Shafaq News

Iraq’s decision to deposit its maritime boundary coordinates with the United Nations this February has pushed the long-running Khor Abdullah dispute beyond a technical legal file and into a broader test of regional alignment. Baghdad describes the issue as a sovereign step grounded in international law, but coordinated concern from Gulf states and rare diplomatic friction with Arab capitals traditionally has triggered and viewed as political partners.

The dispute is about far more than a narrow channel of water. Khor Abdullah represents Iraq’s only maritime gateway to the Gulf, connecting Umm Qasr, Khor al-Zubair, and the under-construction Grand al-Faw Port to international shipping lanes. How that corridor is defined and managed carries direct implications for Iraq’s trade flows, oil exports, and long-term effort to position itself as a regional logistics center.

Those stakes grow sharper with the development of the Grand al-Faw Port —a project valued at nearly $5 billion and designed to handle up to 99 million tons of cargo annually. The port is central to Baghdad’s vision of turning southern Iraq into a major transit and trade hub, making secure and clearly defined maritime access not only a sovereignty issue, but an economic necessity.

From Historical Demarcation To Legal Repositioning

The roots of the dispute date back to UN Security Council Resolution 833 in 1993, which demarcated land and maritime borders between Iraq and Kuwait following the 1990 invasion. In 2012, the two countries signed a navigation agreement to regulate traffic and security in the shared channel. That agreement was later ratified in Iraq, but it remained controversial domestically.

In September 2023, Iraq’s Federal Supreme Court ruled the ratification law unconstitutional, reopening internal debate over the agreement’s legal basis and strategic impact. Building on that ruling, Baghdad deposited a detailed maritime domain map with the United Nations earlier this month and prepared to submit the court’s decision annulling the demarcation framework up to marker 162 —a move that implicitly calls for re-demarcation under international law.

Gulf states responded by urging Iraq to withdraw the submission and address the issue through diplomatic channels. Kuwait has treated the filing as a destabilizing step, while Baghdad insists it acted in full accordance with the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Arab Capitals Align Cautiously

The dispute widened when Palestine, Jordan, and Egypt expressed concern over Iraq’s UN submission, reaffirmed support for Kuwait’s sovereignty, and urged both sides to resolve the matter through dialogue consistent with international law.

Iraq’s Foreign Ministry reacted by summoning the ambassadors of the three countries. During meetings with Undersecretary for Bilateral Relations Ambassador Mohammed Hussein Bahr Al-Uloom, Baghdad presented its position and described the statements as overlooking Iraq’s legal perspective.

Bahr Al-Uloom stressed that the UN deposit represents a sovereign right exercised transparently and in line with international law, adding that Iraq remains committed to resolving the issue through legal and diplomatic mechanisms that protect its national interests.

The exchange underscored a deeper divergence: Baghdad frames the move as a lawful correction within international conventions, while several Arab capitals appear to interpret it through the prism of regional stability and prior commitments linked to post-1991 arrangements.

Competing Interpretations

In Baghdad, political analyst Ali al-Habib described the Arab reactions —particularly from Jordan and Palestine— as contradictory given Iraq’s economic ties and support. He argued that Iraq’s maritime access is a matter of sovereign necessity and suggested that Baghdad may need to reassess how it structures its regional relationships if political backing does not align with economic cooperation.

From Amman, political analyst Hazem Ayad said Jordan’s stance rests on international agreements and previous Iraqi-Kuwaiti understandings, consistent with Arab League calls to avoid unilateral steps. He also noted that the Khor Abdullah file remains internally contested in Iraq, shaped by successive government decisions and judicial rulings.

The Palestinian reaction carried its own sensitivity. Writer and analyst Farhan Allaqam said Palestine cannot afford to be drawn into disputes between Arab states, arguing that maintaining balanced positioning would better serve Palestinian interests. “Any perception of bias could risk damaging ties with Iraq, a longstanding supporter of the Palestinian cause.”

A Domestic Dimension

The issue has also resonated inside Iraq when dozens gathered along Al-Corniche Street in front of the Kuwaiti consulate, praising the UN deposit and describing it as a step toward affirming Iraq’s maritime rights. Participants said the gathering reflected public backing for legal measures to “safeguard national sovereignty.”

Though limited in scale, the move signaled that the maritime file carries symbolic and economic weight in southern Iraq, where livelihoods depend directly on secure, predictable access to Gulf waters. Domestic sentiment could narrow Baghdad’s room for compromise if negotiations intensify.

Sovereignty, Bloc Discipline, And What Comes Next

The unfolding dispute now operates on three interconnected tracks. Legally, Iraq appears prepared to pursue its case within international frameworks, using the Federal Supreme Court ruling and the Law of the Sea as anchors. Diplomatically, Gulf pressure indicates a preference for containment through dialogue rather than procedural escalation. Politically, internal support may reinforce Baghdad’s determination to press its claim.

This episode may mark a turning point in Iraq’s regional posture. If Baghdad continues to advance its maritime claims through international institutions despite coordinated Arab concern, it could reflect a more interest-driven approach to regional relations —one in which sovereign legal agency carries greater weight than bloc expectations.

For now, Iraq presents its move as a lawful assertion rather than a confrontation. The trajectory of the dispute will hinge on how Baghdad and its Arab counterparts manage the balance between national rights and collective alignment in the months ahead.

Read more: Khor Abdullah: A waterway entangled in sovereignty disputes and legacy of invasion

Written and edited by Shafaq News staff.