Iraq  Moves to Expel US Force

The parliamentary resolution passed on the previous Sunday explicitly entailed the termination of an agreement, established over four years ago, whereby Washington deployed troops to Iraq to combat the ISIS threat. During the period of 2014-2017, Iranian-backed militia and US forces jointly engaged in combat operations against the Islamic State group, as they shared a common adversary.

The US-led military coalition operating in Iraq declared its decision to temporarily suspend the ongoing efforts against Islamic State militants. The primary rationale behind this shift in focus is to prioritize the protection of troops and military installations. Consequently, the coalition has announced the suspension of Iraqi forces' training initiatives and other operations aimed at bolstering the fight against ISIS.

US Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina and a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee expressed his concerns regarding the Iranian government's apparent efforts to exert control over Iraq's political system. Senator Graham alleged that Iran is engaging in bribery of Iraqi politicians to transform Iraq into a mere proxy of Iran. Speaking on Fox News, he urged the Iraqi people to remain vigilant and not allow their politicians to succumb to Iranian influence. The senator's remarks underscore the significance of the recent parliamentary vote, which he perceives as a matter of apprehensen.

Can Iraqi Military capabilities save the Nation? 

The United States actively engages in collaboration with the KRG, aiming to facilitate the resolution of longstanding disputes between the KRG and the central government in Baghdad. These disputes encompass various issues such as oil production, budget allocation, territorial claims, and matters about security. The U.S. government provides support to address these matters and promote a mutually agreeable resolution. Since the year 2021, U.S. military forces have undertaken targeted strikes in the border region between Iraq and Syria, as well as within Syria itself. These strikes have been conducted in response to attacks perpetrated against U.S. personnel and facilities in both Syria and Iraq as per the Report of the United States Congress, 2023. The targets of these U.S. strikes have primarily consisted of militia groups with affiliations to Iran, including Iraqi militia groups such as Kata'ib Hezbollah and Kata'ib Sayyid al Shuhada.

Sources: “Iraq since the invasion: 20 years in SIPRI” SIPRI Research Report, 2023, URL:https://www.sipri.org/commentary/topical-backgrounder/2023/iraq-invasion-20-years-sipri-data

In 2009, the Iraqi state assumed formal responsibility for security matters, marking the gradual reduction of the coalition troop presence from approximately 131,000 individuals in 2009 to complete withdrawal by the conclusion of 2011. In response, the Iraqi government orchestrated a large-scale military campaign, supported by multinational forces under US leadership, and supplemented by strategic airstrikes. Notably, military expenditures reached their pinnacle in 2015, coinciding with the Iraqi army's significant offensive in Tikrit. In the context of ongoing conflict, Iraq declared its triumph over the Islamic State (IS) in 2017, following the successful recapture of Mosul. It was worth noting that while the Iraqi and Syrian governments possess varying degrees of access to foreign weaponry, IS primarily sourced its armaments by seizing them from government forces and stockpiles in Iraq and Syria.

At present, there exists a deployment of approximately 2,000 military personnel from the United States within the borders of Iraq. This deployment has been authorized by the Iraqi government, which has extended an invitation to receive advisory and assistance support from the U.S. forces. The primary recipients of this aid are the Iraqi security forces, including the peshmerga forces affiliated with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), a recognized entity within the federal structure of Iraq.

By the time of the Iraq War, the strength of Iraq's armed forces had diminished to approximately 40% of their levels during the 1991 Gulf War. Pervasive international sanctions had precluded Iraq from sustaining or modernizing its obsolete weaponry and equipment. Notwithstanding these constraints, the Iraqi military maintained a considerable level of force, particularly within the Republican Guard and Special Republican Guard, despite inherent limitations.

 

(A.) Iraqi Armed Forces

The Iraqi military encountered significant challenges, resulting in substantial damage, primarily stemming from prolonged conflicts such as the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) and the subsequent Gulf War in 1990. The decision by the Iraqi government to engage in warfare during a period of shifting global geopolitics, marked by the emergence of unipolarity and the United States restructuring of the global and regional order in West Asia, further complicated the situation.

In May 2003, the Coalition of Provisional Authority (CPA), under U.S. leadership, undertook the dissolution of the Iraqi army, resulting in the estrangement of a substantial number of former soldiers, including many of Iraq's seasoned military leaders. Notably, CPA Order 2 distinguished itself through its authoritative decrees and a tone that appeared to inadvertently contribute to subsequent failures. In August 2003, the CPA established the New Iraqi Army, representing a national military force conceived in the absence of a functioning state. Predictably, soldiers of the New Iraqi Army displayed minimal enthusiasm for engaging in hostilities against their compatriots on behalf of the CPA, contrasting with their receptiveness to the interests of militia groups.

Comparable regulations (CPA) were instituted for both the disorganized Iraqi Civil Defense Corps and National Guard, entities that demonstrated ineffectiveness in their respective roles of defense and guarding. Throughout the period spanning from 2003 to the U.S. withdrawal in late 2011, the assessment of NATO coalition military success was predominantly gauged by the quantity of deployed troops and their ability to operate autonomously, devoid of external support.

(B) Iraqi Air Forces

According to a CIA report, Iraq's air defense apparatus comprises an estimated 33,000 to 35,000 personnel, organized into four air and air defense sectors dedicated to safeguarding Iraqi airspace. The F-16 aircraft served as Iraq's principal combat platform for targeting ISIS objectives and defending the nation's airspace. However, Iraq remains dependent solely on the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities of the U.S.-led coalition.

After the end of DESERT STORM, Iraq's air defense system persisted in challenging Coalition aircraft, disregarding the constraints imposed by the established no-fly zone. Throughout Operation DESERT FOX, Iraq engaged Coalition aircraft in more than 1,000 instances over three years, deploying nearly 60 surface-to-air missiles (SAMs).

(C)Popular Mobilization Forces

The establishment of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) as an independent armed entity poses a significant threat to the competition for roles and resources, thereby jeopardizing the effectiveness of the Iraqi military. The PMF assumed a prominent and conspicuous role in the defense against the Islamic State, with its militia members playing instrumental roles in several pivotal victories early in the campaign.

Among a substantial portion of the Iraqi populace, particularly Shi’a Arab Iraqis from the southeast, the PMF is perceived as heroic, with many regarding them as a crucial security buffer against both internal and external threats to the nation. Perceived shortcomings in the Iraqi Army and Federal Police contribute to the sustained support for the PMF. While the Iraqi government holds de jure control over most facets of the PMF, its core militias were formally integrated into the governmental structure through a series of decrees.

In the struggle against ISIL, both Peshmerga and PMF forces assumed pivotal roles. However, the United States, owing to Iraq's affiliations with Iran, withheld crucial support, particularly in terms of intelligence. This withholding was a consequence of the complex geopolitical relationships. Notably absent in this dynamic was a clear articulation of specific requests related to Iraq's cooperation with Iran, which could have potentially created a mutually advantageous space for enhanced collaboration between the United States and Iraq in preventing a resurgence of Islamic terrorism.

 

(D) Republican Guard

Initially established as a component of the Iraqi Military during the Baathist regime, this entity subsequently underwent a transformation, evolving into the Republican Guard Corps, and subsequently, with its organizational expansion into two corps, assuming the nomenclature of the Republican Guard Forces Command. In its initial stages, the United States undertook the dissolution of the Iraqi army and security apparatus, concurrently instituting the Supreme Commission for De-Baathification of the State, aimed at eradicating the Baath party's influence from Iraq's societal fabric.

After the events in Fallujah, a shift in American policy occurred, manifesting in the decision to extend amnesty to high-ranking members of the Republican Guard and their subsequent placement in key positions within the prospective Iraqi armed forces. During this period, the governance of Iraq was overseen by the National Security Council, with the active presence of Robert Blackwell, the principal deputy to the National Security Advisor, in the region. Collaboratively, they executed and enforced American policies in Iraq, operating within the framework of the Bush Administration's strategic direction.

In contrast to the broader Iraqi Security Forces, the compact Counter-Terrorism Service (CTS) receives unparalleled support from the coalition's special operations adviser group. This support extends to comprehensive areas such as training, administrative and financial procurement assistance, as well as dedicated intelligence and aerial support. In addition to the state-mandated army, there exist Peshmerga forces under the authority of the northern Kurdish regional government, and the paramilitary coalition, Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), notably influenced by Iran.

 

‘No to Iran, no to America!’

The above-mentioned slogan has gained significant popularity among the youth residing in southern Iraq, particularly during the protests held in the preceding year against the incumbent government. The resonance of this slogan is evident in various regions such as Basra, Baghdad, and Karbala, vehemently voicing their opposition to both Iranian and US influence. These protesters have consistently emphasized their commitment to asserting Iraqi sovereignty by chanting anti-Iranian and anti-US slogans, thereby expressing their discontent and seeking support from like-minded individuals.

The aspiration for Iraq to regain complete control over its decision-making processes, and for the governance of the nation to be entrusted to its own citizens without any external interference, has emerged as a prevailing sentiment among the populace. However, it is crucial to acknowledge the existence of notable tensions among different groups within Iraq. This is particularly evident in the lack of a unified approach among demonstrators regarding the specifics of their strategies for attaining the aforementioned objectives. While the overarching desire for self-determination is shared, there appears to be a lack of consensus and clarity regarding the practical implementation of their stated goals.

Conclusion

The adverse impact on military reforms and modernization in Iraq has been evident. Preceding the year 2003, the Iraqi military did not hold a regional standing and capability that posed challenges to both American and non-American allies. However, after the civil war crisis and the shift towards a Shia-majority government, the Sunni-dominated Iraqi military confronted sectarian divisions. The ascendancy of a Shia-majority government post-civil war contributed to an internal imbalance within military management. A state with military weaknesses in the security landscape of West Asia is not conducive to fostering geopolitical stability in the region.

Subsequently, the intervention led by the United States and NATO in Iraq aimed to dismantle the Iraqi government. Consequently, the landscape of Iraqi national politics underwent sectarian strife and a Civil War. While some experts attribute this tumultuous outcome to a failure in U.S. policy, others assert that certain native sectarian groups and regional actors viewed it as a strategic opportunity to reconfigure Iraqi society and the political spectrum in alignment with their respective interests.