Iraqis Fear That Trump's America Will Depart Once and For All
By David Schenker for The National Interest. Any opinions expressed are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of Iraq Business News.
Iraqis Fear That Trump's America Will Depart Once and For All
Baghdad has good reason to be concerned about the trajectory of the U.S.-Iraq relationship.
Click here to read the full report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Shafaq News
6 hours ago
- Shafaq News
Iraq's November elections: Top leaders' return sparks intense contest
Shafaq News/ Iraq's next parliamentary election is shaping up to be among the most competitive in years, particularly in Baghdad, independent lawmaker Hussein al-Saabri said on Thursday. Speaking to Shafaq News, al-Saabri noted that several prominent political figures are joining candidate lists, pointing to a sharp increase in electoral rivalry. He also warned that the campaign period is likely to witness heavy spending, use of state resources, and a rise in influence and favoritism in the management of the electoral process. 'There will be unprecedented pressure on institutions, and public resources are already being channeled toward early campaigning…This will make fair competition much harder to achieve.' Several high-profile leaders—some of whom had abstained from running directly in the past two election cycles—are now preparing to stand as candidates, aiming to expand their popular base and position themselves for influence in the next parliament. Among those entering the race are State of Law Coalition (Dawlat al-Qanoon) leader and former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki; Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, representing the Euphrates Movement (al-Furatin); Badr Organization chief Hadi al-Amiri; Taqaddum Party head and former Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi; and National Foundation Alliance (al-Asas al-Watani) leader Mohsen al-Mandalawi. 'The return of top-tier figures reflects a calculated move to shape the next phase of governance,' al-Saabri observed. In early April, the Iraqi cabinet approved November 11, 2025, as the date for the parliamentary vote. The Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) also estimated that around 30 million Iraqis will be eligible to cast their ballots.
Iraq Business
13 hours ago
- Iraq Business
UNDP opens restored Nimrud Agricultural Institute
By John Lee. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in partnership with the Governments of Sweden and Italy and in coordination with Iraq's Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, has officially inaugurated the restored Agricultural Technical Institute in Nimrud, located in the Ninewa Plains. Severely damaged during years of conflict, the Institute has been transformed into a centre for agricultural education and economic development. The first phase of the project, funded by Sweden with $1.25 million and completed in March 2023, restored essential infrastructure including classrooms, laboratories, and poultry facilities. The second phase, supported by Italy with over $1.1 million, added new academic buildings, a student dormitory and club centre, and upgraded the broader campus infrastructure. The revitalised institute will benefit more than 300 students and faculty and serve a surrounding population of over 250,000 people. The forthcoming reopening of a nearby Tigris River bridge is expected to further boost regional connectivity and economic activity. Full statement from UNDP: Restored Nimrud Agricultural Institute Opens Doors to Stability and Opportunity The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in partnership with the Governments of Sweden and Italy and in coordination with the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, officially inaugurated the Agricultural Technical Institute in Nimrud-a major milestone under UNDP Iraq's Stabilization Programme. Located in the heart of the Ninewa Plains, the Institute had suffered extensive damage during years of conflict. Today, it stands restored as a critical hub for agricultural education and economic opportunity for hundreds of young Iraqis. The first phase of the project, funded by the Government of Sweden with $1.25 million, was completed in March 2023. It restored essential academic and agricultural infrastructure, including classrooms, laboratories, poultry facilities, and core services. The second phase, supported by the Government of Italy with over $1.1 million, further expanded academic facilities, constructed a student dormitory and club center, and upgraded campus infrastructure. The inauguration was attended by representatives of the Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research, the President of the Northern Technical University, Dr. Alia Al-Attar, several faculty members, and the Director of Nimrud Police. "This inauguration represents more than the reopening of a building-it is a powerful symbol of resilience, hope, and Iraq's path to development," said Auke Lootsma, UNDP Iraq Resident Representative. "By investing in education and skills for youth, especially in areas impacted by conflict, we are laying the foundation for long-term stability and development." The revitalized Institute will serve over 300 students and faculty, while benefiting the wider community of more than 250,000 residents. With the anticipated reopening of a nearby bridge across the Tigris River, it is also expected to become a key driver of regional connectivity and economic renewal. UNDP expresses its sincere appreciation to the Governments of Sweden and Italy, the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, and Northern Technical University for their ongoing commitment to Iraq's stabilization and development. (Source: UNDP Iraq)
Memri
19 hours ago
- Memri
America's (And Israel's) Ottoman Gamble
That the foreign policy of the new Trump Administration has been bold and disruptive is something most observers would agree. Some see it as catastrophic, others (I am one of those) see it as a long-needed corrective to past disasters. But it is still evolving. A recent tweet by the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack caught some flack in the Middle East. The ambassador wrote on May 25 that: "A century ago, the West imposed maps, mandates, penciled borders, and foreign rule. Sykes-Picot divided Syria and the broader region for imperial gain – not peace. That mistake cost generations. We will not make it again. The era of Western interference is over. The future belongs to regional solutions, but partnerships, and a diplomacy grounded in respect."[1] The tweet garnered some criticism from regional voices, especially in Lebanon (ironic in that Barrack is himself of Lebanese Christian origin) because the French Mandate led to the creation of the state of Lebanon.[2] Others might have noted that Anglo-French "imperial gain" prevented Turkish imperial gain, which is why Mosul is still part of Iraq and Aleppo still part of Syria. Still others may recall when the terrorist Islamic State announced the "end of Sykes-Picot."[3] The idea that Western imperialism, including Sykes-Picot, is the principal reason for all the region's ills (including the creation of Israel) is a staple of Arab Nationalist and Islamist propaganda. But Barrack is not wrong to criticize the bane of Western interference in past decades (quoting President Trump's important Riyadh speech).[4] This not only brought us trillion-dollar wars and thousands of American dead but failed states in the region and turbo-charged global Jihadism. "Regional solutions" is clearly an administration priority and so far, there is positive movement toward a better vision for the region. Trump has given the hard-pressed Syrian people (and President Ahmed Al-Sharaa) renewed hope with the lifting of draconian sanctions. Under American auspices (Barrack is also the Special Envoy for Syria), Israelis and Syrian officials are meeting and negotiating.[5] The U.S. is also mediating between Turkey and Israel, trying to gain a ceasefire in Gaza, a nuclear agreement with Iran, disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon and forge closer ties with Sunni Arab states and Turkey in order to secure regional security and counter the ambitions of Iran, China, and Russia. That is an impressive effort in only four months! The question is not so much if this is the right American strategy for an America that wants to focus on its core interests and get allies to take up more of the burden. It is. The question is whether the pieces will actually fit together (and stay together) toward a more stable region or whether, in leaving past conflicts, we are preparing the stage for future ones. It was less than five years ago that Turkey was openly abetting Islamist revolution in the Arab Middle East.[6] Islamist stations in Istanbul would broadcast against regimes in Egypt, Jordan and the Arabian Gulf while Erdogan saber-rattled against most of its immediate neighbors while actually waging war in Syria, Iraq, Armenia, and Libya. Turkey's policies are not limited to one man and its leadership today has not changed – it is still the same mix of convinced Islamists and extreme nationalists – but its behavior has moderated.[7] Faced with economic headwinds, Erdoğan buried the hatchet with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE.[8] While discourse in the country is deeply antisemitic and anti-American, the rhetoric has usually not translated into concrete actions against the U.S. or Israel. The fall of Assad in Syria in 2024 and Turkey's importance on issues such as the Russia-Ukraine War have created a kind of "Neo-Ottoman Moment."[9] This is all happening almost exactly a century after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the end of the Ottoman Caliphate. But it seems that Turkey is finding that it can gain more with "honey than with vinegar," that being helpful to the Trump Administration will pay greater dividends than overt hostility.[10] Not so surprising actually, given the tactical flexibility and pragmatism of Islamists in general, and of Erdoğan's ideologically-motivated regime in particular. The parameters of this gamble are very much along the lines promoted in the past by American strategist Michael Doran – a coming together of Turkey, Israel, and the United States (and Saudi Arabia and Azerbaijan and Qatar) in a grand strategic alliance that enhances the security of all sides and benefits all parties.[11] Under such a scenario, the United States gains by having reliable regional hegemons who can presumably provide security and stability, keeping out unfriendly powers, fighting terrorism and freeing American resources and interests for other areas. This vision seeks to solve the "problem" of Iran – which was empowered by the policies of the last two Democratic Administrations – by empowering Sunni powers as their adversaries. While we might be skeptical of such a scenario, it is not like the previous, costly strategy of direct US involvement in places like Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya worked particularly well. Israel supposedly would gain because of inferred (in some cases explicit) informal security arrangements and understandings with important Sunni powers like Turkey and Saudi Arabia, potential threats from Syria would be neutralized and Iran and its proxies are kept away from Israel's borders.[12] The Sunni powers gain the powerful backing of the Americans and the benefit of tacit understandings with Israel. This also means a certain amount of carte blanche or green light when it comes to these states' dealings with internal issues and with other countries outside the circle of trust as long as these dealings do not conflict too directly with current American or Israeli interests (for example, America's interests in Armenia or Israel's interests in Southern Syria).[13] It might work, especially in the short run, as long as ambitions remain in check and interests and equities are regularly deconflicted. But it is a risk because it assumes that, for example, Turkish ambitions – the same state that supports Hamas today and openly facilitated the rise of Islamic State fighters a decade ago – would not come into conflict with Israeli ones. That Turkey's interests are limited in Syria to the PKK and returning refugees. Or that an Islamist-ruled Syria would not (unlike all other Islamist states in the past like National Islamic Front-ruled Sudan or Taliban-ruled Afghanistan) become an exporter of extremism. With American imperial overreach a very real issue, this is a gamble worth taking, but with eyes wide open. Empowering Sunni allies like Saudi Arabia is, in principle, a very good idea. With Turkey, the hope is that it is "domesticated," rather than just using one wild, fierce beast against another one and expecting a positive outcome in sync with our interests. Time will tell whether this was bold and timely cleverness or merely American (and Israeli) wishful thinking along the road to unimagined future conflagrations. *Alberto M. Fernandez is Vice President of MEMRI.
