On June 11, American and Iraqi officials kicked off the much-anticipated strategic dialogue between the countries with a two-hour virtual meeting. The talks seek to determine the state of the US-Iraqi relations for the foreseeable future. They take place as Iraq faces intense security, political, economic, and governance challenges. The deep problems facing the country are interconnected, and American support is vital to new Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi's ability to create a functioning, coherent country that prioritizes the needs of its citizens.
The outcome of the talks – and indeed the bilateral relationship itself – has implications beyond Iraq's borders. Neighbors like Iran, Turkey, and the Persian Gulf states have a significant stake in its outcome. But they are not the only interested parties. Israel should not fool itself – the potential for developments in Iraq to affect Israeli security is growing, and decision-makers should be following the strategic dialogue closely. If Iraqi leaders, with US support, can move the country in a new direction, Iran's ability to take advantage of Iraqi state weakness to threaten Israel will be drastically curtailed.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
Though the challenges are daunting, there is reason for cautious optimism that Iraqis can address some of the deep-seated issues afflicting the country.
Though to this point the talks have been at the undersecretary level, they still have the potential to recalibrate the relationship and to accomplish some goals like enhancing the Iraqi state's ability to limit Iranian influence and to create some semblance of governance in the country. But it is no secret that Iraq faces substantial challenges in every subject covered by the talks – governance, corruption, economy, and security.
Iraqi governance is a mess, and the political system and culture that emerged in the post-US era are not currently equipped to meet the needs of its people. The sectarian character of Iraqi politics has created a reality in which lawmakers seek to stave off descent back into violence through uneasy truces between Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds. There is little capacity to focus efforts on addressing housing, jobs, inflation, and other daily concerns of the citizenry.
Corruption is endemic in the country, with an elite that lives off the country's oil wealth. Former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki created a patronage network of supplicants throughout key security and economic ministries. Ongoing attempts at creating a technocratic government show a desire to move away from the Maliki era.
However, it will be far more difficult to offer effective governance with an economy in shambles. The twin shocks of drops in global oil prices and the COVD-19 pandemic pushed the Iraqi economy to the brink of collapse. Oil is the only significant export, which maintains the bloated public sector and lines the pockets of the political class, while leaving much of the public out of work and hungry.
Massive grassroots protests erupted in October 2019 to protest these conditions, the government, and interference in Iraqi affairs by outside – that is, Iranian – actors. Shiite militias loyal to Iran, as well as their Sadrist counterparts, broke up the protests violently, killing hundreds.
The US can help Iraq deal with these challenges. According to the official statement issued following the June meeting, "The United States discussed providing economic advisors to work directly with the Government of Iraq to help advance international support for Iraq's reform efforts, including from the international financial institutions [and] US and international support for the next round of Iraqi elections and strengthening the rule of law and human rights."
American economic support – especially in cooperation with the International Monetary Fund and World Bank that incentivize greater transparency and responsible privatization of state monopolies – will help real Iraqi reformers take steps toward more representative and localized governance. But international aid will be in short supply in the global recession in the wake of the coronavirus. If Iraq is to put itself in the running for the type of loans it needs, it will have to address "fiscal controls and management, meeting cost and time schedules, and producing effective results."
The US can also continue its pressure on Iran within Iraq, and help reduce Tehran's economic and political control in the country. As long as Iran and its proxies hold sway over Iraq's economy and political institutions, government policies will not align with the interests of the Iraqi public.
Ongoing sectarianism will render all of Iraq's woes unsolvable. It will take years to undo the local and national structures that emerged from the zero-sum sectarian competition. The US has proven capable of bringing rivals to the negotiating table in Iraq. It will create a far improved environment for tackling economic and political problems if it focuses on reconciliation and helping Iraq move beyond narrow sectarianism. Of course, the less Iranian influence there is, the easier this task will be.
The security challenge
The final challenge, and the one that is most relevant for Israel, is security. Since the Trump administration pulled out of the 2015 nuclear deal and initiated its maximum pressure campaign against Iran, Iraq has become an arena where Washington and Tehran duke it out.
Islamic State is also becoming a pressing security issue once again. Though the Iraqi government declared victory over the terrorist organization in 2017, and ISIS is still unable to hold territory, attacks rose after the killing of leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in October 2019, and the group has been taking advantage of the focus on the coronavirus, lack of coordination between Kurdish, PMU, and Iraqi forces, and a reduced American presence in the area as a result of Iran-backed attacks.
To deal with this threat, and with pressure from its neighbors, Iraq needs a capable national security force. The Iraqi Security Forces must be able to carry out counterterrorism operations and to deter other countries who seek to meddle in Iraqi affairs. It must be a truly national force that does not serve sectarian agendas or maintain loyalty to political parties. This means building on the few capable units that currently exist, replacing outdated equipment, developing its small air force, and improving its self-sufficiency.
Shiite militias loyal to Iran are a major obstacle to the creation of a capable ISF. These organizations attack US forces at Iran's behest to drive them out of the country and reduce Western influence, and they played a key role in violently suppressing public demonstrations by using lethal force against Iraqi civilians.
The US has much to offer Iraq in terms of security and improving border security is crucial to limiting ISIS's ability to travel between the countries and carry out attacks. The US, Interpol, and other international partners have helped Iraq identify terrorists through biometric-information sharing. Providing technological solutions to Iraqi manpower shortages at the border is only one way that the US can help Iraq improve its security.
It is in America's and Iraq's interest that US forces maintain some presence in the country, in full agreement with Baghdad, to limit Iranian influence. Not surprisingly, Iran and its allies have been vocal about their demands that US troops leave the country. The only public support for a continued American presence is heard, not surprisingly, in the Kurdistan region, though almost all Sunni politicians boycotted the January 5 parliamentary session that voted to expel US troops.
Meanwhile, Israel's interest remains a strategic dialogue between the US and Iraq.
In the past, the strength of the Iraqi state dictated the scope of the threat it posed to Israel. When Iraq was powerful, it could send significant expeditionary forces to Israel's border to participate in Arab-Israeli wars, as it did in 1948, 1967, and 1973. Israel tried unsuccessfully to forestall Iraqi expeditions by supporting the Kurdish rebellion in Iraq's Kurdistan region, seeking to undermine the internal unity of the Iraqi state.
Today, however, the situation has changed. The coherence of the Iraqi state benefits Israeli security, while its weakness allows Iran to turn it into another territory in the crescent stretching from Iran to Lebanon from which it seeks to threaten Israel.
Iran has several means of harming Israeli security from Iraq. The PMU is the primary tool. There are several ways in which the PMU could threaten Israel from Iraq, some of which Israeli has already begun responding to. The most obvious is the transfer of precision missiles from Iran to Syria through Iraq. Israel sees Iran's campaign to improve the precision capabilities of Hezbollah as crossing a red line, and Israel has proven willing to take military action to disrupt this effort. For years, it has struck weapons convoys and depots in Syria, and it has started to do so in Iraq.
Iran-backed proxies could also use western Iraq to fire rockets and missiles at Israel. Because of the distance and reduced intelligence coverage, it would be harder for Israel to combat rocket launches from Iraq than from Syria or Lebanon.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
Iraq could also pose a threat to Israeli pilots. Providing the PMU and/or the Iraqi military with advanced air defense capabilities would make it even more dangerous for the IAF to operate over Iraq and Syria. Reducing Israel's ability to safely fly over Iraq disrupts intelligence-gatherings efforts, allowing Iran to develop infrastructure and transfer missiles more safely. In addition, Israel's freedom of action in striking Iranian convoys and proxies, or potentially nuclear installations, would be limited.
The strategic dialogue with the US comes at a possible turning point for Iraq. The country is ripe for a nationalist, public-service driven politics where good governance is more important than identity. If Kadhimi can start meeting this demand in the short time he has before early elections, and the US maintains its influence in Iraq, the country has a chance to become a coherent state that can fend off Iranian attempts to use it for its own interests.
Israel is not in a position to influence the American-Iraqi talks, nor should it try to do so. Change in Iraq will come as a result of Iraqi leaders meeting the demands of wide segments of the Iraqi public, with American support. This is the outcome that Israel should hope for, and it should pay close attention to the talks over the coming months.
This is an edited version of an analysis that was first published by the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security.
