Iraq says U.S. asked it to close most Iran border crossings

Iraq’s foreign minister says Washington has asked Baghdad to close all but two border crossings with Iran—a request that could change how goods reach Iraqi markets. For households and transport workers, the practical question is which routes would remain available, and whether they could handle the traffic.

Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein attributed the request to the U.S. Treasury in an interview with Al Jazeera. According to the broadcaster’s November 8 interview summary, Washington wants one crossing retained in Iraq’s Kurdistan region and another elsewhere in the country. Neither was named. Whether Baghdad will implement the request, and on what timetable, remains unclear.

Hussein said Iraq remained in dialogue with Washington to avoid economic harm. He put annual trade with Iran at $15–18 billion, including about $4 billion for gas purchases. That qualification matters: his estimate describes the wider trading relationship, not the value of goods carried by trucks through the crossings.

The interview’s release also needs a little untangling. Al Jazeera published excerpts on November 7, announcing that the interview would air the following day. Its full-interview page is dated November 8. Those dates establish when the remarks became public, not when the conversation was recorded or when Washington made its request.

The clearest example of what a crossing closure can mean locally predates those remarks. Iraq shut al-Sheib, also spelled Sheeb, in Maysan governorate on October 21. Government spokesperson Haider al-Aboudi said its technical and logistical facilities needed improvement. At that time, he said other crossings with Iran continued operating, according to 964media’s October 21 report. His explanation included no reopening timetable.

That earlier closure cannot simply be treated as implementation of the newly reported American request. The chronology alone does not establish why Baghdad acted, and Hussein’s account does not establish that Washington caused the al-Sheib shutdown.

Local reporting nevertheless offers a concrete picture of the concerns surrounding it. In Al Jazeera’s November 3 report from Amarah, Maysan’s provincial capital, sellers described higher food prices and weaker business following the closure. One chicken seller reported a rise from 2,400 to 3,400 Iraqi dinars per kilogram. That is an increase of about 42%, calculated from his figures—not a province-wide inflation measurement or proof that the closure alone caused the change.

The same report described protests on October 31 involving truck drivers, taxi drivers and people working at the crossing. These accounts concern the effects attributed to the October closure; they are not evidence of losses caused by a broader shutdown that Iraq has yet to announce.

Keeping some crossings open could preserve trade while changing its geography. If traffic were redirected to fewer gates, the consequences would depend on their capacity, the additional distances involved and how inspections were organized. Fewer crossings could mean longer journeys or queues, but the number of open gates alone cannot establish the size of any delay, price increase or trade loss.

There is also a distinction between local pressure and the authority to reopen a route. Al Jazeera’s November 3 report quoted Border Ports Authority spokesperson Alaa al-Qaisi saying opening and closure decisions rested with the prime minister, rather than provincial authorities. On November 8, Al-Mirbad reported that Maysan MP Murtada al-Saadi described arrangements for provincial and border officials to explain the al-Sheib closure to political leaders.

For traders planning a shipment, the missing details are specific: the names of the two proposed exceptions, an Iraqi implementation decision, and operating arrangements for any redirected cargo. Hussein’s disclosure supplies an account of diplomatic pressure. It does not yet supply a new border timetable.