Panorama of Week: Al-Sharaa in Washington, and Setbacks for the Sadrists and Maliki Bloc in Iraq

Arab newspapers published over the past week shed light on the visit of Syria’s transitional Prime Minister Ahmad al-Sharaa to Washington, Iraq’s parliamentary elections, and developments in Sudan.

The Cost and Gains of al-Sharaa’s Reception at the “White House”

Starting with Syrian affairs, Al-Quds Al-Arabi discussed the visit of Syria’s transitional Prime Minister, Ahmad al-Sharaa, describing it as an attempt by al-Sharaa to strengthen his legitimacy domestically and internationally, and to push for the lifting of American and international sanctions on his administration. In exchange, he hopes to secure political and economic support that would reinforce his authority in the post-Assad phase.

The newspaper pointed out that al-Sharaa faces strict American conditions, including breaking with the jihadist legacy, joining the coalition against terrorism, and pursuing extremist factions within Syrian territory.

It also revealed potential security understandings with Israel, including a limited withdrawal from the Golan Heights in exchange for Syrian concessions, as well as U.S. pressure to restructure relations with the Syrian Democratic Forces amid competing spheres of influence involving Washington, Moscow, Ankara, and Tel Aviv.

The newspaper concluded that al-Sharaa’s meeting with Trump may impose a high political cost on Syria, which could become an arena for international influence and multinational corporations—while the Syrian people remain the biggest absentee in this new phase of “openness.”

Al-Sadr’s Election Boycott Fails to Halt the Rise of His Rivals

In Iraqi affairs, Al-Arab (London) reported on the parliamentary election results, noting that voter turnout exceeded 56%, reflecting the failure of Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr’s calls to boycott the vote and raising questions about the true extent of his popular support.

The newspaper explained that current Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ al-Sudani was the biggest beneficiary of al-Sadr’s withdrawal, as part of the latter’s electorate voted for al-Sudani’s bloc to prevent Nouri al-Maliki from returning to political prominence.

The paper added that the successful conduct of the election—regardless of its detailed results—represents a political setback for al-Sadr, who was unable to delegitimize his rivals within the Shiite political sphere.

Sudan Faces the Unknown

An-Nahar addressed the situation in Sudan, stating that Khartoum “is experiencing a complex phase of bloody conflict” between the army, led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces, led by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti).

The paper attributed the escalation of violence to the refusal to integrate the Rapid Support Forces into the national army, which ignited a confrontation deeper than a mere political dispute.

It further noted that the situation resembles the scenarios of failed transitional states that could not achieve genuine democracy: peoples aspiring to freedom and justice but lacking organization and leadership, while military elites reclaim the initiative.

The Second Phase of Trump’s Plan… Faltering

Meanwhile, Al-Khaleej highlighted the crisis facing the second phase of U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan for the Gaza Strip, which was approved at the Sharm el-Sheikh summit and entered into effect on October 10.

The newspaper focused on the “growing doubts about implementing the plan” due to Israel’s repeated violations of the ceasefire, continued bombardment, failure to open the Rafah crossing, and lack of humanitarian aid entry.

It noted that Trump’s plan faces political, legal, and security obstacles, including the formation and deployment of an international peacekeeping force amid ambiguity in its mandate, rules, and areas of operation; the disarmament of Hamas; Israeli withdrawal prior to peacekeeper deployment; disputes over the role of the “Peace Council” expected to temporarily administer Gaza amid fears it could turn into a “trusteeship council controlling Palestinian decision-making”; and the refusal of several states to participate because Israel seeks to choose the contributing countries itself.

ANHA