Returning from death and the godfather of deals.. What awaits Iraq if Trump wins?

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]Returning from death and the godfather of deals.. What awaits Iraq if Trump wins?[/size]

[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
2024-07-19
So far, it cannot be assumed that US foreign policy under former President Donald Trump will be repeated verbatim if he wins the election battle next November, but what Trump did and said during his first presidency between 2017 and 2021, especially with regard to the Middle East, specifically Iraq, Iran, Syria and Palestine, may be a guide to what is to come.[/size]
[size=45]If Trump is destined to be the 47th president of the United States, as estimates and opinion polls indicate so far, and his chances have actually been strengthened after he survived the bullets of the supposed assassination attempt a few days ago, then, as he did in his first presidency, he will manage the country’s affairs and his foreign policy in his usual style, in the manner of businessmen, and according to the criteria of “profit and loss,” as this populist man does not have a clear ideology, who does not carry a rich political legacy, and believes that the world’s issues and crises are managed and resolved by the principle of concluding deals.[/size]
[size=45]Observers expect, according to a translated analysis, that countries such as Iraq, Iran, Syria and Palestine will be among the countries most affected by Trump’s return to the White House, as they have already experienced the Republican president’s positions and Middle Eastern policies.[/size]
[size=45]In general, Trump’s years in power were characterized by his preference for the “America First” option, and his focus on internal American affairs and challenges instead of spending money and investing in international and regional organizations, alliances and bodies. This is why he withdrew from many international organizations or suspended international agreements, and tried to withdraw from NATO.[/size]
[size=45]On the same principle of deals, Trump recently said, for example, that instead of the major involvement that current President Joe Biden has undertaken in the Ukrainian-Russian war, he is ready to offer a deal that will end the war within a few weeks and convince Russian President Vladimir Putin
.[/size]
[size=45]There is no better evidence of Trump’s approach to compromise and deals than his choice of his vice president, J.D. Vance, who was known for his hostile positions towards him and his mockery of his ideas, and has now become his partner in the presidential battle.[/size]
[size=45]According to observers, this tendency to withdraw inward may be strengthened with Trump’s choice of Vance, who is known for adopting the principle of “America is a[/size]
[size=45]But with regard to the Middle East, it is necessary to recall a number of key stations and positions that characterized Trump’s “first term,” perhaps indicating his “second term.”
Iraq
: During his first candidacy, Trump had previously criticized former President George Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, describing it as causing “a wave of unrest and chaos in the Middle East,” noting that he was an opponent of the invasion.[/size]
[size=45]However, Trump did not hesitate to threaten “severe sanctions” against the government of Adel Abdul Mahdi and the Iraqi parliament when they held a joint session to discuss ending any foreign troop presence on Iraqi soil, after Trump himself dared to take the decision to assassinate the commander of the Iranian Quds Force, General Qassem Soleimani, and the deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Authority, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, on January 3, 2020, in an airstrike near Baghdad airport.[/size]
[size=45]This assassination brought the relatively stable US-Iraqi relations into a new phase of turmoil, tension and embarrassment, as attacks by Iraqi armed factions against US forces began to escalate throughout Iraq and in eastern Syria.[/size]
[size=45]The embarrassment was because the governments, since the era of Abdul Mahdi, then Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, and now Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani, have been forced to work to try to contain the repercussions of that assassination, and try to achieve a difficult balance between the internal stability of the forces and parties participating in the government, and the interests that link Baghdad to the United States and its security and economic presence in Iraq.[/size]
[size=45]Since before and during his first presidency, Trump had several visions and ideas for dealing with the Iraqi issue. For example, he repeatedly repeated his threats against Iran to direct “major revenge” against it if it launched attacks on American interests in Iraq and the region, but Tehran did so by bombing the Ain al-Assad base after the assassination of Soleimani and al-Muhandis.[/size]
[size=45]Trump also tried to set his vision for strategic relations with Iraq according to the principles he set: limiting the Iranian presence in Iraq, strengthening the American military presence and protecting soldiers, and extracting facilities from Iraq for the freedom of movement of American forces, even if their activity overlaps with the American military presence in eastern Syria. When he took office, he also pledged to end the presence of ISIS in Iraq within 100 days, send more soldiers to Iraq, and work to establish a friendly government in Baghdad.[/size]
[size=45]On January 28, 2017, Trump signed a presidential memorandum ordering the preparation of a new plan to defeat ISIS, to be submitted to him by the Secretary of Defense within a maximum period of 30 days and to begin implementation immediately. It includes the following objectives: a comprehensive strategy and plans to defeat and eliminate ISIS, resorting to popular diplomacy, information operations, and electronic strategies to isolate and delegitimize ISIS and its extremist ideology, and working to cut off and freeze ISIS’s financial supplies through money transfers, money laundering, and trafficking in stolen antiquities, among others.[/size]
[size=45]Months after the assassination of Soleimani and al-Muhandis, specifically in April 2020, Trump’s Secretary of State, Mark Pompeo, called for a “strategic dialogue” between the United States and Iraq to discuss the future of the relationship between the two countries, through a series of meetings between senior American and Iraqi officials, and to discuss all aspects of the American-Iraqi relationship.[/size]
[size=45]But an important aspect of Trump’s view and dealings with Iraq was linked to his vision, position and policy – ​​if he had one – towards Iran, and it was clear that part of the tension in US-Iranian relations had direct repercussions on the Iraqi scene, leading to the assassination of Soleimani and Al-Muhandis
.[/size]
[size=45]Trump ignited tensions with Iran when he decided to withdraw from the nuclear agreement with Tehran and return to sanctions on May 8, 2018.[/size]
[size=45]Trump considered at the time that the nuclear agreement had not succeeded in stopping Iran's efforts to obtain nuclear weapons, or deterring it from continuing to develop its ballistic missile program, and that there was therefore a need for an alternative agreement to the agreement concluded before him by Barack Obama.[/size]
[size=45]Today, Trump and his vice president, Vance, will probably help determine the course of relations with Tehran in the next phase. It is true that the nuclear agreement has not been revived, but since the disastrous withdrawal from it in 2018, Iran has taken great strides in strengthening its nuclear program, and it has also regained much of what it had lost in terms of economic and financial interests due to the “maximum sanctions” policy that Trump implemented against it.[/size]
[size=45]The irony is that while the Americans may return Trump to the White House, the Iranians have chosen a reformist candidate to take over power in Iran. It is not clear whether Trump will return to the policy of “maximum sanctions” on Tehran, or whether he will respond to some calls within American government circles to give the reformist president in Tehran a chance.[/size]
[size=45]Days ago, Vance said in a television interview that he supported Trump's policies during his first presidency, but indicated that "in order to confront the hostile actions of the Iranian regime, Tehran must be dealt a 'strong blow.'"[/size]
[size=45]However, when Iran launched missile and drone attacks on Israel about three months ago, Vance believed that Washington must act to prevent the confrontation with Iran from expanding, which would harm US interests.[/size]
[size=45]But Trump and Vance are certainly more biased toward Israel, as their statements show. Throughout the Gaza war, Trump has not made a clear statement criticizing Israel or calling for pressure on it to stop what many international bodies now consider a war of genocide against the Palestinians. Trump even criticized him during his televised debate with President Joe Biden, accusing him of being “Palestinian” because of his positions on the war.[/size]
[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]