A lot of concerns have been raised on the entry and withdrawal of America’s troop in Iraq. It is believed that United States of America’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a mistake, and so was its withdrawal in 2011.1 Numerous opinions have been provided regarding this assertion. However, US’s act to invade Iraq and its subsequent withdrawal is criticized because instead of building Iraq, US-Iraq war led to numerous problems in the country.
As such, after the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, it is likely that a breakup of the Iraqi state is inevitable. According to a report released by the United Nations, many people in Iraq lost their lives after the withdrawal of US troops in Iraq following the protests of Sunni against the central government. This came at a time when the government of Iraq was supposed to start a process of reconciliation and inclusion.2 Since then, the country has experienced numerous political unrests and conflicts.
Partly, such cases are attributed to fact that the Sunni community is still marginalized since the supposed inclusiveness was never achieved. However, the question that many people have been searching for answers is the reason for Iraq’s state of turmoil.
It has been argued that the withdrawal of US from Iraq and the shutdown of Sunni protest camps in Iraq led to entry of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which is linked to the feared al Qaeda group, in Iraq. The ISIS, in a previous version formed a great percentage of the insurgents in Iraq that the Americans were fighting against during the US-Iraq war. The regrouping of the ISIS and other terror groups in Iraq has increased the number of conflicts in Iraq and its borders.
Following the withdrawal of the US’s troops from Iraq, such groups became strong, and have led to the extension of such fights to Iraq and Syria’s border.3 The grievances of the Sunni community are yet to be met and this has contributed to a great extent to the fights in Iraq. While the government of Iraq is struggling to deal with the ISIS, it still receives a lot of opposition from the Sunnis since they consider the ISIS as partners-in-arms against a common enemy.
As such, it can be seen that the continuous fights in Iraq are yet to end given the magnitude of the demands from both the Sunnis and the ISIS. For this reason, it suffices that the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq has been instrumental in the state of Iraq, since it occurred before the country could stabilize.4 Such a move gave the ISIS a chance to reenter Iraq, and the Sunnis to continue with their fight in opposition to their marginalized state and the fulfilment of their grievances. If such a condition remains, a breakup of the Iraqi state is inevitable, given that the civil war in Syria has adversely affected Iraq in various aspects of the country’s economy.
The current state of Iraq in terms of social, political and economic affairs has been largely influenced by the antagonistic relationship that exists between the Shia and Sunni.5 For example, the central government has lost control over Fallujah and Ramadi regions, which has led to the rule of ISIS militants, local police who are tribally-influenced and the Sunni militiamen. Such a state of affairs prevents any form of development in the country, as all resources are channeled into stabilizing the troops and working towards eliminating any threats. Nonetheless, Iraq has been struggling to gain its national identity.
Its main aim as a country is to ensure that the identity obtained can help in solving the differences that exist between its Kurds, Arabs and other minority divisions.6 Altogether, Iraq has come to the realization that it must focus on the development of a new government and economic structures as well as social order after it has gone through a period of sanctions, dictatorship, war civil conflicts and occupation conflicts since the late 1970s.
For Iraq to attain the required level of peace and unity, it must be in a position to cope with the ever increasing changes in population, political and economic conditions.7 In addition, it must be involved in the diversification of its economy which is heavily relies on the exportation of petroleum products. However, the struggle to attain the above benefits may lead to more civil wars and further divisions in the country, as evident in the regions of Fallujah and Ramadi.8 Nevertheless, the political stability in Iraq has high chances of being recovered since the fact that it has numerous cases of violence does not mean that it can never succeed in the establishment of security, better life and stability for its people.
The tension level between the political, parties and the major ethnic groups in Iraq has been rising. The main aspects of conflict have been the control, autonomy and authority over the natural resources in Iraq that have led to strenuous relationships between individuals from both sides. All the groups have been suspecting one another and the strength of competition for dominance has been increasing.
However, the withdrawal of the US forces together with the diminishing role at international level has led to the likelihood of new cases of civil strife and internal violence. The participation of international relations reduced at a time when the region was facing the crisis of declining aid and political instability. As a result, various issues have led to the constant testing of the Iraq government. For instance, the implementation of the Erbil power-sharing agreement of 2010 has been the main area of focus by those testing the government.
The current occurrences in Iraq increase the tension between the factional groups and the central government has led to the feeling of lack of authority from both the political and economic systems of Iraq. In reality, the tension leads to factions between the political and ethnic groups in Iraq that lead to threats by Kurds and Sunnis over the withdrawal of their support to the government as the crisis in the political arena seems to be unavoidable.9
The domestic challenges of Iraq are involved in interactive relationships with the extensive models of instability within the region. For a long time, Iraq has been caught up in between the political fights of other countries as evident in the case of US and Iran.10 In addition, Iraq is drawn closer to the civil conflicts that are constantly experienced in Syria.
Even though the government of Iraq has been active in trying to eliminate ISIS militants in the country, the present civil war in Syria has adverse effects on the stability of Iraq. The crises experienced within the boundaries of Iraq have a lot of impact in the future of Iraq, as well as the interest of other countries in the region. However, the role played by the US in Iraq is far much better than that of Iran. For instance, US’s presence in Iraq was entirely to prevent the influence of Iran over Iraq.
For instance, US claimed that it is the major source of income for Iraq, and helps in training the security officials of Iraq and the provision of other forms of assistance through the use of information operations. However, the main goal of America in Iraq in 2003 was not only to contain the influence of Iran, but also to help in the creation of a stable democratic government in Iraq. It further aimed at ensuring that the country was in a position to defeat the remaining insurgent and extremist groups, have self-defense against threats from foreigners, participate in the development of a sustainable society and finally develop effective relationship with other countries.
US forces in Iraq since 2003 up to 2011, had been very instrumental in the partial suppression of the extent of the internal challenges in Iraq that affected the economic, political and military aspects of the country. This can be attributed to the fact that there were increased tensions in Iraq following US’s withdrawal, which was an indication that the presence of US’s forces in Iraq prevented the terror acts of the Sunnis and the ISIS.11
The increased cases of civil conflicts and war in Syria have undermined the plans to form a stable government. The coalition government was expected to be formed in 2012, alongside setting up of strategic plans in Iraq to deal with the economic, political and military challenges in the country. Nonetheless, the withdrawal of US troops in Iraq was followed by the revival of the fight for power between the Sunnis and the central government, and the increase in terror attacks from extremists groups such as the ISIS.12
Presently, the struggle to gain power still continues and is now more divisive and violent. Concerns have been raised that point out to the possibility of a collapsed democracy in Iraq and complete breakup of Iraqi state if such political situation remains unresolved, as evident in the current civil war in Syria.
Bibliography
Al-Hamid, Raed. “The American Withdrawal from Iraq: Ways And Means for Remaining Behind”. Contemporary Arab Affairs 5, no. 2 (2012): 230-251.
Avant, Deborah and Lee Sigelman. “Private Security and Democracy: Lessons from the US In Iraq”. Security Studies 19, no. 2 (2010): 230-265.
Davidson, Jason. “Heading For The Exits: Democratic Allies And Withdrawal From Iraq And Afghanistan”. Democracy and Security 10, no. 3 (2014): 251-286.
Rubin, Barry. “Reality Bites: The Impending Logic of Withdrawal from Iraq”. The Washington Quarterly 28, no. 2 (2005): 67-80.
Van Creveld, Martin. “The Fall: Consequences of US Withdrawal from Iraq”. New Perspectives Quarterly 24, no. 1 (2007): 41-42.
Visser, Reidar. “Taming the Hegemonic Power: SCIRI and the Evolution of US Policy in Iraq”. International Journal of Contemporary Iraqi Studies 2, no. 1 (2008): 31-51.
Footnotes
- Raed al-Hamid, “The American Withdrawal from Iraq: Ways and means for remaining behind”, Contemporary Arab Affairs 5, no. 2 (2012): 251.
- Deborah Avant and Lee Sigelman, “Private Security and Democracy: Lessons from the US in Iraq”, Security Studies 19, no. 2 (2010): 236.
- Reidar Visser, “Taming the Hegemonic Power: SCIRI and the Evolution of US Policy in Iraq”, International Journal of Contemporary Iraqi Studies 2, no. 1 (2008): 35.
- Deborah Avant and Lee Sigelman, “Private Security and Democracy: Lessons from the US in Iraq”, Security Studies 19, no. 2 (2010): 236.
- Raed al-Hamid, “The American Withdrawal from Iraq: Ways and means for remaining behind”, Contemporary Arab Affairs 5, no. 2 (2012): 232.
- Martin Van Creveld, “The Fall: Consequences of US Withdrawal from Iraq”, New Perspectives Quarterly 24, no. 1 (2007): 41.
- Reidar Visser, “Taming the Hegemonic Power: SCIRI and the Evolution of US Policy In Iraq”, International Journal of Contemporary Iraqi Studies 2, no. 1 (2008): 39.
- Barry Rubin, “Reality Bites: The Impending Logic Of Withdrawal From Iraq”, The Washington Quarterly 28, no. 2 (2005): 68
- Jason Davidson, “Heading For the Exits: Democratic Allies and Withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan”, Democracy and Security 10, no. 3 (2014): 256.
- Raed al-Hamid, “The American Withdrawal from Iraq: Ways and means for remaining behind”, Contemporary Arab Affairs 5, no. 2 (2012): 230.
- Jason Davidson, “Heading For The Exits: Democratic Allies And Withdrawal From Iraq And Afghanistan”, Democracy and Security 10, no. 3 (2014): 251.
- Deborah Avant and Lee Sigelman, “Private Security and Democracy: Lessons from the US in Iraq”, Security Studies 19, no. 2 (2010): 265.