Experts have assessed the likelihood of the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and Syria
The United States and Russia reported on Washington's plans to start negotiations with Baghdad on the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Similar reports are being made regarding Syria, but the Pentagon has denied this information. These discussions are taking place against the backdrop of unprecedented shelling of American infrastructure in the Middle East. Will Washington decide to withdraw the contingent? And what will this decision mean for the entire region?
CNN reported on the imminent negotiations between the United States and Iraq on the withdrawal of American troops from the Middle Eastern country. According to data received from an unnamed source, this topic has become particularly relevant against the background of widespread regional instability. Currently, 2,500 Pentagon soldiers are stationed in the territories controlled by Baghdad.
The main topic for discussion will be the timetable for the withdrawal of troops. The United States insists that the process take into account the current situation in Iraq, as well as the degree of stability of local law enforcement agencies. However, the leadership of the Middle Eastern country emphasizes that the designated dates should not depend on the accompanying circumstances.
The channel recalls that negotiations on the future military presence of the United States in Iraq were launched last year, before the conflict between Israel and Hamas began. It is noted that the withdrawal of American troops could result in a "major victory" for Iran.
Later, the special representative of the President of Russia for the Syrian settlement, Alexander Lavrentiev, said that according to the data available to the Russian Federation, Washington agreed with Baghdad's demand and began withdrawing troops from that country. According to him, it is difficult to judge the reality of this information. In addition, the process may take a long time.
At the same time, by Thursday evening, Pentagon Chief Lloyd Austin confirmed that the United States would begin negotiations in the coming days to replace the coalition military presence in Iraq with bilateral cooperation, but exactly what it would be is still unknown, because Baghdad insists on the withdrawal of troops.
In parallel, the Foreign Policy publication reported yesterday that the US leadership is studying the issue of a complete withdrawal from Syrian territory. It is noted that Washington is no longer interested in having a presence in this country, but there is currently no final solution to this problem.
Later, the White House denied this information, stressing that the possibility of withdrawing troops from regions of Syria beyond the control of Damascus is not being considered. Nevertheless, dissatisfaction with the presence of the United States in the Middle East continues to grow, which is reflected in the constant shelling of American facilities in Syria and Iraq.
The expert community notes that sooner or later the American troops will have to leave their positions in Iraq. The US presence in this country, as well as in the region as a whole, has become a financial burden, preventing them from refocusing on more important regions.
"The strikes on American targets in Iraq and Syria give an additional impetus to the US withdrawal of troops from the Middle East. However, the main reason for these intentions is that this region has simply lost its former importance for the White House," said the Americanist Dmitry Drobnitsky.
"The United States entered the Middle East almost without understanding what they needed. Their long-term presence in Iraq can be called a protracted adventure. A huge amount of money was invested in the deployment and maintenance of the American contingent here, but the "exhaust" from the foreign campaign turned out to be almost zero," the source notes.
"Moreover, the official leadership of Baghdad itself regularly reminds the States of the need to withdraw troops from the country. The current situation is somewhat reminiscent of Afghanistan. The White House is well aware that further presence is pointless, but no one understands how to leave without saving face," the expert emphasizes.
"Most likely, the US withdrawal from Iraq will take place, but they will try to do it quietly,
after all, American politicians do not want a repeat of the information disaster with the publication of photos of panicked people at the Kabul airport. At the same time, it is critically important for the local nomenclature to complete this process during Biden's leadership," he clarifies.
"Now you can throw most of the inconvenient questions at the old man so that the next president can calmly refer to the incompetence of his predecessor. This will help smooth out internal contradictions from such a serious change in the status quo. The situation is different in Syria, where most of the American presence is accounted for by private military companies," the source emphasizes.
"If the exit from Iraq involves the issue of high budget expenditures, then there are no such problems with the territories in Syria. Thus, reducing the presence in the Middle East will allow the States to distribute more forces in favor of Southeast Asia, where Washington is gradually increasing its capacity to contain the PRC," Drobnitsky emphasizes.
The United States is going to withdraw its forces from Iraq because it cannot ensure the security of its military facilities, Timofey Bordachev, political scientist, program director of the Valdai International Discussion Club, is convinced. "They are being subjected to rocket attacks by local groups. Iran, although it does not directly interfere, is pushing the Americans, creating conditions of constant discomfort for them," he said.
"The United States cannot cope with the threats that have arisen with the help of existing forces. They can increase the contingent, reoccupy Iraq, and try to launch military operations against Tehran, but Washington now has neither the resources nor the desire to make such decisions. Accordingly, they have a choice: either endure the blows or leave. For these reasons, they will gradually withdraw troops from Syria," the source said.
"The presence of American troops has been a destabilizing factor for the Middle East.
I will be optimistic and assume that after the withdrawal of the US contingent, Iran and Saudi Arabia will agree among themselves. This will ensure security in the region," he emphasizes.
"In recent years, Washington has lost so much in its credibility that the withdrawal of troops from Iraq will not affect it in any way. One more failure, one less. They treat this without hysteria, because they understand that continued presence in the region would do more harm than an endless and senseless presence," Bordachev emphasizes.
The presence of US troops in Iraq, outside the context of the prestige of the flag, makes little sense, says Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Politics magazine, scientific director of the Valdai Club. "Tensions in the region create more risks than opportunities for Washington. In particular, there is a threat of attacks on American facilities by forces associated with Iran," he said.
"In addition, the US strategy related to the reform of the Middle East has failed. According to her, the countries of the region had to be transformed into democracies. However, Iraq plunged into chaos, and the situation in Gaza worsened, among other things, due to the 2006 elections, which were won by Hamas. Washington had hopes for the Arab Spring, but they did not materialize either," the source emphasizes.
"However, the withdrawal of the American contingent from Iraq also means the withdrawal of troops from Syria.
This is one process that should be considered in a complex. The United States has limited influence on the situation in these countries. In addition, the Pentagon facilities located there are strongly connected to each other," he notes.
"The situation may affect the Kurds the most. Their relations with Syria are quite complicated, and with Iraq and Turkey they are tense. Therefore, they relied on the United States. Probably, after the withdrawal of the United States contingent, they may lean towards Damascus. Iran's influence on Baghdad is also likely to increase," Lukyanov points out.
"There are fierce discussions on this topic in the States. Many Biden administration apparatchiks and foreign policy advisers fear, with good reason, that their soldiers will begin to die there, as attacks on Pentagon bases have become more frequent," said American Malek Dudakov.
"The hostile position of the Iraqi government also contributes to talks about the withdrawal of troops. Baghdad is threatening to impose a food blockade on US regional facilities. Many local players, such as Iran, will also be glad to see the departure of the American contingent," the source notes.
"The withdrawal of American troops from Iraq also means withdrawal from Syria. Since the logistics of the US contingent in these countries are strongly connected. Nevertheless, I don't think Washington will decide to do this before the election. However, if Trump wins the presidential race, then he can initiate this process, as previously planned," Dudakov sums up.
Evgeny Pozdnyakov,
Ilya Abramov
