RSS
Reduction of US Presence in Iraq Likely to Embolden Iranian Axis, ISIS
Military vehicles of US soldiers are seen at Ain al-Asad air base in Anbar province, Iraq, Jan. 13, 2020. Photo: REUTERS/John Davison
JNS.org – The United States and Iraq have been engaged in talks aimed at transitioning the U.S.-led international military coalition in Iraq into a bilateral partnership, a process that has been delayed due to the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict.
These discussions will determine the future of U.S. military presence in Iraq, a country that Iran intends to take over with the help of its Shi’ite-backed militias, and which remains a critical battleground in the fight against Islamic State.
American officials have reiterated that U.S. military personnel are in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government as part of “Operation Inherent Resolve” to advise, assist and enable the Iraqi security forces in their ongoing fight against ISIS. However, signs are growing that the Biden administration—as well as potentially any administration that follows it—would seek to either draw down or entirely remove the American military footprint in the country, with consequences for the entire region.
The United States currently maintains approximately 2,500 troops in Iraq. Additionally, around 900 U.S. personnel are stationed in neighboring Syria, where they continue to play a critical role in counterterrorism operations.
Bradley Bowman, senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and a former national security advisor to members of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, cautioned against repeating the mistakes of the past in both Iraq and Afghanistan, which enabled radical jihadist forces to fill vacuums.
“The primary reason the U.S. military is in Iraq is to prevent a return of the ISIS caliphate,” said Bowman, who was an active-duty U.S. Army officer, Black Hawk pilot and assistant professor at West Point. “Let’s hope this administration does not force us to endure a sequel of the tragic movie we’ve seen before—a premature U.S. military withdrawal that ignores the advice of commanders and neglects conditions on the ground,” he told JNS.
Bowman drew parallels to the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 and Afghanistan in 2021, both of which, he argued, led to significant security setbacks. “That misguided decision to withdraw from Iraq in 2011 catalyzed a series of events that resulted in the ISIS caliphate, eventually forcing the U.S. military to return later to Iraq at a higher cost,” he said.
He noted that the Biden administration risks making the same mistake by withdrawing troops without fully considering the consequences. “In both cases, in Iraq and Afghanistan, we saw a predictable and forewarned disaster,” he added.
The prospect of a U.S. military drawdown in or withdrawal from Iraq has also raised concerns about Iran’s influence.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran wants the U.S. military out of the way,” Bowman stated. He explained that the U.S. presence in Iraq acts as a significant impediment to Tehran’s strategic objectives, which include exerting greater control over Baghdad and using supply lines to arm its proxies in next-door Syria, as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon. “Iran would like to make Iraq like Lebanon, where Tehran uses its terror proxy to undermine national sovereignty and control government decisions,” he explained.
“If you think about it from a Sunni Iraqi perspective—if you have a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq, what is that going to do? That is going to make you fearful that you have an Iranian takeover in Baghdad. Shi’ites aligned with Iran are going to be perceived as ascendant, and that’s going to make some Sunnis more susceptible to ISIS radicalization and recruitment. So, the obvious consequence, the predictable consequence, of a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq is more effective ISIS radicalization and recruitment of Sunnis,” Bowman warned.
He pointed to a July 16, 2024, release by U.S. Central Command that warned that “ISIS is on pace to more than double the total number of attacks they claimed in 2023.” The U.S. combatant command responsible for the Middle East said, “The increase in attacks indicates ISIS is attempting to reconstitute following several years of decreased capability.”
“To make matters worse, if there is a credible perception that the prospective U.S. military withdrawal is in response to the more than 170 attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq, Syria, and Jordan since mid-October, then the take-home lesson for Iran and its terror proxies is that aggression against Americans pays,” added Bowman. “That will invite more attacks on Americans.”
Professor Eytan Gilboa, an expert on U.S.-Israeli relations at Bar-Ilan University and a senior fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, echoed similar concerns regarding a potential U.S. withdrawal.
“The Iranians and their media outlets are pushing for a complete U.S. withdrawal,” he said. He also warned that a reduction in U.S. forces could lead to increased ISIS activity and further destabilize the region.
“It’s clear that if the United States pulls out, ISIS attacks will intensify,” he said, noting that U.S. forces are being targeted by radical Shi’ite Iranian-backed militias while they remain in Iraq to combat Sunni ISIS.
On Aug. 13, Pentagon spokesman Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said that eight U.S. service members had been treated for traumatic brain injury and smoke inhalation following an Aug. 9 drone attack on the Rumalyn Landing Zone base in Syria, adding that an Iran-backed militia had launched the attack.
Gilboa also highlighted the strategic significance of the U.S. presence in Iraq, particularly in relation to Israel and other U.S. allies in the region. “Any move that strengthens Iran and its proxies harms Israel’s national security,” he stated.
Gilboa warned that if the U.S. withdraws, Iraq could become a failed state similar to Lebanon and Yemen, where Iranian-backed militias exert significant influence. “The American presence is a buffer that helps prevent the full takeover of Iraq by Iranian forces,” he explained.
Gilboa questioned whether planners in Washington were thinking about the long-term consequences of such an action.
He assessed that Washington could be keen to pull out of Iraq no matter who wins the next presidential elections in November, adding, “If Kamala Harris wins, she will not continue the Biden policies. Trump, for his part, has said that he will continue his actions from his first term, but that’s also unlikely. People change, and both could be susceptible to isolationist influences.”
As the future of the American footprint in Iraq appears uncertain, the stakes are high.
The potential for a U.S. withdrawal raises concerns that go beyond the resurgence of ISIS, and which touch on increased Iranian influence and effects on U.S. allies—including Jordan, which Iran has attempted to infiltrate, destabilize and use as an arms conduit via Iraq to the east.
The post Reduction of US Presence in Iraq Likely to Embolden Iranian Axis, ISIS first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
New Poll: Majority of NYC Voters ‘Less Likely’ to Support Mamdani Over His Refusal to Condemn ‘Globalize the Intifada’
Zohran Mamdani. Photo: Ron Adar / SOPA Images via Reuters Connect
In a warning sign for the campaign of Democratic nominee for mayor of New York Zohran Mamdani, a majority of city voters in a new poll say the candidate’s hardline anti-Israel stance makes them less likely to vote for him.
In the survey of likely city voters conducted by American Pulse, 52.5 percent said Mamdani’s refusal to condemn the slogan “globalize the intifada” coupled with his backing of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement made them less likely to vote for him in November. Just 31% of city voters polled were more likely to support him because of these positions.
At the same time, a significant share of young New York City voters support Mamdani’s anti-Israel positioning, a striking sign of shifting generational views on Israel and the Palestinian cause.
Nearly half of voters aged 18 to 44 (46 percent) said the State Assembly member’s backing for BDS and “refusal to condemn the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’” made them more likely to support him.
Mamdani, a democratic socialist from Queens, has been under fire for defending “globalize the intifada,” a slogan many Jewish groups associate with incitement to violence against Israel and Jews. While critics argue it glorifies terrorism, supporters claim it’s a call for international solidarity with oppressed peoples, especially Palestinians. Mamdani has also voiced support for BDS, a movement widely condemned by mainstream Jewish organizations as antisemitic for singling out Israel.
The generational divide exposed by the poll comes amid a broader political realignment. Younger progressives across the country are increasingly critical of Israeli policies, especially in the wake of the Gaza war, and more receptive to Palestinian activism. But to many Jewish leaders, Mamdani’s rising support is alarming.
Rabbi David Wolpe, visiting scholar at Harvard University, condemned the phrase with a sarcastic analogy.
“‘Globalize the intifada’ is just a political slogan,” he said. “Like ‘The cockroaches must be exterminated’ was just a housing authority slogan in Rwanda.”
Jewish organizations have reported a surge in antisemitic incidents in New York and across the U.S. since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war last fall. The blending of anti-Zionist slogans with calls for “intifada,” historically linked to violent uprisings, has deepened fears among Jewish communities that traditional red lines are being crossed.
Whether this emerging coalition reshapes New York politics remains to be seen. However, the poll indicates that among younger voters, views that were once considered fringe are quickly moving into the mainstream.
The post New Poll: Majority of NYC Voters ‘Less Likely’ to Support Mamdani Over His Refusal to Condemn ‘Globalize the Intifada’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Report: Jews Targeted at June’s Pride Month Events
A Jewish gay pride flag. Photo: Twitter.
The research division of the Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM) released a report on Wednesday detailing incidents of hate against Jews which took place last month during demonstrations in celebration of LGBTQ rights and identity.
Incidents reported by the group include:
- At a Pride march in Wales, the activists Cymru Queers for Palestine chose to block the path and show a sign that said “Profiting from genocide,” an attempt to link the event’s sponsors — such as Amazon — to the war in Gaza.
- A Dublin Pride march saw the participation of the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which labeled Israel a “genocidal entity.”
- In Toronto at a late June Pride march, demonstrators again attacked organizers with a sign declaring, “Pride partners with genocide.”
CAM also identified a recurring narrative deployed against Israel by some far-left activists: so-called “pinkwashing,” a term which the Boycott, Divest, Sanctions (BDS) movement calls “an Israeli government propaganda strategy that cynically exploits LGBTQIA+ rights to project a progressive image while concealing Israel’s occupation and apartheid policies oppressing Palestinians.”
The report notes that at a Washington DC Pride event in early June Medea Benjamin, cofounder of activist group Code Pink and a regular of anti-war protests, wore a pair of goofy, oversized sunglasses and a shirt in her signature pink with the phrase “you can’t pinkwash genocide.”
Other incidents CAM recorded showed the injection of anti-Israel sentiment into Pride events.
A musical group canceled a performance at an interfaith service in Brooklyn, claiming the hosting synagogue had a “public alignment with pro-Israel political positions.” In San Francisco before the yearly Trans March, a Palestine group said in its announcement of its participation, “Stop the war on Iran and the genocide of Palestine, stop the war on immigrants and attacks on trans people.”
CAM notes that this “queers for Palestine” sentiment is not new, pointing to a 2017 event wherein “organizers of the Chicago Dyke March infamously removed participants who were waving a Pride flag adorned with a Star of David on the grounds that the symbol ‘made people feel unsafe.’”
In February, the Israel Defense Forces shared with the New York Post documents it had recovered demonstrating that Hamas had tortured and executed members it suspected of homosexuality and other moral offenses in conflict with Islamist ideology.
Amit Benjamin, who is gay and a first sergeant major in the IDF, said during a visit to New York City for Pride month that “All the ‘queers for Gaza’ need to open their eyes. Hamas kills gays … kills lesbians … queers cannot exist in Gaza.”
The post Report: Jews Targeted at June’s Pride Month Events first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
IAEA pulls inspectors from Iran as standoff over access drags on
IAEA chief Rafael Grossi at the agency’s headquarters in Vienna, Austria, June 23, 2025. REUTERS/Elisabeth Mandl/File Photo
The UN nuclear watchdog said on Friday it had pulled its last remaining inspectors from Iran as a standoff over their return to the country’s nuclear facilities bombed by the United States and Israel deepens.
Israel launched its first military strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites in a 12-day war with the Islamic Republic three weeks ago. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors have not been able to inspect Iran’s facilities since then, even though IAEA chief Rafael Grossi has said that is his top priority.
Iran’s parliament has now passed a law to suspend cooperation with the IAEA until the safety of its nuclear facilities can be guaranteed. While the IAEA says Iran has not yet formally informed it of any suspension, it is unclear when the agency’s inspectors will be able to return to Iran.
“An IAEA team of inspectors today safely departed from Iran to return to the Agency headquarters in Vienna, after staying in Tehran throughout the recent military conflict,” the IAEA said on X.
Diplomats said the number of IAEA inspectors in Iran was reduced to a handful after the June 13 start of the war. Some have also expressed concern about the inspectors’ safety since the end of the conflict, given fierce criticism of the agency by Iranian officials and Iranian media.
Iran has accused the agency of effectively paving the way for the bombings by issuing a damning report on May 31 that led to a resolution by the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations.
IAEA chief Rafael Grossi has said he stands by the report. He has denied it provided diplomatic cover for military action.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on Thursday Iran remained committed to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
“[Grossi] reiterated the crucial importance of the IAEA discussing with Iran modalities for resuming its indispensable monitoring and verification activities in Iran as soon as possible,” the IAEA said.
The US and Israeli military strikes either destroyed or badly damaged Iran’s three uranium enrichment sites. But it was less clear what has happened to much of Iran’s nine tonnes of enriched uranium, especially the more than 400 kg enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.
That is enough, if enriched further, for nine nuclear weapons, according to an IAEA yardstick. Iran says its aims are entirely peaceful, but Western powers say there is no civil justification for enriching to such a high level, and the IAEA says no country has done so without developing the atom bomb.
As a party to the NPT, Iran must account for its enriched uranium, which normally is closely monitored by the IAEA, the body that enforces the NPT and verifies countries’ declarations. But the bombing of Iran’s facilities has now muddied the waters.
“We cannot afford that … the inspection regime is interrupted,” Grossi told a press conference in Vienna last week.
The post IAEA pulls inspectors from Iran as standoff over access drags on first appeared on Algemeiner.com.