"We do not believe that the coalition forces will leave Iraq, but if they do, the composition of Iraq will be different. Iraq has armed and security forces in the ministries of defense and interior, and in the Kurdistan region we have a strong army of peshmerga." With these words, Jaafar Sheikh Mustafa, Vice President of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, tried to reassure his Kurdish citizens that what happened in Afghanistan would not be repeated in their country. Only from their conquest of Afghanistan. While the scenes of the Taliban's takeover of state facilities spread very easily at the end of last August, everyone wondered whether Baghdad would meet the same fate if the US army withdrew.
In the face of these doubts, officials of the United States, which has the largest consulate in the world in the Kurdistan region, renewed their assurances in the past weeks to the rulers of Kurdistan, reassuring them that they would not abandon their Kurdish ally, even if they decided to reduce their military presence in the future or withdraw completely.
However, none of Washington's pledges or Jafar's words succeeded in alleviating the fears of many Kurds who consider the presence of US forces a necessity for their protection, or even the general Iraqis who followed the events of Afghanistan with great apprehension, especially since the scenes of the collapse of the Iraqi army in hours in front of elements The Islamic State (ISIS) in 2014 is still fresh in the memory.
exit scenario
Despite the defeat of the organization in 2017, most of the American forces continued to remain within the framework of the international coalition, which worried Iran and its allies.
There are fears, then, of the possibility of the collapse of the Iraqi state, especially since the previously scattered American checkpoints have recently disappeared, and have been replaced by Iraqi soldiers and the Popular Mobilization Forces, which means that the field will not be open to a Talabani scenario, but may in fact be open to a militia scenario. As the Popular Mobilization and its ilk of Shiite armed formations are still largely in control, and therefore an American withdrawal could bring an Iranian, not an Afghan, model in Baghdad.
Although the US forces led the international coalition to invade Iraq in 2003 to get rid of Saddam's Sunni Baathist regime, Iran was able to strengthen its presence in Iraq by filling the religious and socio-political vacuum, using its influence in Shiite circles, especially those opposed to the American occupation. Tehran has succeeded in creating several Shiite militias that have become an integral part of the fabric of security and weapons in Iraq, and then its participation in the Syrian war has doubled the deepening of its military presence in the region as a whole, from Basra to Beirut, which means that it has become the most prominent beneficiary of any possible withdrawal of the Americans from Iraq.
That withdrawal is no longer an option today. Washington has already partially withdrawn from Iraq in 2011, leaving a small number of its forces to protect its embassy and to train and assist Iraqi forces, but it returned with huge forces in 2014 to support the Iraqi government in its war against ISIS fighters who then controlled large areas. from Iraq and Syria. Despite the defeat of the organization in 2017, most of the US forces continued to remain within the framework of the international coalition, which worried Iran and its allies, and prompted politicians and Shiite militias associated with it to demand the departure of US forces repeatedly over the past years. Then came the US decision in 2019 to reduce the number of soldiers in Iraq to 2,500, and to keep a small and unknown number of special operations forces, but it did not satisfy the Iranians.
However, the demand for the Americans to leave completely became very urgent after the US assassination of "Qassem Soleimani," the commander of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, which was considered a major turning point in the course of the relationship between the two parties. Since that moment, Iran has increased missile attacks on American bases in Iraq, and supported the Iraqi popular protests condemning the American presence, while Washington focused increasingly on protecting its forces after it withdrew from the vulnerable bases in the country, and strengthened its presence in only 3 Iraqi military facilities. Then the recent popular protests in Iraq came to complicate the Iranian path and weaken the security grip of the militia supported by it under great pressure, which led to the rise of Al-Kazemi, who is close to the United States, as prime minister despite his good political relations with other parties, including Tehran itself.
About a month before the departure of the American forces from Afghanistan, Al-Kazemi visited the White House, and after his meeting with US President Joe Biden, he did not hesitate to announce that the United States would exit completely from Iraq, as it was stated in a joint statement that “the security relationship will move entirely to the role of training and guidance.” and assistance and intelligence sharing, and there will be no US forces in a combat role in Iraq by December 31, 2021."
What leads the Iraqi president to his previous position is that he is under great internal pressure demanding him to push the Americans to leave, but despite what he shows with senior Iraqi military officials of the urgency to complete the American exit, he actually prefers that about 2500 American soldiers remain in Iraq.
As Safaa Khalaf, a researcher in political sociology and crisis analysis, says, the current government is affiliated with the American axis, and therefore adheres to Washington, as the latter provides it with international acceptance and the necessary legitimacy that protects it from falling into the hands of Shiite militias, at least once the Al-Kazemi project succeeds in Undermining the bases of the hegemony of these militias, and strengthening the security services and the army enough for the Iraqi state to become its independent shield.
Who will fill the void?
But this task seems more complex than everyone imagines. At the beginning of last September, ISIS elements launched two attacks in the governorates of Kirkuk and Nineveh in northern Iraq, killing and wounding army and civilians with sniper weapons. Iraqi in the city of "Makhmur" southeast of Nineveh.
Given that the survival of US forces is due to the constant threat posed by ISIS, as well as efforts to train Iraqi forces, the organization, whose attacks have escalated recently, will not be difficult for it to enhance its presence in the provinces near Syria if the United States leaves Iraq as quickly as it did in Afghanistan. As for the Iraqi air force, it is still weak, and it cannot respond to drone attacks without American air cover. A report by the United Nations Sanctions Monitoring Team stated that ISIS is capable of carrying out attacks in Baghdad itself, as well as in the governorates of Diyala, Salah al-Din, and Kirkuk. The report, which was issued on July 23, was based on intelligence, stressing that ISIS "has developed into a well-established insurgency, exploiting weaknesses in local security to find safe havens and targeting forces participating in countering it."
Moreover, there is the danger of the Iraqi militias linked to Tehran, which were formed in 2014 in the midst of mobilizing to confront ISIS and were later absorbed into the ranks of the Iraqi security forces, as these militias proved their ability to continue their attacks against American interests, and it is easy to engage in a fierce conflict. With rival factions in Iraq to control political power and state resources, and even a simple reduction in Washington’s military commitments could change the balance of power in favor of these militias, creating a more fragmented environment that contributes to the return of ISIS, especially if the grievances suffered by the Sunnis over the The hand of sectarian militias if the government's ability to control the street recedes.
In this context, "Shahu al-Qara Daghi", an Iraqi writer interested in human rights and international relations, says that fears of a repetition of the Afghan experience in Iraq are realistic, especially since the United States withdrew from Iraq in 2011 and this caused the spread of terrorist groups already, which ended with ISIS' control of the country. A third of Iraq after the collapse of the Iraqi security and military forces, and their inability to manage the scene in light of the American absence. Al-Qaradaghi told
Meydan
that there has been a development among the security services, which gained a lot of experience during the war on ISIS, "but this does not mean that the Afghan scenario will not be repeated in Iraq. The Yemeni government is in Iraq, and it possesses powerful security, military and intelligence services that compete with the state’s apparatus, and therefore it can exploit any weakness of the state to extend its control.”
Qaradaghi indicates that the American side thinks of its interests and puts them above all else, without paying attention to the disasters that may occur if the military withdrawal is completed without adequate coordination with the security services, and at a time suitable for Washington only, but not for Baghdad.
He asserts: "There is a constant insistence by the factions and militias loyal to Iran on the necessity of withdrawing, and America may be faced with two options, either military escalation and responding to the attacks of armed groups, or withdrawal."
Iraq .. Is there a third path between Kabul and Tehran?
Pro-Iranian factions in the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq (Reuters)
Despite the similarities with Afghanistan, Iraq remains a different country and is relatively far from the fate of Afghanistan, as its national institutions have a long history that is much stronger than their counterparts in Afghanistan. Fadel Abu Ragheef, an Iraqi researcher in political affairs and the history of terrorist groups, says that the Afghan scenario cannot happen in Iraq, as it is a country with a much heavier air force, multiple types of combat units, a counter-terrorism apparatus, as well as a command for joint operations. Abu Ragheef believes that Iraq succeeded to a large extent in the strategic framework talks that concluded less than two months ago in the United States, as these discussions resulted in a gradual withdrawal that began last year, after which more than 9 American bases were handed over to the Iraqi joint operations as well as the withdrawal. Total US combat units.
However, "Safa' Khalaf" sheds light on another scenario related to the Iranian-backed Shiite militias, saying that Washington "is fully aware of the extent of the power and influence of Shiite armed groups linked to Tehran, and is aware that the Iraqi political system is based on contradictions, balances of interests and the circulation of corruption within the authority. The distinctions between Shiite forces, Sunni rivalry, and Kurdish separatism, are all factors that make it difficult for a particular faction to control power. This means that any group’s attempt to exclude other groups will cause devastating fighting. Therefore, elections will remain a basic formula for deliberation, not because they are an honest and true representation of the people. Rather, it is a formula of agreement between these groups.” This path seems closer to the Iranian multipolar regime, but it does not prevent all these armed militias from officially seizing power and inaugurating an Islamic republic that maintains this limited electoral formula.
Baghdad needs to strengthen its security services, curb the armed arms of sectarian parties and militias, and enhance the capabilities and professionalism of the Iraqi army (Reuters)
However, a third path away from the ghosts of the Afghan and Iranian scenario remains possible, as Khalaf indicates that Washington exercises influence through the official state institutions and some political forces that fear the rise of Iranian groups to power, and also through the Kurdistan region, which has no parallel in Afghanistan or Iran.
Khalaf believes that Washington will maintain a military presence, even if limited, after its withdrawal.
To protect this balance between the Iraqi state institutions on the one hand, and the networks of Iranian-backed militias on the ground on the one hand, especially since Iraq is a regionally heavy country close to the Gulf and Syria, and most importantly, it remains a strategic point in the American confrontation with Iran.
Ultimately, regardless of the scenario of the expected US withdrawal from Iraq, the major responsibility for avoiding an Afghan or Iranian fate rests with the Iraqi state and the cadres that carry its banner today are far from sectarian affiliations.
Baghdad needs to strengthen its security services, reduce the armed arms of sectarian parties and militias, and enhance the capabilities and professionalism of the Iraqi army and its representation of all segments of the Iraqi people, in order to ensure that it stands firmly against any new expansion attempts that ISIS may launch following Washington’s withdrawal, as well as any ambitions for complete control that may The armed Shiite sectarian groups seek it, and only then will Iraq succeed in safely passing through the trap of dark scenarios, and will begin its smooth transition as a sovereign state that will need Washington only as an ordinary ally, as many countries in the region do from its south to its north.