At least five killed in attack on Iran courthouse
Iranian diplomat says had 'frank' talks with European powers
Iran says to continue nuclear enrichment
Amnesty slams Tehran for use of 'unlawful' strikes on Israel
Iran says IAEA team to visit soon
A+ A-
ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - At least five people were killed and a dozen others were injured when a courthouse in Sistan and Baluchsestan province was attacked by gunmen affiliated with a Baluch group on Saturday morning, according to Iranian media.
The attack targeted the Zahedan Judiciary building. According to initial reports, at least five people were killed and 13 others were injured. The death toll is expected to rise, reported the state-run IRNA.
The semi-official Tasnim news agency blamed the attack on Jaish al-Adl, a Baluch armed group.
Baluchis are a mainly Sunni ethnic minority group living in the restive province of Sistan and Baluchsestan in southeastern Iran, near the border with Pakistan.
This is a developing story...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Shafaq News
3 hours ago
- Shafaq News
Iraq's PMF Law: A battle for state control
Shafaq News As Iraq's parliamentary term draws to a close, a controversial draft law to restructure the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) has reignited a complex political battle that reaches far beyond its military implications. While the Shiite-led Coordination Framework seeks to secure formal legal status for the PMF within the national defense architecture, internal divisions, Kurdish-Sunni bargaining, and mounting US opposition have turned the bill into a flashpoint at the heart of Iraq's statehood debate. The Political Stakes Behind the PMF Law The proposed PMF Authority Law, backed by major Shiite factions, is officially framed as part of Iraq's ongoing security reform. It aims to integrate the PMF—a force originally formed to fight ISIS—into the military chain of command. Supporters argue the law is necessary to standardize ranks, regulate funding, and clarify the PMF's relationship with state institutions. But opponents—both foreign and domestic—view it as an attempt to legitimize powerful Iran-aligned factions and institutionalize a parallel command structure, insulated from civilian oversight. The controversy reflects deeper struggles over the nature of the Iraqi state: whether it will consolidate authority through a unified military, or evolve toward a pluralistic security system shaped by competing political and paramilitary actors. Legal Background and Structural Gaps The PMF was formed in mid-2014 by government order in response to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani's fatwa (al-jihad al-kafa'i) after the fall of Mosul. It drew tens of thousands of fighters, including from pre-existing armed factions. In 2016, Iraq's parliament passed the first PMF law, formally recognizing the force—but leaving its command structure and internal regulation vague. The current draft law, which has faced repeated delays, seeks to address those gaps. According to parliamentary sources, the amendments propose: -Military ranking and formal structures. -Defined administrative ties to the Ministries of Defense and Finance. -An internal inspectorate for discipline and oversight. -Military background requirements for PMF leadership. -Formation of internal military councils. -Unique financial entitlements for specific units. Yet critics argue that the draft preserves the PMF's administrative independence while cementing legal protections for its leadership—effectively creating a parallel army. Fragmented Support Within Iraq's Parliament While Coordination Framework blocs hold significant parliamentary sway—especially after the 2022 resignation of Sadrist MPs—consensus on the PMF law remains elusive. Internal rifts, even among Shiite factions, center on leadership appointments and control over PMF deployments in Sunni-majority areas. Kurdish and Sunni lawmakers, while less vocal in public, have played a pivotal behind-the-scenes role in blocking the bill. During the July session, both blocs withdrew in protest over the bill's inclusion on the parliamentary agenda. Their objections were procedural and political: citing Article 37 of the parliamentary rules, they argued the bill was added without proper notice, while also using the walkout to apply pressure on broader negotiations. Some Kurdish factions, according to Shafaq News political sources, have linked their support for the PMF law to concessions on unresolved federal-regional disputes, including budget allocations, oil revenues, and control of border crossings. Messages were reportedly sent through intermediaries outlining these conditions for cooperation on 'controversial legislation.' Sunni parties are also split. Most are in favor of not passing the bill most notably former Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi's Taqaddum coalition (37 seats), which has voiced reservations tied to influence distribution and executive authority. Observers note that both Kurdish and Sunni leaders fear the law may consolidate what they see as a 'Shiite army' with disproportionate influence—yet are equally motivated by the opportunity to extract political gains in return for their votes. With Kurdish and Sunni MPs holding over 120 of 329 seats, their coordinated opposition could block passage, despite the Coordination Framework's control of at least 130 seats. The ambiguous positions of independents and small parties further complicate the math, making consensus difficult. US Pressure and Strategic Alarm The United States has expressed firm and repeated opposition to the PMF law. Pentagon officials told Shafaq News they view the draft as a direct enhancement of Iran's influence in Iraq. The US Embassy in Baghdad echoed this stance, with Chargé d'Affaires Steven Fagin warning that the legislation risks legitimizing groups the US classifies as terrorist organizations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a call with Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, warned that the law would institutionalize Iranian-backed armed groups and undermine Iraqi sovereignty. This message was reiterated in a State Department statement, which called the law 'deeply concerning.' A report by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy argued that the US would respond by sanctioning PMF leaders with ties to Iran, freezing components of the US-Iraq security partnership, or conditioning military aid on security-sector reforms. Despite the US warnings, the Iraqi government has stood by its position. A statement from al-Sudani's office described the bill as a sovereign initiative consistent with previous legislation for other agencies, such as the Intelligence and National Security Services. The PMF, it stated, is a 'formal military institution operating under the Commander-in-Chief.' Independent Voices, Strategic Fears Former Iraqi diplomat Dr. Ghazi Faisal told Shafaq News that the PMF law is evolving from a regulatory tool into a 'ticking political bomb.' He cautioned that enshrining the PMF's autonomy would fracture the military command hierarchy and facilitate dual loyalties within Iraq's security system. Faisal warned that unless national consensus is reached, the law could trigger a serious confrontation with Washington and contribute to the erosion of centralized authority. 'We risk institutionalizing a force whose chain of command is not fully loyal to the state.' Efforts by Shafaq News to solicit formal comments from major Kurdish and Sunni parties were met with silence. Spokespersons declined to give on-record positions, noting only that 'all matters will be resolved legally within parliament through dialogue.' Government in the Crossfire Political analysts interviewed by Shafaq News say Prime Minister al-Sudani is walking a tightrope. On one hand, his administration is beholden to the Coordination Framework's legislative agenda. On the other, it seeks to avoid antagonizing Washington at a time when Iraq remains economically fragile and engaged in sensitive IMF and financial negotiations. Strategic expert Ahmed al-Yasiri noted that the US views the PMF law as part of a larger regional contest for influence. The fear is that codifying PMF independence will entrench a legislative precedent that future governments cannot undo. Between Passage and Paralysis Shafaq News has learned from informed sources that US diplomatic efforts to halt the law remain active. While the draft may still be revived in a future session, its fate now depends on a complex equation: intra-Shiite cohesion, Kurdish and Sunni leverage, and the extent to which foreign pressure can shape Iraq's legislative agenda. Ultimately, the PMF law has become a symbol of Iraq's unresolved struggle between the logic of a unified state and the reality of competing armed power centers.
Rudaw Net
5 hours ago
- Rudaw Net
Hezbollah censures Iraqi PM over deadly Baghdad clashes
A+ A- ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - The powerful pro-Iranian group Kataib Hezbollah on Monday criticized Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani for his response to a recent deadly attack on a branch of the agriculture ministry in Baghdad, accusing him of incompetence. The United States has blamed the group for the incident. Armed men affiliated with the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF, or Hashd al-Shaabi) attacked an agriculture ministry office in Baghdad's Karkh district late last month leaving three people dead - a policeman, a civilian, and a member of Kataib Hezbollah. Baghdad confirmed that the perpetrators of the attack were PMF members. Abu Ali al-Askari, the head of Kataib Hezbollah Security Bureau, said in a statement on Monday that the Baghdad incident was a 'trap whose treads were tightened by the hand of one of the Shiite traitors,' without naming anyone. He claimed that "corrupt security leaders are working to serve the American and Israeli project represented in chaos and division' and accused Sudani of lacking military experience and the characteristics of a good leader. Askari also called on the ruling coalition to replace Sudani with a "qualified" individual. A day after the attack, the US embassy in Baghdad blamed Hezbollah for the incident and called on the Iraqi authorities to hold the faction responsible. Washington holds Kataib Hezbollah, a key player in the Iran-led "Axis of Resistance," responsible for numerous attacks on US assets in the region since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas conflict in October 2023. Sudani has vowed to hold the perpetrators accountable and ordered a probe into the attack. The pro-Tehran group has denied involvement in the attack. Iraq's Shiite-led Coordination Framework also condemned the attack as a 'violation of the law and state procedures.'
Memri
18 hours ago
- Memri
Hundreds Of Iranian University Lecturers In Declaration Of Iran's 'Victory': 'We Are In An Era Of "A Historic Turning Point," "The Twilight Of Western Civilization," "Orientalization Of Global Power,"
Introduction Contrary to views in the West that the severe damage caused to Iran's military-nuclear infrastructure and leadership during the June 2025 12-day war has caused the regime to abandon its Islamic Revolution ideology and instead unite the Iranian public around Persian nationalism and culture, many in Iran's intellectual elite have stressed the messages of the Islamic Revolution and praised the leadership of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. On July 22, 2025, Iranian regime mouthpiece outlet Kayhan published on its front page a declaration signed by 313 Iranian university lecturers in which they declared "Iran's victory" against Israel and the United States in the June 2025 12-day war. In the declaration, the lecturers explained that Iran emerged from the Israeli surprise attack victorious and empowered. They echoed the regime's messages regarding the righteousness and superiority of the Islamic Revolutionary regime and the resistance, and the centrality of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, in the face of the disbelieving and secular West, which they predicted will be defeated by Islam, led by Shiite Iran. According to the declaration, for years Israel and the United States have acted and continue to act together in order to topple the Islamic Revolutionary regime, and this is why they targeted its military commanders and its top scientists, with the goal of toppling Iranian society. The declaration explained that Islam is embedded in Iranian society such that the Islamic spirit is so deeply rooted that talk about secularism in Iranian society is false, and they said that the only path that has proven itself has been the resistance – the military-political manifestation of Islamic Iran's opposition to the West – while the path of negotiations has been false and has been used to deceive Iran. It underlined that today, Iran's participation in the negotiations is only a tactic being used to foil the enemy's plots. It also upheld the centrality of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei as the leader of the Islamic nation in accordance with the ideology of the Rule of the Jurisprudent, and it said that he has succeeded by his might and intellect to fend off the hostile Western power of the U.S. and Israel. In addition, it said that he is the individual representing the values of the Islamic Revolution, which is destined to become global. The declaration stated: "We are in an era of 'a historic turning point,' 'the twilight of Western civilization,' 'orientalization of global power [i.e. the shifting of influence to Russia, China, and Iran],' and the 'birth of a strong Iran,' and currently society is ready and eager, more than ever, to jump ahead towards the original ideals of the revolution and to make an Iranian-Islamic plan for independent and original progress." The declaration said that the vision of the global Islamic Revolution is currently being realized: "Today a 'global resistance front' has been created that transcends religion, sects, and territory… This historic situation is the same promise made by [Ayatollah Ruhollah] Khomeini in the first years of the victory of the Islamic Revolution, and today we are clearly witnessing its birth and realization." The following is a translation of the key points of the declaration: "The Joint Goal Of The Zionist Regime And America In The War Was To 'Topple The Islamic Republic [Of Iran]' And Afterwards 'Dismantle Iran', Not Just To Destroy The Nuclear And Missile Infrastructure" "The war that was recently forced [upon Iran] ended in disappointment and helplessness for the Zionist regime and America, and even though a clear opinion cannot be stated regarding the near future and we cannot forget the treachery and violation of promises by the vicious enemy [America] or trust their words, we can at least look at what has happened to us... "The joint goal of the Zionist regime and America in the war was to 'topple the Islamic Republic [of Iran]' and afterwards 'dismantle Iran', not just to destroy the nuclear and missile infrastructure. They wanted to end the Islamic revolution in less than a week and get this 'civilizational obstacle' out of their way forever, by surprise and cleverly. The plan for this war was a plan for 'political collapse' and 'foundational destruction', and it was never limited to [certain] elements. Today everyone knows that the nuclear agreement and the missile deals and the region were just an excuse for dismantling the foundations and essence of the Islamic revolution, but this hidden goal required early preparations such as this. "[America and the Zionist regime] wanted, first and foremost, to empty Iran of its elements of power so that it will be possible to destroy and shatter also the Islamic revolutionary [regime] and Iran [as a state]. The tyrants of the world of Western modernization will never be satisfied with less than that. But because achieving this goal suddenly became difficult and even impossible, they needed to take measures in order to 'dilute Iran's power' and eliminate its resources. Since political bartering in the form of processes and periods of negotiations did not lead to this possibility, the reins of the matter were handed to the Zionist regime in order to kill the [Islamic] revolution in an immediate, crazy, and vicious manner. The war that was recently forced upon [Iran] has no meaning other than [having been a] 'civilizational and identity conflict.' Hence, reductionist and superficial outlooks must be avoided, and reality must be interpreted for what it is. "This attempt showed that there is a distribution of work between America and the Zionist regime, and that there is no gap or difference between the two, and that America will not adopt any policy in the Middle East region that is not coordinated with this [Zionist] regime and that contradicts its interests. "The dichotomy [regarding Israel and America] that was discussed by [Western] secular intellectuals is an illusion and imaginary, and reality has exposed that the Zionist regime is one of the objective expressions and forms of Western civilization, and this civilization and its governments will not stop supporting this regime. The two should be viewed as equal and the distinction between them should be eliminated. America on the one hand insisted on negotiations while on the other hand supported the military aggression of the Zionist regime, and after it saw the defeat of this regime, it put aside its 'false diplomacy' and openly attacked Iran. Hence, the American negotiations table cannot be [now] approached under pretext of preventing war. The recent war resulted from [Iran's] trust in the negotiations table, while a different game was being planned behind the scenes. "Iranian Society Is Mixed And United With Islam In All The Domains And Layers Of Its Personal And Social Lives, And A Deep And Historic Tie Has Been Created Between The Islamic Spirit And The Iranian Body... [This] Is A Separate Identity... [Which Protected Iranians] From Being Swallowed Up And Dissolved By Western Civilization... This War Made It Clear That Iranian Society Has A 'Tight Bond' And 'Internal Tie' With The Revolution And The Regime And That It Sees The Supreme Leader As Its 'Spiritual Father' And 'Source' Of Its Identity" "The citizens of Iran, who are motivated by their identity and semantic ideas, have stood against the incitement to war and their social resistance, and their national character had a deep and religious character. Iran is not a secular social unit, and at least 1,400 years of brilliant and solid history of Iran's post-Islamic period clearly show that Iranian society is mixed and united with Islam in all the domains and layers of its personal and social lives, and a deep and historic tie has been created between the Islamic spirit and the Iranian body. Without these spirit, meaning, and truth, Iran is like a lifeless and rootless body. This holy semantic horizon has granted Iran and the Iranians a separate identity and protected them from being swallowed up and dissolved by Western civilization. "Liberal intellectuals who present a secular narrative about Iran speak about their desires and aspirations, and not about the continuing and clear reality of Iranian society. This war made it clear that Iranian society has a 'tight bond' and 'internal tie' with the revolution and the regime, and that it sees the Supreme Leader as its 'spiritual father' and 'source' of its identity. In these difficult moments, the inner and deep heart of society exposes its belonging and relationship, and Iranian society has also shown that it is not going according to the twisted narratives of the secular intellectuals, and it is not separate from its Islamic and revolutionary identity. These feelings of honor and respect that were now created in the context of Iranian society are a result of the brave resistance of the revolution to foreign invasion, and this glorious victory can be attributed to the world of the revolution and to the wise activism of its wise leader [Khamenei]. "Regarding 'occupations and tragedies,' our view is that in this war a costly base was given, in an outstanding fashion, to reestablishing and rehabilitating the 'social capital,' and the divisions that were forced [upon us] have been removed, and Iran's Islamic society has become united...[1] "It is clear that the structure of our security [institutions] is infested and full of holes and requires serious and comprehensive reconsideration. It requires widespread fixes, holes and breaches need to be identified, and borders and safety boundaries need to be recreated. The extent of the security infiltration during this war is an indication of certain recklessness and shortcomings, and it shows that the matter of fixing this must be placed on the agenda... "The reckless relationship that we have created with Western cyberspace has created the conditions for the infiltration and for insecure and lethal networks, and if we continue with this abandonment and weak-handedness, we will again be met with surprise and the presence of the enemy deep inside [Iran]. "Negotiations Are Pointless... [And] Constitute Self-Deception... Only 'The Resistance' Creates Real Deterrence And Can Cause The Enemy Of Civilization And Identity [America] To Despair And Retreat... The Resistance Is 'The Main And Basic Plan Of Iran' For Advancing And For Confronting Difficulties" "In the domain of 'solutions and means,' our stance is as follows: The recent experience, together with the bitter and damaging experiences of recent decades, have shown that negotiations are pointless and do not solve economic problems, and even constitute part of 'the trap of the aggression' and an 'extortion scheme.' Negotiations should no longer be viewed as a 'solution' to be insisted upon. Negotiations with such an enemy constitute self-deception… "In the recent experience, we have also seen that on the other side of the negotiations table, the plan for war actions was on their agenda, and the negotiations were used as a false cover for this main and hidden goal. Thus, the negotiations have been emptied of their real meaning and have become a theatre of the politics of control. Negotiations in the narrative of the Western governments is surrender of the other side [Iran] to the West, and not an equal and logical deal. But if the other side [Iran] does not choose the path of surrender and humiliation [before the West] and does not want to give up on its natural and inalienable rights… the language turns into threats, and in fact a military war and wave of terror is launched. "On this basis, now, only the 'methodology of the resistance' is effective and solves the problems in all the domains: the political, the cultural, and the economic. Even those who did not support the resistance [i.e. the reformists] have understood now that this approach is a historic must, and that pacification, compromise, or problem-solving must not be used against a civilization that adds fire to war in such a reckless and shameless fashion, and that wages military aggression with cowardice. "Only 'the resistance' creates real deterrence and can cause the enemy of civilization and identity [America] to despair and retreat. A dialogue with these wild and merciless wolves will lead to surrender, kneeling, and humiliation, or to the revealing of the poison dagger that they have hidden under the negotiations table, which they will bury suddenly in Iran's body. "The assumption of these extreme national experiences, going back to the mistakes and the immaturity of the past, and starting from zero[2] will challenge our national security and have a harsh impact on sovereignty and society. Thus, resistance thought must be viewed as groundbreaking and advancing, and it must be seen as 'the main and basic plan of Iran' for advancing and for confronting difficulties. The matter of negotiations must be viewed as a tactic and it must be adopted in accordance with the considerations of the central decisionmakers in the regime, in order to disarm the enemy, remove its excuses, and foil its adventures… "[Iran's Islamic] society has understood clearly that Western civilization wants our soul, our foundations, our power, and our resilience, and if it succeeds it will realize the myth of collapsing [the Iranian regime]. Hence, revealing the harmful aims and goals of this great other [the West] has brought [Iranian] society to a harmony and internal alignment, and it has united it against foreign aggression. This unification is also the result of the 'shining power of the regime of the Islamic Republic' against the [Western] aggression, and the [Islamic] revolution has shown that it has the ability to resist, and that it can respond in time against a multi-faceted, complex, and combined surprise attack, and be the defender of honor and the authority of the people of Iran. Now, after the recent war, our society is full of a feeling of 'pride', 'respect', and 'greatness', and it does not show any signs of defeat, humiliation, or surrender. This social possibility – which stems from 'the intelligent planning of the Leader,' from the 'socialization of revolutionary thought,' and from the 'reliance on the internal technology' – will be the basis for rebuilding social capital in Iran. To this end, [we] must make permanent the elements that were all manifested in the world of the Islamic revolution, the elements that create and shape it. Among these, theories like 'the Rule of the Jurisprudent,' 'the resistance,' 'strengthening the internal structure,' and 'the religious identity of the Iranians,' which belong to the Islamic religious terminologies, must increasingly become part of the social dialogue. "Outlooks that are 'outward-facing,' 'negotiations-oriented,' 'begging,' and 'alienating' have been experienced, and their failure and practical inability has been proven. Thus, they must be overcome, and instead we must place on the agenda that strengthening of the internal infrastructure and resources of Iran. Objective evidence shows that a large part of Iranian society has come to this strategic and historic conclusion, as the Leader [Khamenei] has insisted and demanded for decades, but the forces and movements lacking national confidence [i.e. the reformists] did not aspire to achieve it and chose the path of negotiations and unilateral interaction with the West. "[Iranian] Society… Needs To View [Khamenei] As The Center Of Social Cohesion And Unity And Implement His Demands As The One Who Represents The Hidden And Holy [Imam]" "This experience must become a national principle, and any angle and gap against it constitute a search for conflict with experienced reality and with national unity. The territory and geography of total cohesion [of Iranian-Islamic society] have such characteristics, and those who are subject to the analyses [of foreign media outlets] must unify with the demands of this new national situation and not cause division [in society]. Just as during this war the leader of the revolution [Khamenei] trapped the Zionist regime in a swamp of 'misery' and sent America to the desert of 'regret' by immediately appointing [commanders to replace those who were assassinated] and planning the field, and this way society understood his central and crucial role more than ever, now, too, it needs to view [Khamenei] as the center of social cohesion and unity and implement his demands as the one who represents the hidden and holy [Imam]. "The mentality of Iranian society has for decades been in the context of 'cognitive warfare,' and the enemy is trying to cause society to deteriorate, to become alienated [from the regime], and to decline by means of its narratives. In the face of this wave, silence and conservatism are never acceptable. Rather, we must open, more than ever, our mouths to 'social enlightenment' and 'public explanation,' and tell the truth of the [Islamic] revolution and the [Iranian] regime. "Silence and passivity help the enemy's intellectual and media front, and they create doubt among parts of society. Of course, like in past decades, Western civilization also has an internal to and fro that repeats its statements and narratives, in a certain way, parallel to the enemy's narrative. We must confront the Iranian liberals who are at the mental and intellectual level carrying out the enemy's war actions, and we must not give them an opportunity to raise incitement and doubt. We must find, at least, internal resilience and not allow society to be affected by cognitive shocks that come from their twisted assessments. The statement published in recent days by some elements in the secular intellectual movement that are affiliated with ideas from modern religious studies are an example of an attempt to normalize negotiations, compromise, and giving up, which are entrenched in society as a science and as an expert opinion. The national broadcast authority must provide as much opportunity and space as possible for the dismantlement of liberal errors and shed light on their unpleasant outcomes… "Society Is Ready And Eager, More Than Ever, To Jump Ahead Towards The Original Ideals Of The Revolution And To Make An Iranian-Islamic Plan For Independent And Original Progress… Today A 'Global Resistance Front' Has Been Created That Transcends Religion, Sects, And Territory" "We must ensure that our eyes remain focused on 'Iranian and Islamic possibilities,' and reveal the mechanisms for manifesting internal capabilities. We are in an era of 'a historic turning point,' 'the twilight of Western civilization,' 'orientalization of global power,' and the 'birth of a strong Iran,' and currently society is ready and eager, more than ever, to jump ahead towards the original ideals of the revolution and to make an Iranian-Islamic plan for independent and original progress. "Moreover, today a 'global resistance front' has been created that transcends religion, sects, and territory, since many societies and groups believe in confronting the Zionist regime and America and pushing them back. This historic situation is the same promise made by [Ayatollah Ruhollah] Khomeini in the first years of the victory of the Islamic Revolution, and today we are clearly witnessing its birth and realization. "Most of the world identifies with the Palestinians in Gaza and cannot tolerate the unprecedented wildness and barbarity of the Zionist regime, and harshly criticize its support by the governments of America and Europe. This historic and global front must take intellectual and theoretical shape and experience semantic and epistemological presence in the face of the other [front], which is the front of renewed tyranny and arrogance [led by America]. Signed: [313 lecturers and intellectuals]"[3]
