In a surprising turn of events, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has canceled a planned meeting with an Iraqi judge, Faiq Zidan, who had issued an arrest warrant for former President Donald Trump. Zidan accused Trump of ordering the assassination of Iranian Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani, a global terrorist responsible for the deaths of over 600 American military personnel.
According to sources with first-hand knowledge, Zidan was set to visit the DOJ in October, but after a series of press inquiries, the DOJ decided to backtrack on its invitation. This sudden change suggests tension within the U.S. government regarding Zidan’s pro-Iranian regime rhetoric and conduct.
Zidan had previously stated that Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council filed an arrest warrant for Trump in connection with the targeted killing of Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the head of the pro-Iran Kata’ib Hezbollah militia. The U.S. government considers Soleimani a terrorist, and both the U.S. and European Union designated him as such. Zidan’s claims drew attention from Congress, with some expressing concern about his actions.
The DOJ’s invitation to Zidan raised eyebrows, considering his alleged involvement in suppressing opponents of Iranian militias and his reported human rights abuses. Experts argue that Zidan should not be allowed in America and should instead face sanctions for his actions. His visit to the DOJ would have only empowered him and his pro-Iran regime activities in Iraq.
Critics point to Zidan’s failure to prosecute Iranian-backed militias who killed 800 Iraqis in 2019 as evidence of his biased conduct. They argue that he has sold himself to the Iranians and is willing to do their bidding.
Despite attempts to reach Zidan for comment, there has been no response. The Iraqi Foreign Ministry and its embassy in Washington have also not provided any statements on the matter.
The cancellation of the meeting between Zidan and the DOJ highlights the complexities of international relations and the challenges faced by the U.S. government in dealing with individuals who have controversial backgrounds. It also raises questions about the extent to which foreign judicial leaders should be engaged and hosted by U.S. officials.
The situation serves as a reminder of the ongoing tensions between the U.S. and Iran, as well as the complexities of the Middle East region. As the Biden administration navigates these challenges, it must carefully consider the implications of engaging with individuals like Zidan, who have been accused of human rights abuses and have close ties to the Iranian regime.
Overall, the cancellation of the DOJ meeting with Zidan underscores the delicate balance between pursuing justice and maintaining diplomatic relations with foreign entities. It also underscores the need for transparency and accountability in international affairs.
