The conversation around the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq has picked up momentum recently, stirring debates among officials and defense analysts about the potential consequences of such moves. On September 12, it was reported by the Washington Post citing Iraqi officials, indicating the bulk of U.S. forces would begin leaving Iraq over the next two years. This would leave only a small contingent of troops supporting the efforts of Iraqi Kurds and the operations involving U.S. forces stationed across the border in Syria.
According to reports, Iraqi Defense Minister Thabit al-Abbasi confirmed on the same day the agreement reached between Iraq and the United States to commence withdrawal plans this year, which would be completed by 2026. Similar sentiments have been echoed by Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani, who stated there is no longer any necessity for American and coalition troops to remain, especially with the defeat of ISIS through joint efforts.
Al-Sudani’s claims come amid rising Iranian influence, as demonstrated during the visit of newly inaugurated Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who signed 14 agreements with the Iraqi government during his visit. The agreements reportedly reinforce Iran’s political support and investment strategies within Iraq, raising alarms about the possibility of increased Iranian influence following the American military's departure.
Tehran's intentions to expand its reach through support for various Shiite armed groups are evident. Over the past several years, Iran has backed the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), which became part of the Iraqi military structure during the campaign against ISIS. The Iraqi government’s aim to establish its autonomy is complicated by its increasing leaning on Iran for political and military support.
Despite the Iraqi government’s assertion about the reduced threat posed by ISIS, recent data paints another picture. General Erik Kurilla, commander of U.S. Central Command, testified before Congress earlier this year, warning about the rise of ISIS if troop reductions happen before the Iraqi Security Forces are adequately prepared. He pointed to similar warnings preceding the 2011 withdrawal, which resulted in the quick emergence of the ISIS caliphate, forcing the U.S. back to Iraq just three years later.
Recent operations, such as the August 29 raid by U.S. and Iraqi joint forces aimed at degrading ISIS capabilities, exemplify the persistent threat. The operation tallied with the elimination of key ISIS leaders, yet military experts caution against miscalculations and premature withdrawal, citing the growing number of attacks allegedly conducted by the terror group.
Adding to the complexity of U.S. and Iraqi relations are the series of over 170 attacks by Iranian proxy forces targeting U.S. interests, indicating the considerable risks involved should the U.S. military presence diminish too quickly. Officials within the Iraqi government have voiced their pressures for the coalition to leave, arguing the removal would stabilize the region; this position, nevertheless, has rekindled concerns about ISIS recruitment and resurgence particularly among the Sunni population.
On top of this, there are murmurs of the need for the U.S. to maintain some ability to retaliate against attacks, as civilian safety continues to be undermined. The notion of withdrawing entirely – especially from non-Kurdish areas of Iraq – poses significant risks, potentially jeopardizing the delicate balance achieved after years of conflict.
This strategic withdrawal not only raises eyebrows concerning U.S. military strategy but also the broader geopolitical dynamics within the region. There is apprehension about how America’s diminished presence could enable Iranian influence to ramp up, complicate the security environment, and diminish the operational effectiveness of U.S. forces still stationed within Iraq and Syria. The rare critique aimed at the U.S. military by some Iraqi officials highlights the precarious situation wherein U.S. troops find themselves caught between local political posturing and broader regional hostilities.
Experts urge both Iraq and the U.S. to craft and adhere to coherent strategies and build reliable partnerships for their military actions moving forward. They suggest the need for a sustainable security dialogue instead of conducting intermittent raids and strikes without broader commitments. The future of U.S. military involvement in Iraq remains uncertain, with stubborn conditions on the ground demanding serious consideration before drastic decisions are made.
Current realities and warnings from military leaders underline the long-standing reminders of the consequences following ill-timed withdrawals. Moving forward, it is imperative for the U.S. to back its military presence with necessary support systems and strategic planning to navigate through the complex dynamics of West Asia.
