To Stay or Not to Stay: America’s Dilemma in Iraq
To Stay or Not to Stay: America’s Dilemma in Iraq
The issue of the U.S. military presence in Iraq, as part of the international coalition against terrorism, has long been a topic of extensive discussions within the framework of the coordination of Iraqi Shia political forces. Two members of the coordination framework told Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that the U.S. presence might be a stabilizing factor in Iraq. Baghdad and Washington agreed in early September this year to end the international coalition’s mission by the end of September 2025, and the end of the coalition’s activities in Syria was set for September 2026.
Two members of the coordination framework in the Iraqi parliament said there is a plan to review Iraq’s situation and its foreign policy in light of recent regional developments and the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria, which includes the issue of ending the U.S. military presence. One of these parliament members noted that, given regional tensions, the U.S. presence might be a stabilizing factor in Iraq and beyond in its politically and security-wise turbulent environment.
Another Iraqi parliament member emphasized that the U.S. has prevented the Israeli regime from attacking Iraq and has effectively controlled Iraqi airspace. He added that negotiations are currently underway regarding the extension of coalition forces’ presence or their departure by the end of 2025, but nothing has been clarified yet. The approach of the new U.S. administration towards Iraq and regional issues remains unclear. This parliament member stated that the U.S. presence in Iraq might be a significant deterrent against Israeli regime attacks on regional countries after Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen.
He pointed out that Iraq is concerned about the repercussions of the situation in Syria and its impact on Iraq, as well as the issue of ISIS and its potential resurgence. According to Middle East News, this Iraqi parliament member emphasized that some parties within the government and the coordination framework wish for the international coalition’s presence to be extended until stability is achieved across the region. On the other hand, Aqeel Al-Rudaini, spokesperson for the Nasr Coalition led by Haider al-Abadi, one of the leaders of the coordination framework, said that the conditions surrounding Iraq, especially after the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria, are unstable and this situation raises concerns for Iraq.
He stated that the issue of extending the presence of international coalition forces has not yet been officially raised, but it is very likely that new understandings between Baghdad and Washington regarding the future of the international coalition will emerge in light of recent regional developments. The spokesperson for the Nasr Coalition indicated that there is a possibility of extending the international coalition’s presence in Iraq, and this issue is currently linked to imminent regional developments.
Al-Rudaini said that if Iraq makes such a decision, it will be based on Iraq’s supreme interests and will receive political support. He added that even armed groups are considering Iraq’s interests, and when the government decides to extend the international coalition’s mission in Iraq, there will certainly be opponents, but the government’s decision will take precedence.
On the other hand, Nizar Haidar, an Iraqi researcher residing in Washington, said that Iraq has requested protection from the U.S. in recent weeks against the repercussions of the situation in Syria on its security, meaning that Iraq practically needs the international coalition for protection against potential threats. This indicates that the power Iraq holds under various official titles is insufficient. He added that it is Iraq’s right to request the extension of the U.S. forces’ mission based on previous agreements between the two countries, and when deemed necessary for any reason, this decision ultimately belongs to the government.
Haidar speculated that Iraq might request the extension of the international coalition’s mission in Iraq during the next phase, following regional developments, especially considering that Iraq believes this presence is a security and military necessity and can protect Iraq against future Israeli regime attacks.
On the other hand, Ihsan Al-Shammari, head of the Center for Political Thought Research in Baghdad, said that a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq is not on the table and this is part of a maneuver because the U.S. has informed the Iraqi government that there will be no withdrawal from Iraq, but the issue of presence might be reviewed through bilateral agreements. He explained that delaying the end of the international coalition’s mission is more related to Iraq than to the U.S., as Iraq wants the international coalition to remain due to concerns over regional situations, especially Syria.
Al-Shammari stated that if Iraq wishes to extend the presence of the international coalition, it will be due to the rise of armed groups in Syria, which the Sudani government described as terrorist groups. Consequently, the presence of the international coalition significantly prevents security chaos in Iraq.
He said that the coordination framework believes that keeping the coalition in Iraq and not requesting the withdrawal of its forces might significantly delay extensive Israeli regime attacks against armed groups, as the U.S. has succeeded in delaying these attacks rather than canceling them.
