US troops have started withdrawing from Ain al-Asad air base in Iraq’s Anbar province and Baghdad’s Victoria base, heightening concerns over Iraq’s future stability as well as Washington’s long-term relationship with Baghdad and its regional strategy.
Some units were first redeployed to Erbil’s Harir Air Base, while others were transferred to Syria’s al-Tanf base, according to officials and reports.
The US embassy in Baghdad denies a full withdrawal from the capital, but these moves are the first clear signs of the gradual exit agreed last year by the Iraqi government and Washington, marking a significant transition in Iraq.
Ain al-Asad, located in the western Anbar province, has served as a critical defence against the Islamic State (IS) and as a counterbalance to Iran-backed militias. A reduction in US troop presence may expose Baghdad to more security challenges, both domestically and internationally.
"The American withdrawal, though expected, comes at a sensitive time," analyst Ghani al-Ghadhban told The New Arab. "As military and security cover lifts, economic and political support could follow, leaving Iraq vulnerable to sanctions and restrictions reminiscent of the 1990s."
One of the first potential consequences of the US pullback is the empowerment of Iran-backed militias. The Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF), formed in 2014 to fight IS, have grown into a sprawling network with deep political roots. Now officially part of Iraq’s security forces, they remain closely tied to Tehran and sometimes defy government policies.
Roughly 2,500 US troops were deployed in Iraq as part of the anti-IS international coalition formed in 2014, the year the extremist militant group overran swathes of Iraq and neighbouring Syria. They were positioned in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government.
After Israel's war on Gaza began in October 2023, Iran-backed militias in Iraq, operating as the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, began launching attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria. In addition, these militias also carried out drone and missile strikes on targets within Israel.
On 4 October 2024, the Israeli army reported that two soldiers were killed and 24 others were injured in a drone attack originating from Iraq and targeting the Israeli occupied Syrian Golan Heights.
The Coordination Framework, a coalition of Shia political parties aligned with Iran, has actively worked to institutionalise the PMF within the Iraqi state. This bloc sees the US withdrawal as a strategic success. A diminished American military presence may encourage these militias to increase their political influence, exert pressure on rivals, and challenge the central government’s authority.
"It is likely that the United States and Israel, following this withdrawal, will intensify airstrikes against Shia militias in Iraq," Ghadhban added.
Fragile gains against IS
While militias may gain influence, the counterinsurgency against IS is likely to become more complex. Despite losing territory, IS fighters remain active in rural and border areas, conducting attacks and bombings. US forces have supported Iraqi troops with intelligence, training, and air support.
Baghdad insists that IS is too weak to mount major operations and highlights progress made by its security forces in preventing cross-border infiltration. Yet US officials remain cautious, citing ongoing IS activity along the Syrian frontier and the risk of sleeper cells regrouping.
Without timely US support, Iraqi forces may struggle to maintain control in remote areas. Tough terrain and limited resources add to their challenges. If counterterrorism operations weaken, IS may reorganise and threaten vulnerable communities. This could erode confidence in government.
Beyond security concerns, the US withdrawal could expose Iraq to new economic risks. The American military presence has often been accompanied by political and financial support. This support has helped Iraq maintain its funds in the Federal Reserve, service its debts, and avoid punitive sanctions.
As the military umbrella lifts, analysts warn that economic support could also be withdrawn, raising the threat of sanctions and restricted oil sales, according to Ghadhban.
Oil revenues account for over 90 per cent of the government's income; therefore, any disruption in oil exports could impede economic activity, delay public sector salaries, and provoke social unrest. The memory of severe United Nations sanctions imposed during the 1990s contributes to widespread apprehension regarding a potential recurrence.
Iraq will end the international coalition’s mission by 2026, with withdrawals from Baghdad and Anbar in September 2025 and from the Kurdistan Region in September 2026, according to Prime Minister’s adviser Hussein Allawi.
He emphasised the coalition’s advisory role, while Iraqi forces have led counterterrorism efforts. Allawi cited the military's high readiness, outlining a five-year plan to strengthen air defence through new command centres, training, and international cooperation.
Sardar Aziz, a Kurdish researcher on civil-military affairs and Middle East politics, told TNA that the US withdrawal stems largely from the risk of attacks on American forces, prompting their redeployment to Harir and Tanf bases.
"The withdrawal also shows that Iraq has minor importance for the US. Washington does not want direct involvement in the country. Instead, it plans to manage Iraq’s dossier remotely after completing the withdrawal. This might change Washington-Baghdad ties to a normal military relationship and could lower the diplomatic level in Iraq," Aziz clarified.
He also cautioned that although the withdrawal might be seen as a “success” story for the Iraqis, as it was in response to their demand, it might lead to instability.
"The US’s aim from the withdrawal might not be to attack Iraq. However, it might attack Iraq if necessary, or might not prevent Israel from launching airstrikes inside Iraq. The danger to American forces is now less than it was before the withdrawal. From this, the Shia fear the US might give Israel the green light to attack them."
He said that, overall, the US would retreat to manage Iraq from a distance rather than maintain direct ties. That is not good for Iraq diplomatically. He also noted that the Iraqi government still needs US intelligence, military training, and assistance to fight IS and other dangers.
He concluded that Iraq’s position in Washington could become weaker because the ruling Coordination Framework and its allies do not dare establish good relations or engage in lobbying efforts with Washington, as Tehran does not permit it. Consequently, Iraq’s ties with Washington could deteriorate.
US officials insist the withdrawal does not amount to abandonment. A State Department spokesperson told TNA that the move is "not the end of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, which will continue civilian-led efforts globally," but rather "a transition of the Coalition’s military mission in Iraq to a more traditional bilateral security partnership".
The US withdrawal represents a strategic transition, not a complete disengagement from the region. Training, intelligence sharing, and joint counterterrorism efforts are expected to continue, albeit with reduced US personnel involvement. Nevertheless, many Iraqis see the reduced American presence as a sign of less support.
A delicate balancing act
Against this backdrop, Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani must navigate complex political pressures. His political advancement is partially due to the support of the Coordination Framework, which has consistently advocated for a US military withdrawal from the country. However, he also recognises that American support helps with border security, economic stability, and foreign investment.
Sudani has tried to establish Iraq as a regional intermediary by launching projects such as the Development Road, which connects Basra to Turkey. These objectives require political and economic stability. The US withdrawal may shift the power balance toward pro-Iranian factions, undermine Baghdad’s neutrality, and discourage outside investment.
Given these dynamics, the next several months will be pivotal for Iraq's path. Key risks include the possible consolidation of militia power, a resurgence of IS, and economic instability. These challenges could prompt renewed US airstrikes or a policy reversal. Alternatively, stronger economic pressure may push Baghdad closer to Tehran. Maintaining regional neutrality will require strategic choices to avoid negative outcomes.
The central question remains: will the US withdrawal lead to a stable security partnership or open a power vacuum? Experience after 2011, when IS rose following the US departure, is a warning. Most Iraqis hope to avoid repeating that instability.
The current redeployment of troops marks a significant turning point for both the United States and Iraq. The resulting outcome - whether sustained stability or renewed instability - will depend on both parties' capacity to address security, political, and economic challenges in the near future.
Dana Taib Menmy is The New Arab's Iraq Correspondent, writing on issues of politics, society, human rights, security, and minorities
Follow him on Twitter: @danataibmenmy