The US strategy is based on military domination and the implementation of the policy of economic terrorism in the countries of the region, especially Iraq and Syria, which is based on five elements, the first of which is to protect the military presence in the two countries.
Amin Mohammad Hatit, a regional analyst and strategic affairs expert, wrote in a new article in Al-Banna newspaper about the recent agreement between Baghdad and Washington to change the mission of US forces in Iraq, Following the US withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 under a “Strategic Framework Agreement” that regulated relations between Baghdad and Washington, the United States returned to Iraq in 2014 with a deceptive new formula called Counterterrorism and its occupation of various areas; under the pretext that he intends to fight terrorism created and paid for by the United States, he claimed that the fight against the Takfiri terrorist group ISIS in Iraq and Syria may take 30 years.
But the Iraqis knew how to deal with the second US occupation project carried out by terrorists, and they knew how to equip their defense forces under the guise of a popular mobilization to defend their homeland. Accordingly, the Iraqi popular mobilization forces, along with their allies, confronted ISIS elements and repelled the evil of terrorism.
But now, after the liberation of Iraq from the clutches of terrorism by the resistance, the contradictory positions of the United States are questionable; Because it claimed that it came to Iraq and Syria to fight ISIS and succeeded in destroying this terrorist group; Therefore, if these claims are true, now Washington must empty the arena of Iraq and Syria and hand over these countries to their people.
But the reality is that the United States, as part of its strategy of moving to the Far East and besieging China and cutting the Silk Road, tends to regulate its presence in Iraq under new headings that do not harm Washington’s deceptive and occupying behavior. This ultimately leads to a continuing violation of Iraqi sovereignty by the United States, and the evidence shows that the change of government in the United States from “Barack Obama” to “Donald Trump” and then “Joe Biden” has not changed much the US position and strategy in the Middle East, especially in a country like Iraq.
About six months after Biden came to power, his government’s strategy in the Middle East in general and in Iraq and Syria in particular became very clear. Indicators show that the US strategy is based on military domination and the implementation of the policy of economic terrorism in the region, especially in Iraq and Syria, which is based on five elements, the first of which is to protect the military presence in the two countries. The second element of US strategy is to avoid conflict and military operations in Iraq, unless necessary. The next three elements are the destruction of internal stability, the prevention of a return to normal life in Iraq and Syria and the region as a whole, the continuation of the economic war under siege and sanctions against these countries, and finally the domination of the Iraqi and Syrian governments.
Accordingly, the United States began a new deception in Iraq in order to distort the nature of its occupation presence in the country under new headings such as the presence of advisers and training, and to reduce the Iraqi people’s pressure to expel the Americans.
In fact, Washington believes that changing the address of the military presence in Iraq is enough to better protect its 4,000-strong force at Iraqi bases. In addition, the Americans believe that by changing the title of their presence in Iraq, they can more easily carry out the mission of dominating Iraq’s decisions, sovereignty, wealth, and policies in the context of fighting the Axis of Resistance.
But on Syria, the United States has been much clearer and more brazen, declaring that it will maintain its military presence in all its illegal positions on Syrian soil from southeast to northeast. The Biden administration also claimed that it would suspend all military operations in Iraq from the beginning of next year, but did not make that promise on Syria, and that Washington’s inhumane sanctions against the Syrians, known as the “Caesar Law,” continue.
It is certain that the United States will continue its aggressive actions against the governments of Iraq and Syria and calls on the Iraqi government to legitimize the occupation of American troops on Iraqi soil; the approach from the first day of the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was based on creating sectarian strife in the country. However, this method is not applicable in Syria, where the government and the nation unanimously reject the US occupation of their country, and Washington prefers to continue its occupation in various parts of Syria openly through military presence and operations.
From these we conclude that this time the region is in a new history of confrontation with the occupiers, and this time the United States has entered the Middle East directly, not with alternative means such as terrorism.
But the point to note is that everyone knows that the Axis of Resistance, which thwarted the most dangerous and intense wars and defended the region alone and with the support of its allies for 10 years, is much stronger today than it was 10 years ago when it forced the Americans to leave Iraq. In the end, it can be said that the US military card in the region, especially in Iraq and Syria, has been destroyed and the only lever and pressure left for it is economic sanctions, in which governments are obliged to have a national strategy to stay away from foreign positions.