US Troops Complete Withdrawal from Iraq After Two Decades, Raising Questions About Baghdad's Ability to Secure Itself

The final contingent of American military personnel has departed Iraq, closing a chapter of foreign military involvement that began with the 2003 invasion. The withdrawal marks the end of a US-led anti-Islamic State coalition presence that had become a fixture of the country's security landscape for years. Iraqi authorities now confront the challenge of safeguarding their territory without the direct support of American forces for the first time in a generation.

The US military originally entered Iraq in 2003 with the stated objective of removing Saddam Hussein from power. That campaign quickly toppled the Iraqi leader, but the aftermath proved far more difficult than the initial combat phase. The dissolution of state institutions and the emergence of an insurgency set the stage for years of instability that would reshape the country's political and social fabric.

In the years following Hussein's downfall, Iraq was consumed by a cycle of violence that inflicted deep damage on its infrastructure and society. Sectarian killings, armed uprisings, and the rise of extremist groups repeatedly tested the capacity of the Iraqi state. The country's security forces, rebuilt and trained with foreign assistance, struggled at times to contain threats that crossed provincial and national boundaries.

American officials have long argued that their military presence helped prevent the complete collapse of the Iraqi state during its most precarious moments. Supporters of the intervention point to the period when coalition forces partnered with Iraqi units to roll back the Islamic State's territorial hold, a campaign that required extensive air power, intelligence sharing, and logistical backing from the United States and its allies.

Yet the American role in Iraq has also drawn heavy criticism. Detractors contend that the 2003 invasion itself unleashed forces that Washington failed to anticipate, contributing to the chaos that followed. From this perspective, the instability that gripped Iraq for much of the past twenty years was not merely a domestic failure but a consequence of decisions made by outside powers, including the disbanding of the Iraqi army and the broader handling of the post-invasion transition.

The completion of the withdrawal is being framed by the Iraqi government as the start of a new phase in the country's sovereign trajectory. Baghdad has emphasized its desire to manage security affairs independently, presenting the departure of foreign troops as a milestone in restoring full national control. The coming months will test whether Iraqi forces can translate that ambition into durable stability.

A panel of regional and international analysts examined these questions in a recent episode of Inside Story, weighing the risks and opportunities that lie ahead for Iraq. The discussion, presented by Dareen Abughaida, brought together specialists with backgrounds in Iraqi affairs, Middle East geopolitics, and Gulf security.

Ahmed Rushdi, president of the House of Iraqi Expertise Foundation, joined the program to offer a perspective rooted in Iraqi domestic dynamics and institutional capacity. His organization focuses on the expertise available within Iraq to address the country's governance and security needs, making his assessment central to the debate over self-reliance.

Kenneth Katzman, a senior fellow at The Soufan Center, contributed expertise on Middle East geopolitics and US foreign policy. His analysis typically situates Iraq's trajectory within the broader framework of American strategic interests in the region, including the balance of influence among neighboring states and the ongoing campaign against extremist networks.

Abdullah Alshayji, a professor of political science at Kuwait University, brought a Gulf security lens to the conversation. His vantage point is particularly relevant given that Iraq's stability directly affects its southern neighbors, who have watched the withdrawal with a mixture of interest and concern about regional spillover.

Beyond the question of whether Iraq can handle its own security, the departure raises the issue of who benefits from the US exit. Regional powers with competing interests in Iraq may see an opportunity to expand their influence. Domestic factions could recalibrate their strategies now that the American presence is no longer a factor in their calculations.

The withdrawal also carries symbolic weight. A giant Iraqi flag was displayed at the reconstructed twelfth-century Hadba leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in Mosul, a site that had become a symbol of the fight against the Islamic State. The imagery underscored the narrative of national recovery, even as questions persist about the durability of that recovery.

For ordinary Iraqis, the end of the foreign military presence may bring a sense of closure after years of occupation and conflict. Yet it also places renewed responsibility on their own leaders and institutions. The country's ability to prevent a resurgence of violence, manage internal tensions, and assert control over its borders will determine whether the American withdrawal marks a genuine turning point or a prelude to renewed uncertainty.

The international community will be watching closely. Neighboring states, global powers, and multilateral organizations all have stakes in Iraq's stability. How Baghdad navigates this new reality, and whether it can secure the country without the direct backing of Washington, remains one of the most consequential open questions in the Middle East today.