The news of the withdrawal of more US forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, and coincided with reports that President Donald Trump and his senior military advisers are discussing attacks on Iran in a state of confusion, compounded by the approaching exit of Trump from the White House on January 20.
While the US Department of Defense confirmed - yesterday, Tuesday - that it will reduce the number of its soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq by mid-January, in implementation of the orders of President Donald Trump, who pledged to withdraw his country's forces from the two countries and end the never-ending wars, the New York Times leaked (The New York Times) The content of Trump's meeting with his top generals to discuss the possibility of military strikes on nuclear sites inside Iran.
During his first press conference yesterday, Tuesday, Christopher Miller, Acting Defense Secretary, said that about two thousand American soldiers will leave Afghanistan, and that 500 others will leave Iraq, so that only 2,500 American soldiers remain in each country, which is the lowest number since the arrival of American forces to Afghanistan in 2002 and Iraq in 2003.
Hitting Iran scenario
In an interview with Al Jazeera Net, James Farwell, a former US defense official and now expert at the Middle East Institute, expressed his belief that Trump "has always opposed allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons."
Farwell does not believe that "Trump will launch an attack on Iran, but he may order strikes against Iranian agents working in Iraq, who have retaliated against the US embassy."
Washington's call to withdraw more of its forces from Iraq coincided with the Katyusha rockets that hit the Green Zone in Baghdad on Tuesday evening, where the US embassy is located, and military bases that include American soldiers, and thousands of contractors who work for the American army.
Farwell indicated that his country will complete the withdrawal of almost all US forces from Iraq, but the situation is not favorable because ISIS is also trying to revive itself.
Washington accuses Iraqi militias close to Iran of launching attacks on US targets inside Iraq.
Many commentators criticized Trump's policy towards Iran, according to which Washington withdrew from the nuclear deal without signing a new agreement, which left the room for Iran to develop its nuclear capabilities.
One more thought.
Attacking Iran would almost certainly provoke a 'rally round the flag' response, strengthening a deeply unpopular regime.
An odd policy to pursue for an administration that has been seeking regime change through sanctions from the get-go.
https://t.co/9V9BYhfH3M
- Richard N. Haass (@RichardHaass) November 17, 2020
Misleading foreign policy
In a tweet on his Twitter account, Richard Haass, chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations and former director of planning at the State Department, said, "Iran is closer today to nuclear weapons than it was 4 years ago when Trump became president, and North Korea has nuclear warheads. The missiles are more long-range than they were, and this is the bottom line after 4 years of misguided foreign policy. "
In an interview with Al-Jazeera Net, Charles Dunn, a former intelligence official and currently researcher at the Middle East Institute, considered that "Trump is looking to confuse the regional scene before he leaves office, and in the case of Iran, any attack will serve as a cover for his failed policies towards Iran."
He said, "The Pentagon leaders are not enthusiastic about getting involved in another major conflict in the Middle East, and Trump's supporters do not want a new and endless war."
Restricting Biden's movement
and withdrawing troops, Dan considered that "the rationale for the withdrawal of forces is to restrict the movement of President-elect Joe Biden and narrow the options available to him, but the Pentagon can slow what Trump wants until his presidency ends after nearly 60 days."
For his part, military expert David de Roch, a former warrior and assistant professor at the Center for the Near East and South Asia at the US National Defense University - to Al Jazeera Net - said that Trump has two major foreign policy issues that must be resolved before he leaves office, and both are part of his electoral promises since 2016. .
De Roch believes that "Trump has pledged to end the American intervention in the endless wars in the Middle East, which he saw as not serving our interests, diverting our military focus from the real threat of the resurgence of China and Russia, and ending the nuclear agreement with Iran, which he described as the worst deal in history," And a new agreement with Iran. "
De Roch criticized what he described as "the American left’s contradiction with itself regarding the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq and Afghanistan." "They generally welcome the reduction in the number of American forces in war zones, but their blind hatred for Trump is so strong that even when he does something they want, they Are opposed to it. "
The exit of forces and
de Roche said, "Trump does not see many advantages that accrue to Washington maintaining a military presence in Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan, and he has asked his team to withdraw, and it seems that he doubts that the bureaucracy obstructs the exit of forces and is working to maintain the military presence there." .
De Roch believes that Trump tried to "expand the pressure on Iran to force it to reach an agreement that deals not only with the nuclear program, but also with puppet forces that destabilize other countries in the region, develop missile programs, and human rights issues."
In his opinion, the Iranians are betting that they can outrun Trump, so they are looking to ease US pressure after Biden arrives at the White House.
De Roch believes that Trump "was not satisfied with his inability to reach a new nuclear agreement with Iran on the one hand, or to curb Iran on the other hand, so it is possible that he is considering taking direct action against Iranian nuclear facilities in order to claim that he has succeeded in reducing nuclear capacity." Iranian ".