Iraqis: Don't use our country as a 'proxy battleground'
US strikes in Baghdad that killed an Iraqi militia
leader are testing the fragile relationship
JAN 05, 2024
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iraqis-angry-us-airstrikes/
The U.S. airstrike that killed Mushtaq Talib al-Saidi, otherwise
known as Abu Taqwa, and two other militiamen on Thursday has been unequivocally
condemned by Iraqi leaders, starting with President Latif Rashid and Prime Minister
Mohammed Shia Sudani down
to every parliamentary member in range of a microphone.
“This is a blatant violation of Iraq's sovereignty and
security,” said Rashid in a post on X. “We also condemn the attacks on Iraq’s Kurdistan
Region. Iraq must not and will not be turned into a proxy battleground.
Priority must be given to dialogue as a means to defuse tensions and find
common ground.”
“The Iraqi armed forces hold the forces of the
international coalition responsible for this attack,” Prime Minister Mohammed
Shia al-Sudani’s office said in a
statement, also calling a
“dangerous escalation and aggression.”
The foreign ministry also weighed in Thursday, saying,
“Iraq reserves its right to take a firm stance and take all measures that deter
anyone who tries to harm its land and security forces.”
Abu Taqwa was an operational commander in the
Iranian-backed Harakat al-Nujaba, which was designated a global terrorist
organization by the Trump Administration in 2019. But it is also part of the
wider Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), an umbrella group of paramilitary
organizations that are linked to the
security apparatus of the Iraq government and were instrumental to the 2014-2017 campaign
against Daesh (or ISIS).
Abu Taqwa was the leader of a designated terrorist
organization, but the implications of this attack question the very wisdom of
this operation. At least six strategic consequences come to mind.
Coming on the heels of a similar U.S.
attack less than 10
days earlier, critics say Thursday’s strike was a violation of Iraqi
sovereignty and the government’s authority to manage military operations within
its own country. Whatever Washington says about respect for Iraq’s autonomy and
its relations with Baghdad, the attacks seem to suggest — at least to officials
— otherwise.
Second, the United States has been consistent in its
messaging that it does not wish to expand the Israel-Gaza war into a regional
war. The policy has been ostensibly to contain the conflict, but Thursday’s
operation seemed to test that goal in dangerous ways. Israel has its hands full
with outside attacks from Hezbollah and the Houthis, and the logic behind
provoking the Iraqi PMFs into expanding the conflict is puzzling.
Third, the United States continues to operate against
Daesh in Syria, but much of that operation is controlled, resourced, and
resupplied from within Iraq. Separately, Washington continues a conventional
train and equip security cooperation program with the Iraqi Security Forces as well as
augmenting the Iraqi Security Forces with assets ranging from intelligence to
air support. This attack puts that entire relationship in question and has
reignited the debate over the expulsion of the U.S. forces — an issue which
Sudani raised himself only a week ago.
But the debate goes back to the 2020
parliament vote which
took place after the assassination of Qassim Soleimani and Abu Mahdi
al-Muhandis, the commander of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces and a
member of the Iraqi parliament.
Fourth, coming one day after the four-year anniversary
of the Soleimani killing and on the heels of a terrorist attack in Iran which
killed over 100 civilians at a ceremony at his tomb, it is hard to imagine a
worse time to execute another PMF leader. Emotions were already running high
among Iraqis and Iranians, and this could easily be exploited.
Fifth, the attacks intensify the risk to American
diplomats, troops, and civilians in Iraq. Calls for revenge are resonating
throughout the country, and it is hard to ignore the high probability that
fresh retaliatory attacks will follow from Thursday’s strike.
In carrying out military operations within the country
of an ally, decisions must be respectful of the host country and
well-coordinated. Politics, public opinion, and fundamental issues such as
sovereignty must be thoroughly weighed. While it may make absolute sense to
“take a terrorist off the battlefield” there are deeper considerations when
that “battlefield” is in the country of an ostensible ally.
Washington must develop better ways of coordinating
with the Iraqis ahead of these operations, especially as General Patrick Ryder,
Pentagon spokesman, made it clear
yesterday, that
the U.S. “maintains the inherent right of self-defense if our forces are
threatened.” He did add that “we'll continue to communicate, as we have been
all along, closely with our Iraqi partners when it comes to the safety and
security of our forces in Iraq.”
It is hard to see how that happened in the drone
strike on Mushtaq Talib al-Saidi.
Tanya Goudsouzian is an Istanbul-based Canadian
journalist who has covered Afghanistan and the greater Middle East for over two
decades. She has interviewed leading figures from across the Afghan political
spectrum, including the late King Zahir Shah, the late President Burhanuddin
Rabbani and former President Ashraf Ghani. Previously, she was Opinion
Editor at Al Jazeera English.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario