague the region. In Libya, for instance, the fall of Muammar Gaddafi exposed deep tribal rivalries, leading to a prolonged civil war. Similarly, in Yemen, the conflict is partly driven by tribal and sectarian divisions, exacerbated by foreign intervention.

It’s All About Oil

“There is nothing in the desert, and no man needs nothing,” said Lawrence in the film. But things dramatically changed in the region with the discovery of vast oil reserves. From “nothing”, the region’s desert became resource-rich. Oil turned deserts into global battlegrounds, amplifying foreign intervention. Another Hollywood movie, Syriana, depicts how mega Western energy companies played kingmakers in the region. Greed led to corruption and manipulation. In our times, the US and its allies have often supported local leaders or factions in ways that serve their strategic interests, only to abandon them later. For instance, the US first supported Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, but later overthrew him in 2003. In Syria, Western powers have backed various rebel groups, some of which later turned into destabilising forces.

Oil, the region’s most valuable resource, has been both a blessing and a curse. Oil drew intense interest from Western powers, who sought to control these resources to fuel their economies. The oil-rich Gulf states, while benefiting economically, became heavily reliant on Western security guarantees, leaving them vulnerable to foreign influence. The 1953 Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)-led coup in Iran, which overthrew Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh after he nationalised the oil industry, is a case in point. Similarly, the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, justified on dubious grounds, dismantled state institutions and unleashed a wave of sectarian violence that continues to plague the country.

Israel and Modern Wars

The Balfour Declaration of 1917, in which Britain supported the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, added to the tensions. This commitment conflicted with promises made to Arab leaders by the colonial powers, which had assured support for an independent Arab state in exchange for their rebellion against the Ottomans. The betrayal left deep scars, fuelling resentment that persists to this day. The establishment of Israel following the Holocaust and the UN partition plan displaced hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, leading to the first Arab-Israeli war in 1948. Subsequent wars (1956, 1967, 1973), the Palestinian refugee crisis and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian tensions continue to define the region’s volatility. For many Arab nations, Israel became a symbol of Western-backed injustice and territorial loss.

The Death Of Pan-Arabism

Despite turmoil and crises, or perhaps because of them, Pan-Arabism emerged as a movement to unite the warring Arab world under a shared identity, overcoming tribal and sectarian divisions. Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser was the movement’s most towering figure. Unfortunately for ordinary Arab people, internal rivalries, ideological differences and external meddling stymied the movement.

The United States and its allies, wary of the socialist underpinnings of Pan-Arabism, actively worked to undermine it. For instance, the CIA was reportedly involved in orchestrating coups and supporting conservative monarchies to counter Nasser’s influence. By the 1970s, Pan-Arabism had largely faded, replaced by fragmented nationalisms and chaos.

Hope, Then Disillusionment

The 2011 Arab Spring uprisings briefly raised hopes for democratic change. However, the movements’ outcomes varied widely, with some states descending into chaos. In Syria, peaceful protests against President Bashar al-Assad devolved into a brutal civil war, drawing in regional and international players. The US, Russia, Iran, Turkey and others have all backed different factions, turning Syria into a proxy battlefield. Libya, too, saw its long-time leader Gaddafi overthrown with NATO’s help, only to descend into a protracted conflict among rival factions. Meanwhile, countries like Egypt saw a return to authoritarianism, dashing hopes for meaningful reform.

Echoes Of The Crusades

The Crusades, launched between the 11th and 13th centuries, were actually military campaigns by European Christian powers to reclaim Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim control. Salah ad-Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub, commonly known in the West as Saladin, defeated the Christian army of crusaders at the Battle of Hattin in 1187, which led to the recapture of Jerusalem. Ironically, Saladin hailed from a Kurdish family (non-Arabs in West Asia) but became a hero of the Arabs after the victory. The first sultan of both Egypt and Syria is today hero-worshipped in Muslim societies, particularly in the Arab world, for inflicting a crushing defeat on the European forces. He remains a celebrated figure of resistance, unity, and Islamic valour. His victory symbolises an ability to push back against Western incursions—a legacy still invoked today in discussions of imperialism, foreign intervention and the need for regional unity. Today, Islamist movements and Arab nationalists have, at times, likened Western intervention in the Middle East—such as the US-led invasion of Iraq or European colonial rule—to a “new crusade”, a continuation of Western aggression under different banners.

West Asia is in chaos. Visiting Libya, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq is considered unsafe. It remains a patchwork of conflict zones, authoritarian regimes and fragile states. Over six million Syrians are refugees living in neighbouring countries, and over seven million are internally displaced. Yemen’s civil war, orchestrated by Saudi-Iran rivalry, has created one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises. On top of the crises in Iraq and Syria, their people have to grapple with the threat of ISIS. Lebanon’s economy is in free fall, exacerbating social and political tensions. Even Israel’s economy has ground to a halt due to relentless wars in the last 14 months.

The US and its Western allies remain deeply involved in the region, whether through military presence, arms sales, supporting one extremist organisation or another, or through diplomatic manoeuvres. Unfortunately apart from Turkey, no other emerging power or BRICS nations are showing any interest in shaping the region’s future, even though they know they might be eventually affected by the ongoing crisis.

(Syed Zubair Ahmed is a London-based senior Indian journalist with three decades of experience with the Western media)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

Iraq is set to amend its marriage laws which would lower the legal age of consent from 18 to nine, allowing old men to marry young girls, according to a report in The Telegraph. Dominant Shia Muslim parties in the Iraqi Parliament have proposed an amendment to the country’s “personal status law” that could see a Taliban-style rollback of all women’s rights. If passed, the legal changes will deprive the Iraqi women of rights to divorce, child custody and inheritance as well.

The proposed changes would mark a shift from the 1959 legislation, also known as Law 188, which was introduced after the fall of the Iraqi monarchy. The law transferred family law authority from religious figures to the state judiciary. The coalition of Shia Muslim parties claims that the proposed move aligns with a strict interpretation of Islamic law and protects young girls from ‘immoral relationships’.

While attempts have been made in the past to amend the law, this is the first time it seems that the Iraqi lawmakers might be able to see it through. A second reading of the amendment to the law was passed in September earlier this year.

“It’s the closest it’s ever been. It has more momentum than it’s ever had, primarily because of the Shia parties,” Dr Renad Mansour, a senior research fellow at Chatham House was quoted as saying by the publication.

“It’s not all Shia parties, it’s just the specific ones that are empowered and are really pushing it. Stressing the religious side is a way for them to try and regain some of the ideological legitimacy that has been waning over the last few years.”

Also read | UN Political Mission In Iraq To End By 2025 After Over 20 Years

Opponents of the move have slammed the government and MPs for attempting to diminish women’s rights. Meanwhile, human rights groups stated that the new law effectively puts young girls at risk of sexual and physical violence.

According to the United Nations children’s agency, UNICEF, despite outlawing child marriages in the 1950s, 28 per cent of girls in Iraq are already married before the age of 18. A loophole in the law where religious leaders officiate these marriages, instead of the courts, allows underage girls to be married to older men with permission from the father.

Israel:

Top US diplomat Antony Blinken was due to travel to Egypt on Tuesday for talks on a Gaza ceasefire after saying Israel had accepted a US “bridging proposal” for a deal and urging Hamas to do the same.

Blinken, on his ninth visit to the Middle East since the Palestinian operative group’s October 7 attack triggered the war with Israel, was scheduled to fly from Tel Aviv to El Alamein, the Mediterranean city famous for a World War II battle in 1942, to speak to Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi at his summer palace.

Afterwards, he will head to a meeting with Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani, in Doha, the scene of ceasefire talks last week.

Both Egypt and Qatar are working alongside the United States to broker a truce in the 10-month Gaza conflict.

Washington put forward the latest proposal last week after the talks in Doha.

Blinken said Monday he had “a very constructive meeting” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who “confirmed to me that Israel accepts the bridging proposal”.

Ahead of those talks, Hamas called on the mediators to implement the framework set out by US President Joe Biden in late May, rather than hold more negotiations.

The movement said on Sunday that the current US proposal “responds to Netanyahu’s conditions” and leaves him “fully responsible for thwarting the efforts of the mediators”.

Earlier on Monday, the US secretary of state had said: “This is a decisive moment — probably the best, maybe the last, opportunity to get the hostages home, to get a ceasefire and to put everyone on a better path to enduring peace and security”.

Months of on-off negotiations with US, Qatari and Egyptian mediators have failed to produce an agreement.

Israel and Hamas have blamed each other for delays in reaching an accord that diplomats say would help avert a wider conflagration in the Middle East that could draw in Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

“There is, I think, a real sense of urgency here, across the region, on the need to get this over the finish line and to do it as soon as possible,” Blinken said.

The Biden administration is under domestic pressure over Gaza, with pro-Palestinian protests taking place outside the Democratic National Convention in Chicago on Monday.

Biden said in his farewell speech to the convention that the protesters “have a point”, adding that “a lot of innocent people are being killed, on both sides”.

Permanent ceasefire

Israel and Hamas have traded blame for delays in reaching a truce deal.

Hamas insisted on “a permanent ceasefire and a comprehensive (Israeli) withdrawal from the Gaza Strip”, saying Netanyahu wanted to keep Israeli forces at several strategic locations within the territory.

Western ally Jordan, hostage supporters who protested in Tel Aviv during Blinken’s visit, and Hamas itself have called for pressure on Netanyahu in order for an agreement to be reached.

Far-right members crucial to the prime minister’s governing coalition oppose any truce.

The October 7 attack on southern Israel resulted in the deaths of 1,198 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally of Israeli official figures.

Israel’s retaliatory offensive in Gaza has killed at least 40,139 people, according to the territory’s health ministry, which does not give details of civilian and operative deaths.

Out of 251 hostages seized during Hamas’s attack, 111 are still held in Gaza, including 39 the military says are dead.

The Biden framework would freeze fighting for an initial six weeks while Israeli hostages are exchanged for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and humanitarian aid enters Gaza.

Netanyahu said on Monday that negotiators were aiming to “release a maximum number of living hostages” in the first phase of any ceasefire.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

A proposed bill in Iraq’s parliament has sparked widespread outrage and concern, as it seeks to reduce the legal age of marriage for girls to just 9 years old. The controversial legislation, introduced by the Iraq Justice Ministry, aims to amend the country’s Personal Status Law, which currently sets the minimum age for marriage at 18.

The bill would allow citizens to choose between religious authorities or the civil judiciary to decide on family affairs. Critics fear this will lead to a slashing of rights in matters of inheritance, divorce, and child custody.

If passed, the bill would allow girls as young as 9 and boys as young as 15 to wed, sparking fears of increased child marriage and exploitation. Critics argue that this regressive move would undermine decades of progress in promoting women’s rights and gender equality.

Human rights organizations, women’s groups, and civil society activists have vehemently opposed the bill, warning of serious consequences for young girls’ education, health, and well-being. They argue that child marriage leads to increased dropout rates, early pregnancies, and a heightened risk of domestic violence.

According to the United Nations children’s agency, UNICEF, 28 percent of girls in Iraq are already married before the age of 18.

“Passing this law would show a country moving backward, not forwards,” Human Rights Watch (HRW) researcher Sarah Sanbar said.

Amal Kabashi of the Iraq Women’s Network also voiced strong opposition, stating that the amendment “provides huge leeway for male dominance over family issues” in an already conservative society.

In late July, parliament withdrew the proposed changes when many lawmakers objected. They resurfaced in an August 4 session after receiving the support of powerful Shia blocs that dominate the chamber.

The proposed changes would mark a shift from the 1959 legislation. This law, enacted after the fall of the Iraqi monarchy, transferred family law authority from religious figures to the state judiciary. The new bill would reintroduce the option to apply religious rules, primarily from Shia and Sunni Islam, but does not mention other religious or sectarian communities within Iraq’s diverse population.

Proponents of the bill claim it aims to standardize Islamic law and protect young girls from “immoral relationships.” However, opponents counter that this reasoning is flawed and ignores the harsh realities of child marriage.

By giving power over marriage to religious authorities, the amendment would “undermine the principle of equality under Iraqi law,” Sanbar of HRW said.

It also “could legalise the marriage of girls as young as nine years old, stealing the futures and well-being of countless girls.”

“Girls belong on the playground and in school, not in a wedding dress,” she said.

It is still unclear if this bid to change the law will succeed where several earlier attempts have failed.

Baghdad, Iraq:

Iraq said Sunday a new power line will bring electricity from Turkey to its northern provinces as authorities aim to diversify the country’s energy sources to ease chronic power outages.

The 115-kilometre line connects to Kisik power plant west of Mosul and will provide 300 megawatts from Turkey to Iraq’s northern provinces of Nineveh, Salah al-Din and Kirkuk, according to a statement by the prime minister’s office.

PM Mohamed Shia al-Sudani said the new line is a “strategic” step to link Iraq with neighbouring countries. 

“The line started operating today,” Ahmed Moussa, spokesperson for the electricity ministry, told AFP.

Decades of war have left Iraq’s infrastructure in a pitiful state, with power cuts worsening the blistering summer when temperatures often reach 50 Celsius (122 Fahrenheit).

Many households have just a few hours of mains electricity per day, and those who can afford it use private generators to keep fridges and air conditioners running.

Despite its vast oil reserves, Iraq remains dependent on imports to meet its energy needs, especially from neighbouring Iran, which regularly cuts supplies.

Sudani has repeatedly stressed the need for Iraq to diversify energy sources to ease the chronic outages.

To reduce its dependence on Iranian gas, Baghdad has been exploring several possibilities including imports from Gulf countries.

In March, a 340-kilometre (210-mile) power line started operating to bring electricity from Jordan to Al-Rutbah in Iraq’s southwest.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Baghdad:

An army officer and four soldiers were killed in an attack on their post in Iraq’s central province of Salaheddin on Monday, officials said.

Iraq’s ministry of defence said that an officer and several members of his regiment were killed “while thwarting a terrorist attack”.

“Daesh terrorists launched an attack” on an army post in the village of Mtebija “killing four soldiers and the regiment commander,” said a security source, using an alternate name for the Islamic State group.

The jihadist group overran large swathes of Iraq and neighbouring Syria in 2014, proclaiming its “caliphate” and launching a reign of terror.

It was defeated in Iraq in 2017 by Iraqi forces backed by a US-led military coalition, and in 2019 lost the last territory it held in Syria to US-backed Kurdish forces.

But its remnants continue to carry out deadly hit-and-run attacks and ambushes, particularly from remote areas and desert hideouts.

In a report published in January, the United Nations said IS has “between 3,000 and 5,000 fighters” across Iraq and Syria.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Nasiriyah:

Iraqi authorities have executed at least 11 people convicted of “terrorism” this week, security and health sources said Wednesday, with rights group Amnesty International condemning an “alarming lack of transparency”.

Under Iraqi law, terrorism and murder offences are punishable by death, and execution decrees must be signed by the president.

A security source in Iraq’s southern Dhi Qar province told AFP that 11 “terrorists from the Islamic State group” were executed by hanging at a prison in the city of Nasiriyah, “under the supervision of a justice ministry team”.

A local medical source confirmed that the health department had received the bodies of 11 executed people.

They were hanged on Monday “under Article 4 of the anti-terrorism law”, the source added, requesting anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue.

All 11 were from Salahaddin province and the bodies of seven had been returned to their families, the medical official said.

Iraqi courts have handed down hundreds of death and life sentences in recent years for people convicted of membership in “a terrorist group”, an offence that carries capital punishment regardless of whether the defendant had been an active fighter.

Iraq has been criticised for trials denounced by rights groups as hasty, with confessions sometimes obtained under torture.

Amnesty in a statement on Wednesday condemned the latest hangings for “overly broad and vague terrorism charges”.

It said a total of 13 men were executed on Monday, including 11 who had been “convicted on the basis of their affiliation to the so-called Islamic State armed group”.

The two others, arrested in 2008, “were convicted of terrorism-related offences under the Penal Code after a grossly unfair trial”, Amnesty said citing their lawyer.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)