An American report: Baghdad is "dangerous" and not a reliable partner for Washington. We should go to Erbil

by **claud39** Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:57 am

An American report: Baghdad is "dangerous" and not a reliable partner for Washington. We should go to Erbil

02/09/2020

An American report: Baghdad is "dangerous" and not a reliable partner for Washington. We should go to Erbil 111095

Baghdad today - follow up On Sunday (February 9, 2020), an American website published a report that talked about the beginning of the war in Iraq in 2003, and pointed out that since that time, the importance of the safety of the political situation and territorial integrity in Iraq has been an essential .component of US policy, according to the text of the report

In light of the US assassination of Qasim Soleimani, the Iranian response to it, and the" continuing violence in Iraq - which was recently embodied in an attack that was not claimed by anyone on the American embassy - the US government must now return Consider the " .feasibility of continuity of the current policy adopted towards Iraq

He added, "The current government in Baghdad has proven many times that it is not a reliable partner of the United States by neglecting its basic duties, including its inability to
".protect American personnel abroad

The website continued, "For example, the government showed that it either did not wish or was unable to protect the American embassy from violent demonstrators and attacks. For weeks, Baghdad did not succeed in preventing American diplomats, forces, and private contractors from being bombed, knowing that they came to facilitate training the army AlIraqi - what resulted in the death of a private American contractor and the wounding of many .other American contractors and soldiers recently

The site pointed out that "the controversial voting process conducted by the Iraqi parliament recently to end the presence of American forces in Iraq confirms what has been circulated for months - if not years - that the Iraqi government in Baghdad is subject to elements loyal to Iran. This vote also proves acceptance of the continued existence of groups Armed, hence a " .desire to ignore the rule of law

The report stated, "Moreover, this vote reflects the deep sectarian divisions within the Iraqi government. The majority of Shi'a MPs in parliament voted in favor of expelling US forces, while other Iraqis remain opposed to Iran's interference. More importantly, Iraqi Sunni and Kurdish politicians did not attend. Parliamentary voting session "according to the text of the .report

The report pointed out that "the solidarity of the Shiite politicians, manifested by the strengthening of the capabilities of the army and state institutions, reflects their lack of willingness to ensure the interests of the Iraqi state as a whole and not only their society, as well, confirms the million-dollar march called by the leader of the Sadrist movement Muqtada al-Sadr last week that the maker of the most likely kings in The formation of the new Iraqi government is not inclined or not much concerned with maintaining an American military .presence in Iraq, although it also seeks to limit Iranian influence over Iraq policy

He continued, "So far, American policymakers have identified two possible responses to recent developments. One is based on staying in Iraq and mending ties. The United States justifies this response based on the large amount of human capital and resources invested in Iraq, as well as Iraq's future role in countering the return of ISIS and the containment of " .Iran

However, repairing relations requires a legitimate Iraqi partner. It may take months to form" a new government, since the Iraqi government is in a volatile situation after the prime minister resigns. The more the United States waits to form a new government, the greater the risk of exposure to officials, soldiers, and private contractors," the website said in its " .report. Americans for attacks

The second possible outcome is the end of the US military presence in Iraq. The Trump administration’s promise to reduce troop levels overseas and avoid further conflicts in the Middle East could be demonstrated if violence against American targets persists. However, a withdrawal would The United States would provide Iran and its proxies with boldness, question the American resolve at the regional and international levels, and probably result in the return of ISIS, but a third or intermediate option remains. The United States can significantly reduce its presence in Baghdad without withdrawing from the region through Consolidate her relationship With the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq, strengthening our military relationship with a trusted partner would compensate for a limited US presence in the region and enable the United States to pursue its goals in the region and weaken the " .government in Baghdad

The report pointed out that "the strengthening of the US-Kurdish relationship and the strengthening of the military presence in Iraqi Kurdistan will also allow the United States to preserve its commitment to the global coalition to defeat ISIS, and an increased military presence in Kurdistan will authorize the United States to exert maximum pressure on the Iranian government until a nuclear agreement is reached." More inclusive, and ultimately, US allies like Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates will welcome this development in " .the wake of the withdrawal from Baghdad

The report continued, "In contradiction to what it is with the politicians in Baghdad, there is no friendly relationship between the leadership of the Kurdistan Regional Government and Iran despite the need for this government to coordinate with its neighbor from the east thanks to the latter's regional influence and geographical proximity. And because of the passion of the existing Kurdish segment In Iran, the latter abandoned the Kurds and left their fate in the hands of Saddam Hussein on several occasions while opposing the independence of the Kurds, and with the stationing of American forces in the Kurdistan region, the United States will also be able to avoid any of the potential repercussions resulting from the future, but unlikely, possible division of Iraq. Until it is impossible to know where the ongoing protests and counterattacks in Baghdad and other major cities will lead to, it should not be .ruled out that they evolve into civil war, mainly due to the apparent violence

The report stated, "But in light of such a division, a strong relationship with the Kurdistan Regional Government and maintaining the long-term presence of American forces in America may prompt the ultimate consideration of formal recognition of a Kurdish state, a goal that the Kurdish people have always sought to achieve but has evaporated in September 2017, when the Kurdistan Regional Government succeeded in holding the referendum on .independence easily, but it was unable to mobilize international support for its results

He said, "And if it is going to be to strengthen the position of Baghdad, the independence of the Kurds will put additional financial pressure on a government that suffers mainly to fill its deficit, which reinforces the significance of the refocusing of American forces in the Kurdistan ".region of Iraq now

The site concluded its report by saying: "Finally, the developments witnessed in the past weeks show that it is worth the United States to seriously consider leaving the Baghdad and welcoming the option of firm commitment to military cooperation with the Kurdistan Regional Government, and this strategic repositioning - which represents the compromise between staying In and out of Baghdad - with greater benefit to the interests of the United States in " .the Middle East, and help stabilize the region as well

https://baghdadtoday.news/ar/news/109945/%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%B1%D9%83%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D8%BA%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%AE%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%A9-