U.S. President Donald Trump’s surprise trip to Iraq may have quieted criticism at home that he had yet to visit troops in a combat zone, but it has infuriated Iraqi politicians who on Thursday demanded the withdrawal of American forces.
“Arrogant” and an “a violation of national sovereignty” were but a few examples of the criticism emanating from Baghdad following Mr. Trump’s meeting Wednesday with U.S. servicemen and women at the al-Asad Airbase.
Trips by U.S. presidents to conflict zones are typically shrouded in secrecy and subject to strict security measures, and Mr. Trump’s was no exception. Few in Iraq or elsewhere knew the U.S. President was in the country until minutes before he left again.
But this trip came as curbing foreign influence in Iraqi affairs has become a hot political issue, and Mr. Trump’s perceived presidential faux-pas was failing to meet with the Prime Minister in a break with diplomatic custom for any visiting head of state.
On the ground for only about three hours, the U.S. President told U.S. soldiers that Islamic State forces have been vanquished, and he defended his decision against all advice to withdraw troops from neighbouring Syria. He declared: “We’re no longer the suckers, folks.”
The abruptness of his visit left lawmakers in Baghdad smarting and drawing unfavourable comparisons to the occupation of Iraq after the 2003 invasion.
“Trump needs to know his limits. The American occupation of Iraq is over,” said Sabah al-Saidi, the head of one of two main blocs in Iraq’s parliament.
Mr. Trump, he said, had slipped into Iraq, “as though Iraq is a state of the United States.”
While the President didn’t meet with any officials, he spoke with Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi by phone after a “difference in points of view” over arrangements led to a face-to-face encounter between the two leaders getting scrapped, according to the Prime Minister’s office.
The visit could have unintended consequences for American policy, with officials from both sides of Iraq’s political divide calling for a vote to expel U.S. forces from the country.
Mr. Trump, who kept to the U.S. air base approximately 100 kilometres west of Baghdad, said he had no plans to withdraw the 5,200 troops in the country. He said Ain al-Asad could be used for U.S. air strikes inside Syria.
The suggestion ran counter to the current sentiment of Iraqi politics, which favours claiming sovereignty over foreign and domestic policy and staying above the fray in regional conflicts.
“Iraq should not be a platform for the Americans to settle their accounts with either the Russians or the Iranians in the region,” said Hakim al-Zamili, a senior lawmaker in Mr. al-Saidi’s Islah bloc in Iraqi parliament.
U.S. troops are stationed in Iraq as part of the coalition against the Islamic State group. American forces withdrew in 2011 after invading in 2003, but returned in 2014 at the invitation of the Iraqi government to help fight the jihadi group. Mr. Trump’s visit was the first by a U.S. President since Barack Obama met with then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki at a U.S. base near Baghdad in 2009.
Still, after defeating Islamic State militants in their final urban bastions last year, Iraqi politicians and militia leaders are speaking out against the continued presence of U.S. forces on Iraqi soil.
Supporters of the populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr won big in national elections in May, campaigning on a platform to curb U.S. and rival Iranian involvement in Iraqi affairs. Mr. al-Sadr’s lawmakers now form the core of the Islah bloc, which is headed by Mr. al-Saidi.
The rival Binaa bloc, commanded by politicians and militia leaders close to Iran, also does not favour the U.S.
Qais Khazali, the head of the Iran-backed Asaib Ahl al-Haq militia that fought key battles against the IS in northern Iraq, promised on Twitter that Parliament would vote to expel U.S. forces from Iraq, or the militias would force them out by “other means.”
Mr. Khazali was jailed by British and U.S. forces from 2007 to 2010 for managing sections of the Shia insurgency against the occupation during those years.
Mr. Trump’s visit would be a “great morale boost to the political parties, armed factions, and others who oppose the American presence in Iraq,” Iraqi political analyst Ziad al-Arar said.
Still, the United States and Iraq developed considerable military and intelligence ties in the war against the IS, and they continue to pay off in operations against militants gone into hiding.
Earlier in the month, Iraqi forces called in an air strike by U.S.-coalition forces to destroy a tunnel used by militants in the Atshanah mountains in northern Iraq. Four militants were killed, according to the coalition.
A hasty departure of U.S. forces would jeopardize such arrangements, said Iraqi analyst Hamza Mustafa.
Relations between the United States and Iraq also extend beyond military ties. U.S. companies have considerable interests in Iraq’s petrochemical industry and American diplomats are often brokers between Iraq’s fractious political elite.
Iraq’s Sunni politicians have been largely quiet about the presidential visit, reflecting the ties they have cultivated with the United States to counterbalance the might of the country’s Iran-backed and predominantly-Shia militias.
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Mr. Abdul-Mahdi accepted Mr. Trump’s invitation to the White House during their call, though the Prime Minister’s office has so far refused to confirm that.