19-05-2025
On the menu, not at the table: Iraq's growing irrelevance in the region
Shafaq News/ In a region historically shaped by American interventions and shifting alliances, President Donald Trump's recent Middle East tour has once again stirred debate over Washington's recalibrated priorities. With high-profile visits to Riyadh, Doha, and Abu Dhabi, Trump unveiled ambitious economic and security plans—but his conspicuous exclusion of Iraq sent a different kind of message.
For many observers, Baghdad's absence was neither a scheduling oversight nor an accident of geography. Rather, it served as a calculated signal from Washington: Iraq is no longer central to US strategy in the region.
A Tour Signaling Realignment
Billed as both a diplomatic reentry and an unofficial campaign reset, Trump's visit aimed to deepen ties with key Gulf allies while reviving elements of his foreign policy legacy. Major trade and infrastructure agreements were signed in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, while energy cooperation and regional conflict mediation were the focus in Qatar.
US officials traveling with the president described the tour as part of a broader push for 'economic stabilization and conflict de-escalation.' Yet, the deeper strategic undercurrent was clear: redrawing regional alignments by focusing on pro-US Gulf states and distancing Washington from actors perceived as unstable or adversarial.
The Silence from Baghdad
Iraq's omission stood in stark contrast to its historic status as a pillar of US Middle East engagement. Once a focal point for both military campaigns and democratic nation-building, Iraq now finds itself on the periphery of regional diplomacy.
'Iraq doesn't fit the mold anymore,' said Frank Masmar, a policy advisor at the University of Maryland, in an interview with Shafaq News. 'Trump's doctrine favors functional allies who offer strategic or economic returns. Iraq is increasingly viewed as a liability rather than a partner.'
Masmar noted that Trump's itinerary was methodically crafted. 'The focus was clearly on Saudi Arabia and Qatar as drivers of a new regional dynamic,' he said. 'Iraq represents an older era of US involvement—one Trump wants to move past.'
He added that Baghdad' s continued entanglements with Iran and its fragmented domestic politics make it an unappealing partner for a US administration prioritizing economic partnerships and streamlined security cooperation.
Strategic Message to Iraq's Ruling Class
According to Dr. Ihsan al-Shammari, head of the Iraqi Center for Political Thought, the snub was more than symbolic. 'The United States no longer sees Iraq as an autonomous actor,' he told Shafaq News. 'It sees Iraq as an extension of Iran's sphere of influence.'
Al-Shammari attributed this perception to Baghdad's failure to institutionalize sovereignty and chart an independent foreign policy course. 'Washington's frustration is rooted in Iraq's lack of clarity—its inability to distance itself from Tehran has cost it dearly in regional relevance.'
Trump's longstanding aversion to 'endless wars' and his preference for transactional diplomacy made Iraq's complexity a strategic inconvenience. As Masmar put it, 'Trump didn't want Iraq on the itinerary because it raises difficult questions. The decision was deliberate.'
Washington's Recalibrated Lens
Within US policy circles, the shift away from Iraq is increasingly evident. Former American diplomats speaking to Shafaq News said the current approach to Iraq is largely reactive—aimed at damage control rather than partnership-building.
Tom Harb, director of the American Mideast Coalition for Democracy, noted that Iraq no longer features in Washington's core calculations. 'It's not seen as a platform for influence anymore. It's a cautionary tale,' he said. 'That space is now being filled by Saudi Arabia and Qatar.'
Harb emphasized that Trump's foreign policy revolves around clear returns: base access, intelligence sharing, and economic cooperation. 'Iraq hasn't delivered on these fronts. Instead, it's viewed as a host for Iranian-backed militias that complicate diplomacy and security.'
Al-Shammari echoed these concerns, arguing that Washington doubts Iraq's ability to act independently. 'The presence of entrenched, Iran-aligned groups has undermined state authority,' he said. 'This erodes trust and narrows Iraq's diplomatic value.'
Regional Conversations Without Iraq
Iraq's absence from high-level discussions on Syria, regional security, and the Abraham Accords further highlights its diplomatic isolation. As the US explores conditional re-engagement with Damascus and works to expand Arab-Israeli normalization, Baghdad remains a bystander.
Trump's meeting with Syrian transitional president Ahmed al-Sharaa—described by Western observers as 'historic'—marked a milestone in thawing US-Syria ties after more than a decade. The visit also symbolized a willingness to reward governments that show signs of recalibration.
'Syria is being reintegrated. Iraq, paradoxically, is being sidelined,' said Radwan Ziadeh, a Syrian-American academic based in Washington. He noted that while Syria was once more isolated than Iraq, it is now making strides that Baghdad has not pursued.
Strategic Costs and Domestic Paralysis
Analysts warn that Iraq's growing irrelevance may soon solidify into a broader regional consensus. Without a decisive pivot away from Tehran and toward independent diplomacy, Baghdad risks entrenching its own marginalization.
Dr. Laith Kubba, former Iraqi government spokesman and regional affairs analyst, told Shafaq News that Iraq is drifting toward a 'strategic vacuum.'
'It's not fully aligned with Iran, but it's also not part of the Arab consensus,' he said. 'That ambiguity is costly. In moments of regional realignment, countries without clear positions are left behind.'
So far, the official Iraqi response to Trump's tour has been notably muted. Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein welcomed the outcomes of Trump's Gulf meetings and expressed support for sanctions relief on Syria. Government spokesperson Bassem al-Awadi stressed that Iraq neither requested nor was invited to participate in the meetings, dismissing rumors to the contrary.
Some interpret this 'shy' response as a careful balancing act—an effort to avoid antagonizing either Washington or Tehran. Others see it as further evidence of Baghdad's internal dysfunction.
'There's a paralysis in Iraq's foreign policy,' said Kubba. 'It reflects the fragmentation of the political elite, which can't agree on core national interests—let alone a coherent regional role.'
From the Sidelines to Obsolescence?
The risk, experts argue, is that Iraq's passive posture may evolve into permanent irrelevance if its leadership fails to act. As other states in the region redefine their positions and build new alliances, Iraq's seat at the table is increasingly vacant.
'The longer Iraq stays out of these realignments, the harder it will be to reintegrate,' warned Paolo von Schirach, president of the Global Policy Institute in Washington. 'In this region, if you're not at the table, you risk being on the menu.'
Reclaiming a meaningful role, analysts contend, will require more than rhetoric. It will demand strategic clarity, sovereignty in decision-making, and engagement that transcends internal divisions.
Until then, Iraq may remain on the menu—discussed, evaluated, and acted upon by others—but not at the table where those decisions are made.
