Why Is the U.S. Angry about the Iran–Iraq Security Pact?
WANA (Aug 18) – Four days after the end of the 12-day war, Baghdad hosted a visitor whose presence carried far more weight than a routine diplomatic meeting: Brigadier General Esmail Qaani. During his trip, he exposed scenarios that revealed the fingerprints of Mossad and other actors in the recent conflict, with traces extending into Iraq.
Around the same time, a new idea began to take shape: building a security continuum between Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon. That idea, reinforced by intelligence shared by Iran’s Minister of Intelligence, soon gained traction.
Now, with the visit of Ali Larijani, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, the process has culminated in a formal security agreement—one that Washington has openly expressed anger about. According to sources, its first tangible outcome was the foiling of terrorist plots during the massive Arbaeen pilgrimage.
Details of the Security Agreement—In Larijani’s Words
In an interview, Larijani explained that the core of the agreement is to establish a “shared security space” between the two countries—an arrangement preventing either side from being targeted from the other’s territory. He said the experience of the 12-day war showed that part of Israel’s operations had relied on support from third countries, which underscored the urgency of an updated accord.
Details of the Iran–Iraq Security Agreement
WANA (Aug 17) – The Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council outlined the details of the recent security agreement between Iran and Iraq. Ali Larijani, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, in a televised interview about his recent trip to Iraq and Lebanon, stated: “Instead of allowing others to destabilize […]
Larijani added that the pact was founded on the “common understanding of the Islamic Ummah”—not merely a dry security contract, but a document rooted in social capital and regional solidarity. He also noted that during Israel’s recent assault, a scene of national unity unfolded inside Iran, transcending political factions. In his view, this social cohesion is the greatest asset underpinning such agreements.
But why has the United States reacted with such anger?
The Puzzle of 360 Names and a Joint Intelligence Cell
Reports have surfaced claiming that Iranian intelligence handed Baghdad a list of 360 individuals and units affiliated with Mossad in Iraq. If true, the implications are clear: findings from the 12-day war exposed a network of strategic enemy linkages across Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon. These revelations became the foundation for creating a joint operations room.
Here lies the obvious reason for Washington’s fury: the closing of Israel’s infiltration routes and the shrinking of U.S. intelligence access in Iraq.
Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, met with Iraq’s National Security Advisor, Qasim al-Araji on August 11, 2025. Social media/ WANA News Agency
Iraq: A Perilous Playing Field
Yet for Baghdad, the situation is far from simple. Qaani’s trip to Iraq had a sharp political edge, coupled with warnings about internal tensions—particularly recent clashes between the 45th and 46th brigades of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). Amid intense U.S. pressure to dissolve the PMF, such infighting could drag Iraq onto a dangerous path.
Within Iraq’s leadership, two main approaches compete: one camp favors direct confrontation with the U.S. and Israel even at the cost of instability; the other prioritizes preserving political gains, even if that means military restraint. Iran clearly leans closer to the latter.
The Resistance Axis and the Redefinition of Unified Fronts
From Tehran’s perspective, developments in Iraq cannot be separated from the broader regional equation. After the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, proposals emerged for an “energy-for-energy war”—a strategy suggesting that, in response to pressure on Iran’s nuclear program, American oil and gas infrastructure in the region could be targeted.
The 48-Hour Deterrence: A Battle That Frightens Israel
WANA (Jul 31) – In the latest analysis of the security dynamics between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Israel, one point stands out above all: Tehran’s ability to impose deterrence within the first 48 hours of any potential confrontation. The Islamic Republic has explicitly warned that, should war break out, it will strike […]
Iran sees the security agreement with Iraq as part of this larger strategy. Today, Tehran is working to reorganize the Resistance Axis so that each of its components—whether Yemen, Iraq, or Lebanon—can operate independently of direct Iranian logistical support while still preserving the concept of “unity of fronts.” This strategy enables simultaneous responses across different theaters to any Israeli attack: if one front is struck, others retaliate at once.
This is precisely what the U.S. and Israel fear most: the real linkage of resistance arenas and the fusion of separate crises into a single battle.
Three Battlefields, One Shared Project
Today, the resistance is simultaneously facing a coordinated “disarmament” project across three fronts:
1. Gaza – under blockade and threatened with occupation plans aimed at eliminating the resistance altogether.
2. Lebanon – under political and international pressure to disarm Hezbollah.
3. Iraq – under a media and political campaign against the PMF, with internal crises exploited as levers of pressure.
Iran and the Disarmament Project of the Resistance in Lebanon
WANA (Aug 16) – While much of the media’s attention is fixed on Lebanon’s crisis, what is unfolding in Beirut is far more than an internal affair—it is directly tied to Iran’s future. The project to disarm Hezbollah, pursued under pressure from Washington and Riyadh, targets not only Lebanon’s fragile balance but also one of […]
Washington and Tel Aviv do not treat these as isolated arenas but as parts of one unified project pursued through different tools. The Iran–Iraq security pact, however, has at least complicated their calculus on one front.
The Core of America’s Anger
The reason for U.S. outrage is straightforward: the Iran–Iraq security agreement represents a resounding “no” to Washington’s efforts to contain the Resistance Axis. It has the potential to expose Mossad’s covert networks, disrupt American intelligence chains in Iraq, and most importantly, transform Iraq’s resistance into a more organized actor—reshaping the regional balance of power.
Put simply, America fears the nightmare it has long sought to avoid: the genuine integration of resistance fronts, where every local crisis becomes part of a single, unified struggle against U.S. interests.
