A real order to withdraw troops from Iraq to escape further costs
The presence of US troops in various countries in the post-World War II period existed under various pretexts, and Washington has gradually established its foothold around the world. However, Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait not only expanded the US military presence in the Middle East but also expanded its apparent legitimacy. In response to the critics, it was announced that the United States had come to the region to protect its allies at the request of Arab countries.
Since the presidency of Barack Obama, the issue of US withdrawal from the Middle East has been raised, and he even implemented this decision during the period, but soon after, the pretext of confronting ISIS increased Washington’s intervention and presence in the region. Donald Trump also made great efforts to withdraw his forces from the Middle East, but without much success.
Joe Biden, however, took the first practical step with a vociferous withdrawal from Afghanistan and handed the country over to the Taliban. The Biden government now claims to have withdrawn its combat troops from Iraq, keeping only a small number to support and train the Iraqi armed forces.
Analysts believe that the US military presence in Iraq has apparently diminished. In fact, the US is still involved in everything in the country, and Biden has not changed the situation.
Changing the approach of the US military presence
The Conversation website writes that the US military presence in the Middle East has declined sharply compared to a decade ago. The number of American troops in Iraq has risen from 170,000 in 2007 to 2,500, and the number of troops in Syria has halved from four years ago. Some say the pressure to drastically reduce the defense budget led to the decision. Others believe the White House has shifted its focus to international issues, especially in the Middle East and other parts of Asia.
The United States has large bases for training and managing smaller bases in 600 regions around the world.
A look at the history of the US military presence shows that there are 600 areas in the world that the Americans use as large bases for training forces and managing smaller bases.
The chart also shows that the United States now has more than 171,000 troops worldwide, the lowest level since World War II.
According to this analysis, over the past 70 years, approaches to the military presence and Washington interventions have changed many times. Especially during Trump’s presidency, the United States sought to reduce its military presence abroad, but did not succeed. Biden, of course, pursued this approach in a different way, leaving Afghanistan and Iraq. At the same time, he blocked the implementation of Trump’s order to reduce US troops in Germany.
The publication believes that the US military presence has cost the White House dearly to defend other countries and guarantee its interests. Changing socio-political trends in host countries, especially inciting nationalist opposition movements, and intensifying dissatisfaction with the US presence are important consequences.
As opposition to Washington intensifies in a particular country or region, political pressures increase to the point where opportunities for the United States in the host country and its neighbors diminish. This is in addition to the direct financial and human costs that the United States pays for its forces on foreign missions.
The United States does not have a grand strategy for the Middle East
Analysts see Biden’s one-year performance in foreign policy similar to previous eras and even on par with the previous president. “Biden seeks to legitimize US ambitions in the Middle East through its policies,” wrote the World Politics Review.
Accordingly, the current US administration is trying to restore the image of the White House. The report’s author, Ellen Lipson, believes the assessment of the Biden administration’s one-year performance in the Middle East requires precise criteria. There is doubt that the past year, compared to the tumultuous years of the Trump era, has played a significant role in building peace.
At one time, the people of the region were deeply disturbed by the growing power and interference of the United States in the Middle East, but now the United States has behaved in a way that should give them another form of concern. There is now an emerging consensus in Washington that the United States has more and different strategic strategic challenges.
The Iraq war highlights the lack of a grand and comprehensive strategy in US foreign policy.Recently, however, Brett McGurk, the Biden team’s Middle East chief who has served in four administrations so far, made it clear that for decades, the United States had made too many commitments in the region. Biden now wants to abandon the maximalist goals of changing the Middle East through regime change or democratization; The United States wants to end its evil dealings with authoritarian rulers in the region.
Although some observers say Biden is pursuing a different strategy, some experts say the US problem is that it has not implemented a grand strategy in any period. “The Iraq war highlights the lack of a grand and comprehensive strategy in US foreign policy,” The Hill quoted an expert as saying.
Richard Hanania, an international affairs analyst and director of the Center for Partisanship and Ideology, told The Hill: It has continued so far.
He believes: In fact, there is no comprehensive strategy and all policies are adopted on an impromptu and unannounced basis.
According to Hanania, the US invasion of Iraq revealed that a month after Saddam Hussein was overthrown, the Bush administration still did not know how to deal with Iraq.
He added: “The same kind of confusion and unplannedness occurred in the issue of invading Afghanistan and leaving it.” In fact, in both cases, the United States, after attacking the countries, then thought of justifying the continuation of its policies.
The United States must finally end its presence in the region after 20 years, the analyst said; Exit from Afghanistan with complete chaos; In Iraq, despite the contradictory statements, it has not yet been fully implemented.
The United States must finally end its presence in the region after 20 years; Exit from Afghanistan with complete chaos; In Iraq, despite the contradictory statements, it has not yet been fully implemented.The US intervention in Iraq has not changed
Washington has made a lot of propaganda about the withdrawal of its troops from the Middle East, while in the case of Afghanistan this withdrawal was accompanied by many problems; Regarding the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, it was claimed that US forces have been active in Iraq since the beginning of the new year, while such an issue in Iraq is not in line with the facts on the ground.
According to The Americanconservative, Biden and the Iraqi government have stated that the US military mission in Iraq is non-combat, but recent events prove otherwise, as it appears that the Americans are still fighting in the country and this is a cause for concern. It has become an Iraqi group.
“In December 2021, the governments of Baghdad and Washington announced that the mission of US troops in Iraq would be changed to a non-combat role;” Dan Caldwell wrote in his report. This means that the situation of the US military presence in this country will not change fundamentally. Both the Iraqi government and the Biden government hoped to achieve similar goals with this change of situation.
Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi hoped to use the ploy to quell some powerful Iraqi militias and political parties opposed to the US military presence in Iraq. The President of the United States, on the other hand, is now leading a country that is increasingly pessimistic about foreign intervention; He wanted to present himself as a special figure trying to end US intervention in foreign countries and the endless war in the Greater Middle East.
However, less than a month after the imaginary change of presence in Iraq to a non-combat mission, the Americans found themselves under fire again in Iraq. In a matter of days, suicide drones and several missiles were fired at US bases throughout Iraq; One of the most important targets was Al-Assad Air Base, where the Marines are stationed. However, the occurrence of attacks against US forces in Iraq showed that the announcement of a change in the mission of US forces from a combat to a non-combat mission did not really make a difference.
Biden wants to present a special face that seeks to end US intervention in foreign countries and the endless war in the Greater Middle East.According to the publication, as long as American male and female soldiers are present in Iraq, they will be the target of regular attacks by opposition groups, and they will be caught in a situation that any sensible person would call war. Instead of pretending that American troops are not on a combat mission in Iraq, the Biden government should do something about their actual withdrawal from the country.
It is now claimed that the mission for US forces is to train and equip Iraqi security forces to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. However, nearly three years ago, the territory of ISIL and the group itself was destroyed. Few of its forces remain, but these scattered forces no longer pose a serious threat to America’s vital interests.
According to this analysis, Americans should not be asked to risk their lives to support the Iraqi government or the people who intend to kill them. Given the paradoxical nature of the current US military mission, the only sensible way forward is to retreat from the status quo.
Withdrawing from Iraq also reduces the risk of falling into an escalating spiral of tension with Iran and its proxy forces. Failure to leave Iraq could lead to another bloody conflict in the Middle East, which the world has repeatedly reached in recent years; The crisis has been linked to Trump’s failed “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran.
According to this analysis, staying in Iraq with obvious military signs does not change the reality on the ground. In practice, it is Iran that has benefited from the policies of the White House in Iraq over the past two decades. This fact became clear when the United States made a catastrophic decision to overthrow Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, who was Iran’s main enemy in the region. Iran’s influence in Iraq has steadily intensified since 2003; If in the past the United States could not eliminate Iran’s influence with its 150,000 troops during the height of its presence in Iraq, now Washington certainly can not meet such a goal with a few thousand troops.
Instead of entangling the United States in another cycle of retaliation that does not increase the security of American forces in Iraq, Biden should order the immediate and real withdrawal of its forces from the country.Iran’s superiority in Iraq was not the only catastrophic consequence of the US decision to invade the country in 2003. The 18-year US war killed 4,500 American soldiers and left tens of thousands wounded.
Tens of thousands of wounded Iraqis continue to bear the consequences of the war due to various disabilities. The Iraq war has cost American taxpayers more than $ 2 trillion. If the United States continues to intervene in Iraq with a different mission that is not necessary for Washington’s security, these costs will increase.
According to the American publication, Biden should know that he will not gain anything by losing the blood and wealth of American citizens in the deserts of Iraq. Last year, in response to similar attacks on US bases in Iraq, he launched airstrikes against Iranian-backed militants in Iraq and Syria. As last week’s events showed, those airstrikes did not deter anti-US militias from targeting Americans. Instead of entangling the United States in another cycle of retaliation that does not increase the security of American forces in Iraq, Biden should order the immediate and real withdrawal of its forces from the country.
Sources:
https://theconversation.com/after-afghanistan-us-military-presence-abroad-faces-domestic-and-foreign-opposition-in-2022-172360
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/a-distinction-without-a-difference
https://taskandpurpose.com/opinion/us-policy-iraq-syria
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/,588602-richard-hanania-discusses-the-bush-administrations-lack-of-long-term-plans-for
https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/30282/biden-is-rightsizing-us-policy-in-the-middle-east