The recent political upheaval in Syria, marked by the swift fall of Bashar Assad, has caused significant strategic recalibrations among Iraqi factions previously advocating for the withdrawal of U.S. forces. The change in Syria's leadership, driven by a Sunni Islamist rebellion, presents a new geopolitical landscape that is compelling Iraqi and American officials to reconsider earlier agreements.
Last year, an agreement between the U.S. and Iraq was inked, aiming to conclude the American-led coalition's military operations against the Islamic State (IS) by September 2025. This planned withdrawal was in response to the perceived containment of IS threats and growing calls from Iran-aligned Iraqi factions for a U.S. exit, especially after the October 2023 conflict involving Israel and Hamas. The war's aftermath, seen unfavorably across the Arab world due to U.S. support for Israel, further fueled these demands.
However, the rapid overthrow of Assad has reshuffled regional alliances and intentions. Key players in Iraq, particularly those within the Coordination Framework—a coalition of predominately Shiite, Iran-backed political parties—are now reevaluating their stance on the U.S. military presence. The concern is not only about regional stability but also the potential resurgence of IS, which could exploit any power vacuum during Syria's transitional phase.
An official from the Coordination Framework emphasized the urgency of maintaining a U.S. presence, citing fears that a withdrawal could embolden IS forces. The shift in dynamics has caused a significant reduction in demands for U.S. withdrawal, the official noted, expressing a sentiment echoed by various political and security agencies in Iraq.
Echoing these sentiments, a top official from the Iraqi National Security Service highlighted the strategic necessity of U.S. involvement amidst these evolving security challenges. Requesting a withdrawal of U.S. forces at this juncture is not in Iraq's national interest, he stated, indicating a notable decrease in public rhetoric pushing for American withdrawal.
A senior U.S. defense official confirmed these apprehensions, disclosing informal dialogues initiated by Iraqi leaders to delay troop withdrawal, highlighting valid concerns over an IS resurgence fueled by disorder in post-Assad Syria. While an immediate resurgence isn't imminent, the conditions could foster one, he remarked, underscoring the potential risks posed by the current instability.
Despite these informal discussions, the Iraqi government has yet to make any public announcements regarding an extension of the coalition's mission. However, Iraqi government spokesperson Bassim al-Awadi reassured that the timelines had not been altered and dialogues with international partners remain active.
Extending the coalition's presence might require a formal request from Iraq, a move that Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al-Sudani may approach cautiously to avoid political backlash domestically from factions skeptical of perceived concessions to U.S. policies. Iraqi leadership continues to walk a fine line, balancing ties with the U.S. alongside its regional neighbor Iran.
The situation also sees a nuanced relationship between U.S. forces and the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), an amalgam of primarily Shiite militias. While historically adversarial, these groups have sometimes found themselves on the same side against common threats like IS. Their role and interactions could further evolve in response to the shifting sands of Middle Eastern politics.
Insights from experts like Renad Mansour of Chatham House underline the cautious approach of Iraqi leaders, who vividly recall the turbulent period following Saddam Hussein's ousting. The potential for destabilization, akin to the post-2003 era, influences current strategic decisions.
In concluding, the changing scenario in Syria has significant implications for regional security and reshapes Iraq's strategic calculus concerning U.S. military presence. While the concrete outcomes of these reassessments remain to be seen, the ongoing dialogues suggest a sustained—and perhaps recalibrated—American involvement in Iraq's fight against evolving security threats.