With the escalation of attacks...what will the American response be in Iraq?

POSTED ON[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] BY [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[size=52]With the escalation of attacks...what will the American response be in Iraq?[/size]

[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
2023-11-02
Observers believe that the continuation of attacks against American forces in Iraq will force them to take steps to defend themselves and respond to these attacks, stressing that protecting foreign facilities and elements present inside the country is the responsibility of Baghdad, in accordance with the covenants and charters signed with Washington.[/size]
[size=45]American forces and international coalition forces in Iraq and Syria were attacked at least 27 times, from 17 to 31 October.[/size]
[size=45]Fox News said that among these attacks, 16 occurred in Iraq and 11 in Syria, some of which were attacks by drones and others by attack missiles.[/size]
[size=45]She stated that American forces succeeded in thwarting most of these attacks, and most of them failed to reach their goals.[/size]
[size=45]According to information, on Wednesday, a drone attack on an American base in Syria was thwarted.[/size]
[size=45]An Iraqi government source told Reuters that two drones targeting the Syrian Al-Tanf area were disabled or destroyed by the basic defense system.[/size]
[size=45]First, how is the foreign military presence in Iraq regulated?[/size]
[size=45]Director of the Iraqi Media Center in Washington, Nizar Haider, says, “The Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Prime Minister, Muhammad Shia’a Al-Sudani, said, ‘All the military bases in the country are Iraqi, hosting foreign advisors and trainers only, and these are present in Iraq, at the request of From the Iraqi government).[/size]
[size=45]Haider confirms that “this is what actually happened, as the last foreign soldier left Iraq on 12/31/2011, within the framework of the security agreement that Baghdad signed with Washington and which the Iraqi parliament legislated by law.”[/size]
[size=45]He explains, “What currently regulates the foreign military presence in Iraq are three constitutional and legal texts:[/size]
[size=45]A/ The Strategic Framework Agreement signed in 2008, which Parliament also legislated by law.[/size]
[size=45]B/ The protocol signed by the second Maliki government with Washington on (6/22/2014), in which the Commander-in-Chief asked Washington to return to Iraq to assist him in the war on terrorism, and according to which Al-Maliki granted the returning foreign forces complete immunity and protection by granting them entry visas. diplomacy.[/size]
[size=45]C/ Outputs of the strategic dialogue between the two parties, which continued over three joint meetings, the last of which was during the visit of former Commander-in-Chief Mustafa Al-Kadhimi to Washington on (4/7/2021).”[/size]
[size=45]He asserts, “All of these covenants and charters stipulate that Iraq is responsible for protecting foreign facilities and elements present on its territory. Therefore, it is noted that all governments that took power in Baghdad after 2014 describe the foreign forces that returned to Iraq as friendly forces, not occupiers.”[/size]
[size=45]He added, “Accordingly, any attack on these forces and their facilities amounts to a violation of the stability, security, and sovereignty of the country, and this is what Al-Sudani indicated in his recent statement, when he issued his orders to pursue and track down the missile launchers.”[/size]
[size=45]“The right to self-defense”[/size]
[size=45]Commenting on the statement of US Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, who said, “If the attacks on American military personnel in the Middle East do not stop, we will respond,” Haider said, “This statement comes in this context, given that Baghdad has failed in its obligations with Washington in protecting its forces and installations.” Foreigners are granted the right to self-defense, as stated in international law.”[/size]
[size=45]He explains, “This is a dangerous matter and will harm Iraq and put it once again at the hands of a demon. Therefore, the Sudanese government and the forces of the coalition of state forces that formed his government, specifically the forces of the Coordination Framework, will do their best to respect their commitments.”[/size]
[size=45]He adds, “No one wants to neglect the political and security stability that Iraq has witnessed over the past year of the current government’s life, which has begun planning and implementing major projects that will not see the light of day if the security and military escalation returns again, in the way we have been seeing it over the past years.”[/size]
[size=45]A parliamentary decision is ready and awaiting implementation[/size]
[size=45]He points out that “if the Sudanese government is unable to implement its obligations, it can take the initiative to implement the parliamentary decision issued by the House of Representatives on (1/5/2020) and request all foreign forces to leave Iraq.”[/size]
[size=45]He believes that “this measure is easy to implement, as the parliamentary decision exists. It does not require a new political consensus, nor a new session of Parliament. Rather, only implementation remains, and the Iraqi state must bear the burdens and consequences of this decision, with its positives and negatives.”[/size]
[size=45]Washington does not want a regional war...but...[/size]
[size=45]For his part, political analyst and expert in Arab-American relations, Dr. Atef Abdel-Jawad, points out that “since the seventh of last October, American forces have been subjected to numerous attacks by Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria.”[/size]
[size=45]Abdel-Jawad adds, “But the United States responded to militia positions in Syria with only three attacks, and the reason for this is that Washington and its Defense Minister do not want to expand the scope of the war into a regional war.”[/size]
[size=45]“proportionate response”[/size]
[size=45]He continues, “This means that the Minister of Defense, in his recent statements, wants to deter Iran and the militias from continuing their attacks, but if the attacks continue, the United States will respond in proportion.”[/size]
[size=45]Regarding the details of this response, he explains, “The proportional response will begin first by intercepting the militia missiles and drones and shooting them down during their launch and before they reach their targets, as happened when the US Navy shot down missiles and drones in the Red Sea launched by the Houthis from Yemen.”[/size]
[size=45]He continues, “But if this response does not succeed, the United States - according to the statement of its Defense Minister - is ready for a direct response, and since Iran itself is not the direct source of the attacks, the United States will focus on bombing the attacking militias.”[/size]
[size=45]He adds, “Since some of these militias are present in Iraq, Baghdad is responsible for preventing these militias from using Iraqi territory to launch attacks.”[/size]
[size=45]“Washington is in a dilemma”![/size]
[size=45]He points out that “Washington stands in a situation that involves a dilemma, which is two-fold:[/size]
[size=45]First: It does not want to harm its allies in the Baghdad government, but it will want to respond proportionally to the militias.[/size]
[size=45]Second: Washington wants to prevent the expansion of the war despite its desire to respond.”[/size]
[size=45]He concludes his speech by saying, “Washington may have asked Baghdad to act as a mediator to persuade the militias or Iran not to attack American forces, in order not to expand the war, but the United States will not hold Iraq responsible for these attacks.”[/size]
[size=45]“Convenient auto response”[/size]
[size=45]In turn, Dr. Hassan Mneimneh, a political analyst and researcher at the Middle East Institute in Washington, believes that “the preference in Washington remains not to expand the circle of war, and to keep the battle in Gaza alone.”[/size]
[size=45]Mneimneh explains, “However, the established practical procedures of the United States are that if its forces are exposed to any attack, the response will be automatically and appropriate,” indicating that “the statement of the US Secretary of Defense comes in this context.”[/size]
[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]