A few days ago, the United States Central Command (CENTCOM), responsible for operations in the Middle East, announced that it had carried out a joint operation with Iraqi forces in western Iraq in the early hours of August 29. This operation aimed at targeting leaders of the Islamic State (ISIS) to disrupt and reduce the group’s capacity to plan, organize, and carry out attacks against civilians in Iraq, as well as against American citizens and allies in the region and beyond. The U.S. military command underscored that “ISIS remains a significant threat to the region, our allies, and our homeland”. They affirmed that “CENTCOM will continue to actively pursue these terrorists in collaboration with the coalition and our Iraqi partners.”
In a statement released last month also, the U.S. Central Command affirmed that ISIS is making efforts to “restructure itself,” indicating that the frequency of its attacks in Syria and Iraq is projected to double in comparison to the previous year.
Analysts in the political sphere have associated the recent warning from the United States about the resurgence of ISIS with the withdrawal of American and coalition forces from Iraq. They contend that the United States is hesitant to depart, especially at a time marked by the ongoing conflict in Gaza and rising tensions involving Lebanon, Iran, and Israel. As a result, the threat posed by ISIS is being utilized as a justification for an extended military presence in the area.
A significant body of evidence supports the legitimacy of this analysis. This is especially pertinent because many Iraqi political figures and those engaged in political matters contend that American assertions are frequently overstated. For example, Iraqi Member of Parliament Ali Al-Bandawi, who serves on the Parliamentary Security and Defense Committee, remarked in a press interview with an Iraqi publication that “the assertions made by the Americans regarding the ISIS threat are at odds with the current situation, which indicates that security remains stable in Iraqi cities, and the security forces are fulfilling a crucial role. Although there are remnants of ISIS terrorist factions, they do not represent the same degree of danger as previously; instead, they are isolated incidents recognized by our security forces.”
Al-Bindawi asserts that “these American statements do not impact the ongoing negotiations between Baghdad and Washington regarding the withdrawal of coalition forces. The Iraqi negotiator is negotiating firmly due to the security developments in Iraq following the defeat of ISIS, alongside the urban development in the provinces previously occupied by ISIS. Such statements typically come from American spokespersons to create confusion.”
There is indeed a notable internal movement in Iraq advocating for the American forces to establish a timeline for their presence. Reports indicate that preparations for demonstrations are in progress not only within Iraq but also in various other nations. The objective is to pressure American troops to abstain from interfering in the domestic matters of these countries. For an extended period, Baghdad has been pursuing the withdrawal of the international coalition led by the United States, seeking to confine its involvement in Iraq to advisory roles, as local security forces claim their ability to manage threats autonomously.
High-ranking Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ al-Sudani, have consistently asserted that ISIS no longer represents a threat in Iraq, and thus, the coalition’s presence is deemed unnecessary, even though members of the organization continue to execute attacks in other regions.
It is also crucial to note that various reports and studies suggest that following its defeat in Baghouz in 2019, and earlier in Iraq two years prior, ISIS has completely lost its territorial control. Nevertheless, the organization has reestablished itself in a decentralized format akin to its earlier operational methods. While the group continues to exhibit a regular pattern of activities, it has refrained from executing major attacks, opting instead for intermittent operations that can be efficiently addressed by Iraqi forces.
Nevertheless, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad reaffirms, according to statements made by U.S. Ambassador to Baghdad, Alina Romanowski, that “ISIS continues to pose a threat in Iraq.” She further noted that “the efforts of the U.S.-led military coalition with Iraq to rout the organization are not yet concluded.”
Additionally, leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and several senators have expressed in various media statements that the issue of withdrawal from Iraq is premature, suggesting that the terrorist group ISIS has not been eradicated and could potentially resurge if American forces withdraw from the country.
Most importantly, Iraqi Deputy Yasser Al-Husseini previously stated that negotiations between Baghdad and Washington regarding the conclusion of the international coalition’s mission and the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq have effectively been stalled for weeks, with no clear reasons provided. He indicated that “it is evident that there is American pressure on the Iraqi government to maintain its forces in the country for an extended period, without any genuine withdrawal.”
It is no longer a secret that the United States prioritizes its interests above all else, as evidenced by its previous actions in Afghanistan, where American forces withdrew, leaving the country to the Taliban, which it had previously labeled a terrorist organization, without regard for any other considerations. Consequently, it is challenging to believe that the United States intends to remain in Iraq to combat terrorism or for the country’s benefit. The political and security developments that may arise in certain Middle Eastern nations, particularly in the event of any conflict between Israel and Lebanon, as well as the Iranian threat to Israel, represent the true objectives behind the presence of American and NATO forces in the region, with ISIS merely serving as a pretext for this presence.
Since the emergence of the “ISIS” organization on the global stage, various regional and international countries have accused one another of being responsible for the creation of this terrifying group. The Syrian opposition has alleged that the Iranian regime is behind it, while the United States has claimed that Turkey supports “ISIS.” Afghanistan has accused the United States, and each party asserts that it possesses evidence implicating the other as the true architect of this brutal organization. Nevertheless, it ultimately appears that all actions taken by this group serve only American interests and objectives.
At present, it is also observed that following each phase of negotiations with the United States regarding the withdrawal from Iraq, there is a noticeable increase in the activities of the terrorist organization ISIS. This situation appears to justify the continued presence of American forces in Iraq. Regardless of these unprovable suspicions, we are left with a singular, pointed question. Are the attacks carried out by ISIS genuinely of such a magnitude that they cannot be effectively countered by Iraqi forces alone, or are they merely exaggerated claims by the United States to maintain its military presence in the region amidst the ongoing tensions and escalation in the Middle East, which poses a threat to its ally, Israel?
Dr Marwa El- Shinawy – Academic and Writer
