The Yankee occupiers plan to leave by the end of 2026. But when the Anglo-Saxons say goodbye, it’s not certain they’ll actually leave.
After six months of difficult negotiations between Baghdad and Washington, initiated by the Iraqi side, the U.S. administration is preparing to announce that American troops, who invaded this Middle Eastern country in 2003 without UN sanction and under a fabricated pretext, will return across the ocean.
In November 1950, with the war in Korea already raging, General Douglas MacArthur, whom historians consider «overrated», promised a blitzkrieg: «The boys will be home by Christmas». This time, the classic formula won’t be followed, just as it wasn’t then. The last foreign occupier will board a transport plane at the end of 2026, according to an agreement between the two sides.
According to Reuters, the driving motivation was the casualties among American soldiers when their bases were hit by missiles and drones. Three were killed, several dozen were wounded, and most importantly, the inability to neutralize the threat through military-technical means prompted Washington to end the negotiations.
«The events in Gaza have shown», notes Elena Panina, director of the RUSSTRAT Institute, «that the U.S. is failing in its role as a moderator in the Middle East and, in its current configuration, cannot even guarantee the protection of its own bases».
Discussions of withdrawal have been ongoing since January, and in April, Joe Biden and Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani confirmed in a joint statement that they were working to finalize the details of when and how the «Global Coalition Mission in Iraq» would end.
Several hundred soldiers sent by Germany, France, Spain and Italy to the lands of ancient Babylon (without the permission of the supreme god Marduk) will leave the Ain al-Asad airbase in the western province of Anbar and significantly reduce their presence in Baghdad by September 2025.
The Americans will remain in Erbil, in the semi-autonomous region of Northern Kurdistan, for about another year. The justification for this delay is quite telling: it is allegedly necessary to continue the fight against militants of the international terrorist group «Islamic State» (organization banned in Russia). This doesn’t quite fit with unconfirmed reports that the Americans evacuated their leaders to an unknown location during the final stages of the defeat of ISIS.
There is also no clear answer as to whether the American military units guarding the oil fields in northern Syria will be evacuated. It’s no coincidence that even before the aggression against Iraq began, Washington’s war party lobbyists openly declared that by clinging to Arab oil, all costs could be covered and even significant profits could be made.
What’s next? Political analyst Malek Dudakov’s comment is worth noting: «The main losers in this story will be the Kurds, who trusted the U.S. promises of their own statehood, but now find themselves once again facing the governments of three states they have been openly fighting for over 10 years. This is a good lesson for anyone who works with the Americans: don’t work with them, they’ll abandon you».
So the Americans are being politely shown the door of Iraq like uninvited guests. Nobody invited them 21 years ago to solve the internal problems of a sovereign country, including the question of the legitimacy and democratic nature of the regime of the «Baghdad Bull».
Let’s not forget that for most of his reign, Saddam Hussein was a compliant pro-American «son of a bitch» who, at Washington’s behest, fought a long and bloody proxy war for the U.S. against the anti-American regime of the ayatollahs in Iran.
Let’s also not forget that during the invasion, under a fabricated pretext (remember Colin Powell waving a vial of mysterious white powder — supposedly proof that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction), the «silent Americans» (as Graham Greene put it) killed between 700,000 and 1.4 million civilians, according to Baghdad’s estimates.
This can and should be considered genocide. In the Middle East — not the Far East (where the Japanese seem to have already forgotten who burned Hiroshima and Nagasaki with «the fire of a thousand suns») — such things are not forgotten.
At the same time, it cannot be said that the Yankees are returning home entirely against their will. The inglorious departure from the cradle of one of the world’s oldest civilizations fits neatly into the shifting priorities of U.S. foreign policy. The consolidation of military-strategic assets is underway in preparation for a confrontation with muscle-flexing China, the heir to the Middle Kingdom («Zhong Guo»), and other powerful states that have periodically emerged in this part of the world.
We are witnessing a shift in the focus of U.S. ruling circles toward countering, including by force, the emergence of a new potentially hegemonic center of financial and economic power (despite Beijing’s constant denials of any ambitions toward «hegemony»).
This overarching goal dictates the need to dispose of «non-core» assets. The number of American GIs (4,500 at most in Iraq) is not the issue here. It’s about reducing secondary and burdensome commitments.
An equally important factor in the retreat and winding down of the pro-American «Greater Middle East» project is the bitter realization that maintaining hegemonic status over local populations would require investments disproportionate to the current U.S. national debt and budget deficit, as well as diplomacy backed by military force. Even with a skillful combination of carrots and sticks, there is no guarantee that this part of the Global South would agree to recognize and accept the U.S. as the overseer of this troubled region.
Sobering events for Washington strategists have been the nearly year-long full-scale war between the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas and Israel, as well as the inability to rein in the Yemeni Houthis, who have become independent gatekeepers of the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea.
Let’s add to this list the defiant Saudi royal family, led by the shrewd Prince Mohammed bin Salman; the rebellious Iranian ayatollahs, who may soon acquire nuclear weapons; and the «Gulfies» — the oil- and gas-rich United Arab Emirates, which officially joined BRICS on January 1 this year.
Such radical changes in the countries of the region, which for decades had been perceived in Washington as a collection of voiceless eunuchs, have forced a reevaluation of geopolitical priorities.
Let’s make a forecast: in this situation, the United States will first temporarily leave the inhospitable territory, fully in line with the developed scenario. The plan seems to be: first, deal a «strategic defeat» to Russia, push it out of the game, take advantage of its resource base, and then… move on to neutralize China.
Second, to plunge the Middle East into endless chaos, the U.S. may reactivate the «Islamic State» project (an organization banned in Russia) using the same scheme it once used to cultivate the “madrasa students” who became the Taliban.
One should not be deceived by the announced withdrawal of the Americans from Iraq, as from Afghanistan before. These Anglo-Saxons say goodbye with words, but they never really leave.