Popular Mobilization ForcesEdit
The Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) is an umbrella of Iraqi paramilitary groups formed in the context of the 2014 war against the Islamic State. Originating from a call by national religious authorities and evolving under the authority of the Iraqi state, the PMF brought together a range of militias that had arisen to defend communities, secure territory, and support the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) in a time of existential threat. Over the ensuing years, the PMF shifted from a wartime, ad hoc coalition into a formal security architecture within the Iraqi political and military system, while maintaining a spectrum of loyalties, structures, and command arrangements. The PMF has been credited with halting ISIS advances, recapturing large swaths of territory, and stabilizing liberated areas; at the same time, it has been the subject of sustained debate over sovereignty, accountability, and foreign influence. Popular Mobilization Forces and Hashd al-Shaabi are terms commonly used to describe this phenomenon, though the exact composition and governance of the groups have continued to evolve as Iraqi politics have shifted.
The PMF’s emergence occurred in the crucible of rapid ISIS gains in 2014, when large parts of northern and central Iraq fell to the extremist organization. In response, Iraq’s political leadership and religious authorities urged civilians and irregular combatants to organize in defense of major cities and minority communities under threat. The PMF brought together disparate militias with varying ideologies, organizational practices, and international linkages, but most shared a commitment to confronting ISIS on the ground. By design, the PMF complemented the ISF and the coalition war effort, expanding the pool of manpower available for counterinsurgency operations, security clearing missions, and protection of liberated populations. Islamic State and Iraq were thus the overarching framework within which the PMF operated in the early years.
History
Origins and formation
The PMF was formed during the ISIS crisis in 2014 as a loose, government-supported coalition of militias organized under the broader banner of_hashd al-shaabi_ (Popular Mobilization). The movement drew in part on religious authority—particularly endorsements from influential Iraqi clerics—as well as local and tribal networks that had already mobilized to defend communities. The intention was to provide a national shield against ISIS while coordinating with Iraqi Security Forces and allied international partners. Over time, the PMF came to be regarded as a de facto parallel security asset, with a stated aim of preserving Iraq’s territorial integrity and preventing ISIS from returning. Hashd al-Shaabi and Popular Mobilization Forces thus became the two most common designations for the same institutional phenomenon in different arenas of discourse.
Legal status and integration into the Iraqi security apparatus
In the mid-2010s, the Iraqi state moved to bring the PMF under formal oversight. A series of legal and political steps culminated in the recognition of the PMF as part of the country’s security framework, with authority acknowledged by the government and the parliament. This evolution helped coordinate operations with the Iraqi Security Forces, set the ground rules for accountability, and facilitated the PMF’s role in post-conflict stabilization. While the PMF’s integration was intended to preserve sovereignty and civilian government control, it also raised questions about the balance of power between official security institutions and militia groups with their own leadership and external lines of influence. The ongoing question has been how to preserve unity of command, ensure accountability, and prevent external actors from shaping Iraqi security policy through their proxies. Iraq and Kata'ib Hezbollah components illustrate the complex overlap between national defense goals and external alignments.
Role in the fight against ISIS
The PMF played a pivotal role in key counter-ISIS operations, participating in offensives that recovered territory and secured liberated communities. In cities and corridors where ISIS had imposed control or terror, PMF units contributed to clearing operations, stabilization efforts, and protection of civilians. Their involvement in major campaigns alongside the Iraqi Security Forces and international partners helped blunt ISIS’s territorial hold and interrupted its capacity to reorganize. In the post-2017 period, the PMF also supported reconstruction efforts, border security, and the policing of newly liberated zones, complementing the civilian governance processes that would eventually anchor long-term stability. See for instance the campaigns around Mosul and other liberated areas, where multiple PMF units operated alongside conventional security forces. Mosul and other theaters thus became testbeds for how irregular militias could interface with formal state structures in a security-first approach.
Post-ISIS period and structural evolution
With the defeat of ISIS as a territorial force, the PMF increasingly assumed responsibilities associated with stabilization, reconstruction, and governance in areas liberated from ISIS control. The post-ISIS period raised defining questions about the PMF’s future: how to align its activities with the rule of law, ensure civilian oversight, and prevent ethnic or sectarian grievances from festering in communities still recovering from war. The balancing act has involved negotiations over funding, command authority, and jurisdiction across ministries, as well as ongoing debate about how much autonomy the PMF should retain within the broader Iraqi security framework. The PMF’s status remains a live issue in Iraqi politics, reflecting broader questions about sovereignty, security, and national unity. See discussions of the broader security architecture, including Iraqi Security Forces and related institutions.
Organization, leadership, and command
The PMF is not a single centralized army; it is an umbrella combining a diverse set of militias and affiliated units. The most prominent groups have historically included the Badr Organization, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, and Kata'ib Hezbollah, among others. These units operate under a publicly acknowledged command framework that intersects with the Iraqi state and, in some cases, with external actors. The precise balance of control has evolved over time, with ongoing debates about how much authority rests with PMF leadership versus the office of the prime minister and designated security ministries. From a national-security perspective, the PMF’s strength lies in its civilian-military alliance—drawing on local knowledge, manpower reserves, and rapid-response capabilities—while its weaknesses center on questions of governance, accountability, and external influence. See related pages on Hashd al-Shaabi and the individual militias for more detail on organizational specifics. Badr Organization, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, and Kata'ib Hezbollah are commonly cited as flagship factions within the broader coalition.
Controversies and debates
From a security-first perspective, the PMF delivered crucial capabilities at a critical time, offering a flexible reserve and local knowledge that complemented conventional forces. Proponents emphasize that the PMF significantly contributed to preventing ISIS from reestablishing a foothold in key urban and rural areas, stabilized liberated territories, and supported the civilian return process. They argue that, properly regulated and integrated, the PMF enhances Iraq’s sovereignty by reducing dependence on foreign actors and by providing a robust, locally rooted security option. The PMF is thus often framed as a necessary tool for national defense and counterterrorism, not as a set of autonomous factions.
Critics, however, point to legitimate concerns that follow from mobilizing irregular forces into the security architecture. Key issues include:
Sovereignty and oversight: The PMF’s substantial autonomy, historical ties to external patrons, and parallel command channels raise questions about the extent to which the Iraqi state exercises exclusive control over its own security apparatus. The ideal outcome for many observers is a fully accountable, civilian-led force that remains tightly integrated with the country’s democratic institutions. See discussions of civilian oversight in Iraq and the security framework surrounding Iraqi Security Forces.
Accountability and human rights: Independent monitors have documented cases where PMF units faced accusations of abuses or coercive behavior in liberated areas, particularly in the immediate post-conflict period. Advocates for reform argue that robust civilian-military oversight, transparent investigations, and rigorous disciplining of offenders are indispensable to maintain legitimacy and trust among all communities.
Iranian influence and foreign alignment: Some PMF factions maintain explicit alignment with Iran’s regional security objectives and receive support from outside actors. From a national-security vantage point, this raises the risk that Iraq’s security policy could be pulled toward external strategic interests rather than being guided by Iraqi national priorities. Proponents counter that Tehran’s ties reflect the geopolitics of a fragile neighborhood and that practical coordination against common threats can be leveraged for stability, while still maintaining sovereign decision-making within the Iraqi state. See the broader discussion of regional influence on internal security through Iran and related groups such as Kata'ib Hezbollah.
Sectarian dynamics and governance in mixed communities: The PMF emerged in a context of sectarian distrust and long-standing grievances among Sunni communities in central and western Iraq. Critics worry that heavy PMF presence in mixed areas could perpetuate cycles of retaliation or undermine ordinary governance, especially if militia channels compete with or bypass formal local authorities. Supporters maintain that the PMF’s presence was essential to protect populations from ISIS violence and to deter renewed extremism, arguing that governance reforms and inclusive security practices can mitigate these risks.
Legal status and disarmament prospects: The question of how to reconcile a large, well-armed militia network with a fully civilian-led security apparatus remains unsettled. Some policymakers advocate phasing the PMF into the regular armed forces through formal demobilization and reallocation of resources, while others argue that the PMF will remain a necessary, legitimate instrument for national defense and border security given Iraq’s security environment. See the debates around the post-conflict security architecture and the formal status of the PMF within Iraqi Security Forces.
Designations and external legal pressures: The PMF and its constituent groups have been subject to external designations by foreign governments and international bodies at various times, reflecting ongoing concerns about governance, terrorism-related designations, and regional security. These pressures feed into domestic political calculations about how to balance security needs with the rule of law and the country’s public legitimacy.
In this sense, debates about the PMF reflect a broader contest over how Iraq should secure its borders, defend national sovereignty, and maintain a credible state monopoly on armed force, while also integrating the practical, local leadership and societal cohesion the PMF helped mobilize during the ISIS threat. See Popular Mobilization Forces and discussions around the future of Iraq’s security architecture in sources covering Iraq and Iraqi Security Forces.