US engagement with Iraq and the region after Operation Inherent Resolve

1. Victoria Taylor: The End of Operation Inherent Resolve

Timestamp: 00:14:38 to 00:17:04 - watch this moment on skim

The conclusion of Operation Inherent Resolve and the departure of US troops from Iraq mark the end of nearly two decades of continuous US military engagement. The return of US troops in 2014 was critical to defeating ISIS, but their presence became a target for Iran-backed militias and a political irritant. The agreement to end the coalition presence by September 30th, 2026, and the subsequent fall of the Assad government in Syria paved the way for withdrawal. The panel will explore the implications for US security cooperation, support for Iraqi and Syrian Kurds, and the disarmament of militias.

Significance (High): This sets the historical context for the entire discussion, framing the withdrawal as a significant turning point after years of US military involvement in Iraq and Syria.

Sources in support: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council)

Neutral sources: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024)), Andrew Tabler (Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute), Ziad Sajat (Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Center for International Policy), Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

2. Ambassador Romanoski: Navigating the Withdrawal Framework

Timestamp: 00:20:19 to 00:27:41 - watch this moment on skim

The US withdrawal from Iraq was framed as a controlled and reasonable transition, aiming to avoid being 'kicked out' again. The agreement included a timeline for the coalition's end and allowed bilateral security relationships to be built, but the real question is what has been built in its place. The militias, particularly the recalcitrant ones, are watching this date closely, and the challenge for the new Prime Minister is managing their expectations and the disarmament promise, which is a tall order given Iraqi politics and history. The ongoing Iran war adds another layer of complexity, as militias may continue to attack neighbors, and the US must consider the implications of a complete withdrawal on attracting investment and ensuring a safe environment.

Significance (High): This point sets the stage for the complex negotiations and the precarious balance the US and Iraqi governments must maintain. It highlights the internal and external pressures on Iraq's leadership.

Sources in support: Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

Neutral sources: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Ziad Sajat (Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Center for International Policy), Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

3. Ziad Sajat: Disarmament Deadline is Unrealistic

Timestamp: 00:29:58 to 00:34:01 - watch this moment on skim

Disarming militia groups by September 30th is categorically unrealistic. The Iraqi government's focus is on integrating some groups into the PMF, but outright disarmament is rejected. These resistance factions, having fought ISIS and saved the state, are unlikely to disarm voluntarily, especially with the ongoing US-Iran tensions and the IRGC's strategic interests. The prime minister faces pressure to disarm them, but also stated the government will not clash with these groups, ruling out a forceful approach. The groups themselves see little value in disarming if they face continued sanctions and US opposition, preferring to maintain their capabilities aligned with the IRGC. The prime minister is in a difficult position, with potential resignation threats and a need for a negotiated settlement, possibly influenced by an upcoming meeting with President Trump.

Significance (High): This perspective directly challenges the official narrative and highlights the deep-seated issues within Iraq's security landscape. It underscores the difficulty of achieving genuine stability without addressing the root causes of militia power.

Sources in support: Ziad Sajat (Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Center for International Policy)

Neutral sources: Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024)), Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

4. Muhammad Sali: Kurds Face Heightened Risks

Timestamp: 00:35:02 to 00:39:53 - watch this moment on skim

The US troop withdrawal poses significant risks for Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan, who have already experienced the aftermath of US withdrawals in Syria. Concerns include the potential end of US air defense protection for the region, leaving it vulnerable to Iranian and militia attacks. The lessons of 2011, when ISIS resurged after US withdrawal, loom large, raising fears of jihadi groups reorganizing. Furthermore, the fragile peace with Turkey regarding the PKK could be disrupted, leading to renewed conflict. Despite these risks, the long-standing Kurdish-American relationship is expected to endure, with US political and diplomatic engagement likely to continue, even if military presence diminishes.

Significance (High): This analysis underscores the disproportionate impact of US policy shifts on vulnerable populations like the Kurds, highlighting their precarious security situation and dependence on external support.

Sources in support: Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

Neutral sources: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024)), Andrew Tabler (Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute), Ziad Sajat (Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Center for International Policy)

5. Andrew Tabler: Shifting US Policy and Regional Implications

Timestamp: 00:40:41 to 00:41:54 - watch this moment on skim

The Trump administration's approach to Iraq differs significantly from the Biden administration's, with a greater emphasis on rapid withdrawal and less on sustained security cooperation. Tabler was not surprised by the troop decision, as it aligned with a broader policy context of ending 'forever wars.' The ongoing Iran war adds complexity, potentially influencing reconsideration of troop presence, but the administration's focus remains on withdrawal. The situation in Syria, where US presence was critical for fighting ISIS and supporting Syrian Kurds, also faces uncertainty with shifting US policy. The regional picture is dynamic, with the US needing to balance economic interests with security commitments.

Significance (Medium): This point clarifies the ideological differences in US foreign policy and how they translate into concrete actions on the ground, impacting regional stability and alliances.

Sources in support: Andrew Tabler (Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute)

Neutral sources: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024)), Ziad Sajat (Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Center for International Policy), Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

6. Andrew: The American Public's War Weariness

Timestamp: 00:42:24 to 00:45:18 - watch this moment on skim

The American public, particularly in the de-industrialized center of the country, is exhausted by the 'forever wars' and the associated human and economic costs. This sentiment fuels movements like MAGA and influences political decisions regarding military engagement abroad. The current struggle with Iran, with its deep economic implications, is a direct concern for these communities who are disproportionately affected by military service and economic hardship.

Significance (High): This sentiment directly shapes the political calculus for US foreign policy, creating pressure to disengage from prolonged conflicts and prioritize domestic concerns. It suggests a fundamental shift in public appetite for overseas military interventions.

Sources in support: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council)

Neutral sources: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

7. Sajad: Navigating US-Iraq Relations Amidst Security Risks

Timestamp: 00:47:20 to 00:50:55 - watch this moment on skim

The US must strike a balance between protecting its national security interests and fostering an environment conducive to American investment in Iraq. This requires careful management of the transition as US troops leave, addressing the Prime Minister's timeline and conditions, particularly concerning the militias. The US-Iraqi strategic relationship agreement remains on the books, providing a framework for continued engagement, but sustained investment hinges on the Iraqi leadership's ability to control militias and improve governance.

Significance (High): This highlights the intricate tightrope walk for US policy, where security concerns and economic opportunities are deeply intertwined. The success of US investment and regional stability hinges on Iraq's internal capacity to manage its security landscape.

Sources in support: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters)

Neutral sources: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

8. Sajad: The Challenge of Iraqi Prime Minister's Political Capital

Timestamp: 00:55:01 to 00:58:36 - watch this moment on skim

Despite a strong personal relationship with President Trump and a clear need for American investment, the Iraqi Prime Minister possesses limited political capital domestically. He lacks a strong political party and control over his cabinet, making it difficult to implement reforms and disarm powerful militias. The Prime Minister's strategy relies on a combination of US pressure (the 'stick') and investment opportunities (the 'carrot'), but his ability to enforce disarmament remains questionable.

Significance (High): This internal political dynamic in Iraq significantly constrains the Prime Minister's ability to enact meaningful change, potentially jeopardizing US-backed initiatives and prolonging instability. It underscores the deep-seated challenges of governance in post-conflict Iraq.

Sources in support: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters)

Neutral sources: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

9. Muhammad: US Policy Shift and Kurdish Anxiety

Timestamp: 00:58:47 to 01:07:11 - watch this moment on skim

The current US administration's state-centric approach, prioritizing dealings with national governments, has created anxiety among Kurdish groups. This focus on Baghdad, coupled with the potential complete withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, might lead Washington to bypass Kurdish interests. While the US-Kurdish relationship has strategic depth due to Iran's influence, the internal divisions within Kurdish politics and the delayed formation of a new Kurdistan Regional Government cabinet weaken their position.

Significance (High): This policy shift and internal Kurdish fragmentation could diminish the strategic leverage of Kurdish groups, potentially impacting regional stability and US counter-terrorism efforts. It raises concerns about the long-term viability of Kurdish autonomy and influence.

Sources in support: Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

Neutral sources: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council), Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters)

10. Andrew: The Future of US Military Engagement

Timestamp: 01:07:13 to 01:09:25 - watch this moment on skim

The US military's role in the Middle East is in serious question, not due to capability, but due to a lack of public trust in the architects of its strategies. The American people support a strong military but distrust the 'endless wars' and poorly designed policies that lead to loss of life and financial strain. Future administrations, regardless of party, will likely face continued pressure to disengage from prolonged conflicts, though the fundamental strategic interests in the region may remain.

Significance (High): This signals a potential recalibration of US foreign policy, moving away from large-scale military interventions towards more targeted or diplomatic approaches. The erosion of public trust in strategic planning poses a significant challenge for future US engagement in the region.

Sources in support: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council)

Neutral sources: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

11. Navigating Iran's Nuclear Ambitions

Timestamp: 01:09:27 to 01:11:28 - watch this moment on skim

Dealing with Iran's nuclear program presents a complex strategic challenge, with numerous potential pathways to conflict. The problem lies in committing to a specific course of action, which then dictates subsequent decisions and negotiations. The risk is that a chosen path may not yield the desired results, such as reopening critical energy routes like the Straits of Hormuz, leading to a more precarious geopolitical situation.

Significance (Medium): The multifaceted nature of addressing Iran's nuclear ambitions requires careful strategic planning to avoid unintended escalations and achieve desired diplomatic outcomes.

Sources in support: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council)

Neutral sources: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

12. Sanctions as a Geopolitical Lever

Timestamp: 01:13:27 to 01:16:25 - watch this moment on skim

Sanctions remain a primary tool in the US foreign policy arsenal, particularly concerning Iran. These sanctions are expected to persist and potentially intensify until a comprehensive agreement is reached. Countries like Iraq must navigate this reality, understanding that their relationship with the US, especially under administrations focused on 'maximum pressure' campaigns, will be significantly shaped by their adherence to or defiance of these sanctions.

Significance (High): The continued application of sanctions creates economic strain and political complexity for Iraq, forcing difficult choices in its foreign relations and economic policy.

Sources in support: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council)

Neutral sources: Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024)), Ziad Sajat (Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Center for International Policy)

13. The Tightrope Walk: Iraq Between US and Iran

Timestamp: 01:15:46 to 01:20:47 - watch this moment on skim

Iraq finds itself in an unenviable position, caught between the geopolitical pressures of the United States and Iran. The nation strives to maintain a neutral stance, seeking to benefit from positive relations with both powers. However, this delicate balancing act is increasingly challenged as both the US and Iran attempt to draw Iraq into their respective spheres of influence, creating a politically untenable situation for Iraqi leadership.

Significance (High): Iraq's ability to pursue its own interests is severely hampered by this geopolitical tug-of-war, potentially leading to instability and missed opportunities for development.

Sources in support: Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

Neutral sources: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council), Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Ziad Sajat (Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Center for International Policy), Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

14. The Case for Iraq as a Major Non-NATO Ally

Timestamp: 01:20:48 to 01:24:53 - watch this moment on skim

A proposal is floated to designate Iraq as a Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA) of the US. This move is seen as a low-cost, flexible signal to the world and potential investors that the US-Iraq relationship is evolving to a new stage. While the Iraqi government, particularly the Prime Minister, may be receptive due to a perceived pro-US orientation and potential for investment, the timing and readiness for such a designation are questioned, with some arguing that the foundational elements for this partnership are not yet in place.

Significance (Medium): This designation could significantly alter the perception of US commitment to Iraq, potentially attracting investment and solidifying a strategic partnership, but its premature implementation could undermine its intended effect.

Sources in support: Andrew Tabler (Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute)

Sources against: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council)

Neutral sources: Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024)), Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

15. US Security Support Post-Withdrawal

Timestamp: 01:25:20 to 01:28:25 - watch this moment on skim

Following the withdrawal of US troops, Iraq faces significant capability gaps in areas like counter-UAS, missile defense, and critical infrastructure protection. The question arises regarding the nature and extent of US security and intelligence support that can realistically remain available in a major security contingency. Discussions suggest that while direct troop presence is reduced, 'over-the-horizon' capabilities and bilateral security relationship parameters are being defined, though dependent on Iraq's internal political and security arrangements.

Significance (High): Iraq's ability to defend itself against emerging threats is contingent on the continued, albeit redefined, security partnership with the US, highlighting the ongoing need for external support.

Sources in support: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council), Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters)

Neutral sources: Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024)), Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

16. The Risk of Re-Emergence of Threats

Timestamp: 01:27:53 to 01:29:04 - watch this moment on skim

Fragmented societies, particularly in regions like Iraq and Syria, are vulnerable to the re-emergence of threats such as ISIS or a combination of extremist groups and state-sponsored actors. Without stable political and security arrangements, even significant investments in infrastructure can be jeopardized. The historical precedent of groups like ISIS re-emerging after troop withdrawals underscores the need for sustained stability and effective governance to prevent a return to past conflicts.

Significance (High): The potential for renewed instability and the resurgence of extremist groups poses a direct threat to regional security and the success of long-term development initiatives.

Sources in support: Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters)

Neutral sources: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council), Alina Romanoski (US Ambassador to Iraq (2022-2024))

17. Investment Challenges in Iraq

Timestamp: 01:29:14 to 01:32:05 - watch this moment on skim

Despite Iraq's potential for rewarding investment opportunities, a critical missing piece is the institutional layer required for proper financial, legal, and commercial structuring. This gap hinders international capital from flowing into the country, as investors require assurances of control, standard practices, and sustainability. The presence of armed groups outside central government control further complicates long-term investments in critical infrastructure, making energy companies hesitant to commit significant resources.

Significance (High): The lack of robust institutional frameworks and security assurances deters much-needed foreign investment, slowing Iraq's economic development and reconstruction efforts.

Sources in support: Muhammad Sali (Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute)

Neutral sources: Victoria Taylor (Director of the Iraq Initiative and Syria Project at the Atlantic Council), Heramra Pomuk (Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent at Reuters), Andrew Tabler (Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute)

US Policy vs. Domestic Sentiment (Medium severity)

Type: Political Activist

The tension between the US administration's foreign policy objectives, such as engagement in Iraq and the region, and the domestic sentiment of the American people who are weary of 'forever wars' and seek to avoid 'throwing good money after bad'.

Significance: This internal conflict within the US could lead to policy decisions that prioritize short-term domestic political gains over long-term strategic stability in the Middle East, potentially undermining US influence and creating vacuums for adversaries.

Militia Control and Iraqi Sovereignty (High severity)

Type: Political Activist

The Iraqi Prime Minister's struggle to control powerful, Iran-aligned militias, which possess significant political and military capital, directly challenges his authority and the Iraqi government's ability to ensure security and attract foreign investment.

Significance: Failure to rein in these militias could destabilize Iraq, prolong US military engagement, and severely hamper economic development, raising questions about the true extent of Iraqi sovereignty and the effectiveness of US support.

US-Kurdish Relations vs. Central Government Focus (Medium severity)

Type: Political Activist

The US administration's preference for dealing with centralized governments, including Baghdad, potentially sidelines Kurdish groups who have historically relied on US support and may face increased pressure from regional powers and the Iraqi federal government.

Significance: This shift could weaken the Kurdish position, exacerbate internal Kurdish divisions, and alter the regional balance of power, particularly in the context of ongoing US-Iran tensions and the strategic importance of the Kurdish territories.