With a closer look, we will find out that the basis of U.S. presence in the Western and Southwestern Asia, especially Iraq, is rooted in the strategy of “the regional partition” and establishing a “new Middle East”. The initial ideas of the strategy were formed during Bill Clinton’s presidency and it was practically launched under George W. Bush.
The strategy has been applied in all the tactics and policies of U.S. foreign and defense policies in the past two decades, and there is no ambiguity or disagreement between Democrats and Republicans regarding the necessity of its implementation. Criticizing Donald Trump’s recent behavior in the region by his Democratic rivals is related to the failure of the White House in carrying out the strategy.
The U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA, exerting pressure for a new deal or at least including new articles in the current deal, and insisting to limit the Iranian influence in the region can be assessed in this regard.
Washington has made great investment to exploit the terrorist potential of Takfiri groups for the implementation of the partition project in the region. Therefore, U.S. presence in the region, under the pretext of the fight against ISIS, is an issue of crucial importance for the White House, which it will not easily ignore.
On the other hand, Americans, who have undergone major defeats in the political, military and intelligence areas by the axis of resistance, failed to keep up with their plans, despite spending huge sums of money. This became an important matter in Iraq and officials provided the conditions for greater synergy with the axis of resistance, a move that infuriated the White House.
Since four months ago, the U.S. has put the tactic of “creating a power vacuum based on social protest” on its agenda to weaken those leaders whose policies are in line with Iran and make them leave power. Washington has sought to undermine the Iranian-Iraqi strategic unity through anti-Iran biased slogans and prepare the ground for its troops to remain in Iraq.
Meanwhile, Trump’s gambling over the assassination of senior commanders of the resistance movement, Major General Qassem Soleimani, and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was the same blunder that the theorists of the partition project were afraid of since they considered it as the loss of all American possessions in the region.
However, such horrible incident happened, and in the first step of hard revenge the resistance front, the Iraqi nation agreed upon the expulsion of U.S. troops from the country. The incident was the beginning of the new White House game in Iraq, so that, over the past two weeks, Americans made every effort to disrupt the implementation of the resolution.
In a false allegation, Americans first described the resolution as illegal and then claimed that the parliament did not have a quorum at the time of voting. The false claim was stated that under the Iraqi constitution, parliamentary sessions will take legal form if more than half of the members plus one person attend the session. This is exactly what happened during the voting.
When they failed to prove their allegation, U.S. officials resorted to bypassing the resolution by bringing up again the old disputes between the Kurdish leaders and Baghdad.
The U.S. is also trying to convince the UN Security Council of the necessity of continuing its presence in Iraq to fight terrorism, by transferring a number of ISIS leaders (trained at U.S. bases, especially in Syria's Al-Tanaf and Al-Hasakah) to Iraq.
In fact, several terrorist operations recently carried out by ISIS elements in Iraq is an example of the American hostility.
On the other hand, a new wave of violent protests have been staged in the past few days, which are being directly led by the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. Washington is seeking to seize the opportunity and stabilize its presence in Iraq by disrupting the process of appointing a new prime minister.
It seems that Iraq will witness some unrest due to enmity of the U.S. and its regional and European allies, including Britain, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia. Such situation requires the solidarity of all political groups and people under the leadership of the religious authority.