As US troops plan to leave Syria, a similar withdrawal from Afghanistan is looming, possibly lasting as peace talks with the Taliban may result. On February 2, US President Donald Trump turned his attention to a third crucible of conflict in the region, Iraq. But this time, instead of talking about withdrawal, Trump argued in an interview with CBS, in the "Facing the Nation" program, that US forces should stay in Iraq, not only to continue fighting a " To monitor Iran, "Trump suggested that" US bases in Iraq will serve as monitoring points, to monitor Tehran's activities related to (nuclear weapons or other things). "
Trump's speech, which portrays Iraq as a pawn in US policy toward Iran, would poison Washington's relationship with Baghdad, one of the last strongholds of American influence, in an area full of ineffective and unproductive partnerships.
The subject from an Iraqi point of view
The US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the disastrous occupation that followed, opened the door for hardliners and sects to flow into the heart of the Arab world, helping Iran to support and expand its power. The region and the world continue to suffer from these consequences. But despite this history full of thorns, Iraq's leadership is still remarkably open to US diplomatic and security assistance.
A reporter recently visited Baghdad and spoke to political leaders from across the political spectrum, including critics of US policy in Iraq. Many of these leaders expressed hope that Washington would continue to support the Iraqi government in its efforts to improve security and build state institutions. These leaders pointed out that US intelligence is, above all, invaluable to Iraqis. No other source can provide satellite images, and monitor the return of «back» back to the scene of events more than US sources. Iraqi leaders believe that with the help of the United States in combating terrorism and gathering intelligence, the Iraqi government can eliminate insurgents and eventually gain strength to ward off external interference, both from the United States or from its eastern neighbor, Iran.
Accurate balance
Since the US withdrawal in 2011, Baghdad has had to strike a delicate balance and maintain friendly relations with Washington and Tehran. A senior politician told the paper in January: "We do not like the US military presence in Iraq." "But if they suddenly leave, Iran will fill the vacuum." Behind closed doors, many politicians in Iraq, and until recently, demand that the US withdrawal also include the withdrawal of all foreign forces, in reference to Iran, and share this view even members of the Sadrist movement, a group known for its fiery national rhetoric, and resistance Armed with the American occupation.
But the Sadrists and others can only abandon this pragmatic position in public if the United States avoids creating the impression that Iraq is part of an anti-Iranian and pro-Israel axis. Even Iraqis who sympathize with America only believe that their country has limited common interests with the United States, and with Iran, from which Iraq gets substantial investment in industrial and tourist infrastructure, Baghdad's most important trading partner for food and natural gas. Tehran also played a crucial role in the war against the Da'ash organization, providing technical assistance to the Iraqi Interior Ministry and parts of the intelligence apparatus. As a result, the Iraqi elites are loath to alienate Iran.
A rough touch
But if the Iraqi hedge requires a soft touch from the United States, Trump will do the opposite in the interview. As a result, Iraqi President Barham Salih described Trump's speech as "strange" and warned the United States against "overloading Iraq" with its own issues. He also criticized the supreme religious authority of Iraq's Shiites, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the US president. For their part, the Sadrists adopted a parliamentary resolution calling for the expulsion of US troops. Meanwhile, Asaib Ahl al-Haq, a Shiite paramilitary group, has indicated its willingness to take up arms again against the Americans. Even if such anti-Americanism is more acute, the change in tone is alarming.
Simply put, military and intelligence partnerships require respect and strong respect for the sovereignty of partners. Iraq seems ready to host a wide range of US military assets and can even overlook US surveillance activities that are not about "defiant" fighting, but Iraqi leaders will find it more difficult to do so if the United States insists on drawing attention to its origins. Every time and another, and imagine Iraq as a base through which to monitor Iran and protect Israel, as Trump believes.
A new Middle East system
Trump's mistake seems more horrifying, because Iraq's continued openness to US security and intelligence cooperation makes it separate from any other US partner in the Middle East, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia. This would make Iraq a weak ally, but vital at the same time, immune to Iranian influence. The intelligence service in the country provides an example, with multiple competing agencies gathering intelligence and participating in counter-terrorism operations. The United States trusts some of these agencies, provides them with valuable intelligence, while Iran employs other agencies. In his interview with CBS, Trump seemed to call for a reduction in the US presence, saying the United States could "return if it had to." This is a grave mistake, because long-term partnerships and the costly infrastructure needed by these partnerships can not be rebuilt overnight.
Intelligence co-operation fell after the US troop cut in 2011. When the Hizballah fighters began to flow from Syria shortly thereafter, Iraq remained unprepared. After the country was exposed to this cycle of separation, subsequent trauma, and renewed cooperation, Iraq and the United States now have a clearer vision of what is required of this partnership. Iraqi leaders must also take a good look at this lesson, even if domestic political pressures make them enticing a hostile line to America.
Iraq is the place where the regional regime was destroyed in 2003, the logical place to start repairing what the invasion has ruined. Helping to rebalance the region, through diplomacy, would be the best option for America, rather than putting pressure on Iraqi partners and turning the country into a battleground for US-Iranian rivalry. Rebalancing will necessarily require stability in domestic politics and the security situation in Iraq. But it also includes the restoration of relations with neighboring Arab states, which have faded after the decision of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait in August 1990.
The future of Iraq is of strategic importance to all the major players in the Middle East, not least because the country is at the center of important relations: between the United States and Iran, between Iran and the Arab world, and between the Arab states. The Saudi Arabian Gulf states adopted a realistic approach to Iraq. Saudi Arabia reestablished its diplomatic relations with this Arab country, reopened border crossings, and took the lead in future economic and security cooperation. These promising steps are long overdue. However, these efforts still lack a comprehensive framework, an ambitious task for which the United States must place its weight.
The Iraqi state must deal not only with the volatile security situation, but also with chronic corruption and the difficulty of providing basic services to its citizens. The crisis over potable water, in parts of Basra, led to demonstrations that turned into war-like last autumn. The political future of Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, who took office since October 2018, has become dependent on the provision of basic services. He has even set this goal at the top of his priorities, ahead of the priority of achieving political unity in his government. "If we can not get enough electricity by summer, the game will be over," one of the prime minister's advisers said.
The US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the disastrous occupation that followed, opened the door to hardliners and sects to flow into the heart of the Arab world and helped Iran to support and expand its power.