Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq?

Why is the U.S. still in Iraq?

Mason C. Overby

University of North Carolina at Charlotte

 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 2

Why is the U.S. still in Iraq?

My research question is “Why does the U.S. still have troops in Iraq?’’. The Iraq war at

16 years since the invasion has been the longest running conflict in U.S. history (Taylor, 2019).

The war has cost American lives, taxpayer money, and has changed Iraq and the world forever.

And as a future U.S. military service member I wanted to know why. Why is this war different

and why can we not bring back our troops? Many Americans cannot answer this question,

including myself before I started my research. I wanted to know how we got involved, why are

we still there, and what is the future of this conflict?

My First Source

I started my research with a basic Google search of U.S. intervention in Iraq. I did this to

get a feel of the information available and what I can expect to find. The first source I found was

“​U.S. Policy in the Middle East: 1945 to 2008”. This article was a timeline of U.S. actions in

Iraq, divided up by presidents. This source gave a brief history of each president and his actions.

This was a good start because I would not get bogged down in too many details and I had a total

overview of the conflict. The war was not started overnight, there were many underlying causes

that built up to the eventual invasion. After WWII the U.S. had little interest in Iraq by itself. It

was the then Soviet Russian presence in Iran that the U.S. diverted most of its attention to

(Tristam, 2018). It was not until the 1980’s, under president Reagan, that Iraq would be in the

spotlight, but not for good reasons. The Reagan administration supported Saddam Hussein in the

Iraq-Iran war believing he could destabilize Iran and end the Islamic revolution (Tristam, 2018).
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 3

This shocked me that the U.S. had given support to what would eventually be its enemy. From

there however, U.S. intervention got stronger. On August 2nd, 1990 Saddam Hussein invaded

Kuwait and President George H.W. Bush launched operation Desert Shield. This deployed

American troops to Saudi Arabia to defend against a possible Iraqi invasion (Tristam, 2018).

Desert Shield turned into Desert Storm and America went on the offensive and invaded Iraq. In

21 days Iraq was defeated and Saddam Hussein was captured. Mission accomplished right?

Nope. 9/11 the day the world changed forever and the “War on Terror” had begun in

Afghanistan. Iraq, in 2006, had fallen into civil war (Tristam, 2018, pg 1). To stabilize the

country and prevent extremist groups from taking power U.S. troops were deployed. In 2007

U.S. troop numbers surged (Tristam, 2018) and according to Tristam “ by then the majority of

the American people and many government officials were widely skeptical of the motivations for

the invasion.” However skeptical the motivations for invasion the fact remains that U.S. troops

still remain in Iraq which the article fails to mention. The article was written in 2018 yet neglects

to include the Obama administration where there were many significant developments in Iraq.

This is where the article falls short in my opinion. While it gives an overview it is incomplete.

This article gave me a good overview but I now I moved on to find out why are troops there

currently and to fill in the gap from 2008-2019.

Second Source

The next source I choose to look on JSTOR for a more scholarly article that could give

me more details. The article I choose is titled “Ending the U.S. War in Iraq: The Final Transition,

Operational Maneuver, and Disestablishment of United States Forces-Iraq”. This article I felt

could give me more insight into the war itself and the after effects. This article went into a lot of
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 4

details and honestly I kept keeping lost. The amount of acronyms was very confusing. However,

from what I gathered it can be said that the U.S. had extensive plans for the Government

following Saddam Hussein's removal of power. Most of the plans however were not executed

properly or failed. As Brennan (et all) note on page 26 “Operating with the conviction that he

had President Bush’s unqualified support, Ambassador Bremer developed an 18 month plan to

rebuild Iraq, by having Iraqis draft the constitution, conduct a referendum on the final text,

established election law, and then hold a national, regional, and local elections.” Also a new

military, police, and essential services had to be rebuilt from the ground up. A monumental task

to take on, plus the military faced a new threat, one it was not trained to handle. To prevent

extremist groups from retaking the country the military now assumed the role of police until the

Iraqi army was rebuilt and capable. Counter-insurgence was not something the military was

trained for on such a large scale. Another part of this article I enjoyed was the “Conclusions and

Recommendations” this was like “lessons learned” where the author makes recommendations of

U.S. policies moving forward using the U.S. intervention in Iraq as the example. This was a good

source, the detail the article went in was immense. However, this did not answer why the troops

are still in Iraq as it only looked at the 6 years after the conclusion of the Iraq war.

Third Source

The next source titled “ The U.S. occupation of Iraq: Questions for the Peace Movement”

I found on the UNCC database. This article is very much against the U.S. occupation of Iraq and

is somewhat dated (2004). My sources until now were non-bias and were instead very factual

and did not debate the occupation. This source renounces U.S. occupation of Iraq and provides

possible ulterior motives for the occupation. Stating President Bush gave a flimsy excuse in the
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 5

first place “Genuine democracy in the region is incompatible with the real goals of the U.S.

military intervention in Iraq — to secure a U.S. military platform in the Middle East and bases in

Iraq as an alternative to remaining dependent on an increasingly undependable Saudi Arabia, to

advance the global corporate capitalist system, and to gain strategic control over the vast Iraqi oil

supply as a way of further enhancing U.S. global power.” ( Landy, 2004). The author believes

the U.S. motivation of promoting democracy is a sham and the U.S. actually wants oil, bases,

and advance the corporate capitalist system. I can see the merit of wanting oil and strategic

military bases but to advance the corporate capitalist system? To me it sounds more like a

conspiracy theory. However, the article does point out many policies that are questionable. For

example a flat tax system was introduced, meaning all classes of society will pay the same. Also,

according to the article, the U.S. agency for International development have hired only U.S.

contractors. Corporations like Halliburton, which “have close ties to the administration”

insinuating that Bush is paying off his supporters with exclusive access to Iraqi contracts.

However this hidden agenda and possible secret agenda is not my research question but did

provide some new insight into the controversy surrounding the U.S occupation of Iraq. While the

author wants the U.S. troops out of Iraq the reason given for the current occupation is the troops

are keeping Iraq unified. Also the troops prevent an ideological governments from taking over.

This article answered my question somewhat. The intense bias was off putting too me and I still

needed more sources.

Fourth Source
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 6

To get a less scholarly view and to get my question answered directly I did a Google

search of “why U.S. troops are still in Iraq”. I choose the article “Do U.S. Troops Have a Future

in Iraq?” This article, written a couple of months ago, would give me a up to date account of the

current troop situation in Iraq. The article quotes President Trump “​In fact, we could use this as

the base if we wanted to do something in Syria”. The President has no intentions of pulling U.S.

troops out of Iraq. After the removal of Saddam from power the Islamic state started to gain

territory and Bagdad asked the Americans for help. This source does not clarify if that is still the

current U.S. objective. The source does make mention of how the President intends to use Iraq to

watch or counter Syria and Iran. It would seem the President is keeping the U.S. troops in Iraq

as a staging ground for operations in Syria and as first line of defense against Iran. However the

relations between Iraq and the U.S. are strained “Trump’s remarks come as a variety of anti-U. S.

political blocs are urging the parliament to vote on legislation that would curtail American

military activities in Iraq — or even oust U.S. troops entirely” (Taylor, 2019). This was an

interesting new piece of information I did not know. However, the article does not make it clear

if U.S. troops are still fighting insurgency groups or are just in Iraq for operations in Syria. To

me it is still unclear what the troops are doing currently in Iraq.

Fifth Source

Somewhat frustrated with my question still remaining unanswered, I yet again turned to

Google for help. Clicking on almost all the links I found the one. This article describes the

previous operations in Iraq and what the U.S. is doing. I knew that the U.S. had been called in by

Iraq to help stop ISIS from gaining territory and power but my previous sources never mentioned

if this goal had been accomplished. The author, Mohammed Tawfeeq puts it nice and plain for
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 7

me “Last December, Iraq's military declared that it had "fully liberated" all of Iraq of "ISIS

terrorist gangs" and retaken full control of the Iraqi-Syrian border.” ( Tawfeeq, 2018). Now I

know the U.S. is not doing any combat missions since the enemy has been defeated, so then why

have our troops not come home? Much to my delight that question was also answered. U.S.

troops are in Iraq to train, advise, and support the Iraqi military to eventually be a capable force.

Tawfeeq quotes the coalition spokesperson who says “ Our enduring presence as invited guests

in Iraq will shift to focus more on policing, border control and military building capacity

building. We will sustain the successful momentum and enhance the capacities of the Iraqi

Security Forces in pursuing Daesh (ISIS), now and in the future,” ( Tawfeeq, 2018). Finally

relieved to have my answer spelled out in front of me. U.S. troops are no longer seeing combat

but sharing tactics, strategies, and information to help Iraq prevent another insurgence group

from taking land.

Concluding Remarks

The U.S. involvement in Iraq is complicated history, and the Iraq war having seen the

deployment of 166,000 troops (Tawfeeq 2018). Through my research I learned the reason for

why the U.S. was in Iraq in the first place, what the U.S. has been doing recently, and the

current/future goals of the U.S.. Originally, the U.S. mission was to protect Saudi Arabia, then

the mission was to remove Saddam Hussein from power. The mission changed entirely when

Iraq called on the U.S. to help remove ISIS which was taking land in Northern Iraq. The

counter-insurgency had begun in Iraq. Fortunately, ISIS has been pushed out of Iraq and now the

U.S. is helping to build up Iraq’s military so they can protect themself. The President is not

totally done with Iraq yet. He wants to keep military bases in Iraq for possible operations in Syria
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 8

and to “watch” Iran (Taylor, 2019). However, after 16 years major fighting it would appear the

U.S. presence in Iraq is dwindling. My source “US will reduce troop levels in Iraq, Baghdad

says” stated that 25,000 airstrikes had occured in the past 3 years. As a potential pilot in the

United States Air Force this really resonated with me. As cadets in AFROTC we are told the

importance of Air Power in warfare and to see this figure it reinforces the importance of air

power and reinforces my commitment to my country. I think of how many Army or Marine lives

were saved because instead of attacking a target we could just bomb it. My research has

definitely reaffirmed my choice to join the Airforce.

 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 9

References

Brennan, R., Ries, C., Hanauer, L., Connable, B., Kelly, T., McNerney, M., . . . JEFFREY, A.

(2013). The First Six Years. In Ending the U.S. War in Iraq: The Final Transition,

Operational Maneuver, and Disestablishment of United States Forces-Iraq (pp. 21-64).

RAND Corporation. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt5hhwfg.11

This article goes into detail the U.S. trying to end the war in Iraq. From combat

operations and transition of power this article details the steps the U.S. took to get out of Iraq and

let the Iraqi government take over. The article details the military’s new role as peacekeepers,

who were specifically now trained to fight insurgencies. A role the military was not yet adapted

for. Also, the article mentions the many programs that went into rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure

and military. A large amount of humanitarian aid came to Iraq to ease the transition from

Saddam Hussein to an independent Government. What this article does very well is look at the

challenges faced by the American Government and the Iraqi Government. Also, this article talks

more in dept about U.S. military intervention and the role U.S. troops play in Iraq, both past and

present. Another point I really like about this article is at the end it gives insight and

recommendations for the U.S. policies. Using the mistakes the U.S. encountered in Iraq as

lessons learned. This gives the reader a good insight into what can be expected going forward,

not just in Iraq, but in any country the U.S. invades.

 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 10

Landy, J., & Landy, J. (2004). The U.S. Occupation of Iraq: Questions for the Peace
Movement. New Politics, 9(4), 19–31. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/60688991/

This is a argumentative article very much against the U.S. occupation of Iraq. The article

does a good job at pointing out the many mistakes of the U.S. in Iraq. The article points out how

much “big business” has played a role in Iraq and the consequences of their actions. The article

makes the point that the U.S. has skewed plans for Iraq as big business is using the Iraq war to

profit off of and to secure profit in the post war Iraq. The article does seem to contradict itself

when it comes to the occupation. For example, the U.S. occupation is keeping country united but

if the troops leave then a civil war could break out as different groups fight to gain control of the

country. This is not a desired outcome, and the article notes the importance a U.S. occupation

provides but still is adamant about a total troop withdrawal. However, I like how the article

considers all aspects of the occupation and tests the outcome of a total troop withdrawal. This

article, although dated, has good insight into the opposition of the U.S. occupation and the many

folies and underlying motives for the continuation of the Iraq war.

Tawfeeq, M. (2018, February 06). US will reduce troop levels in Iraq, Baghdad says. Retrieved

from ​https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/06/middleeast/american-troops-iraq-intl/index.html

This article finally answers my question of what are the troops doing in Iraq now. Unlike

my other sources it clearly states the U.S. is no longer involved in combat missions. Large

territory held by ISIS was finally taken back and insurgency groups have been quelled. This

means large combat operations are no longer necessary and attention can be placed on rebuilding

Iraq. Now the U.S. military is now serving as advisors to the Iraqi military. Building up the Iraq
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 11

military so that the U.S can pass the torch and Iraq will be able to defend itself. The article gives

me the impression that the U.S. military operation in Iraq is coming to a close and while bases

might remain, troops will not be in immediate danger. This article is not too in dept, but finally

covers the previous actions in Iraq, such as eliminating ISIS, to the current operational; advising

and supporting the Iraqi military. No other article has directly answered this question. In any

case, I finally have my answer: U.S. troops are in Iraq to train and advise the Iraqi military so

they will eventually have autonomy.

Taylor, A. (2019, February 07). Do U.S. troops have a future in Iraq? Retrieved from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/02/07/do-us-troops-have-future-iraq/?ut
m_term=.9b7c0838ab53

This article reports the current U.S president’s attitude about the future of U.S. and Iraq

relations. The article remains neutral and does not pick a side, instead, it uses quotes from

domestic and foreign leaders to present the current and future U.S. actions in Iraq. The article

gives a very good overview of the current U.S. military and its goals in Iraq and explains why

they are still there. Another thing this article does very well is explaining how Iraq fits into the

greater conflicts in the Middle East. For example, Iraq is a neighboring country of Syria and Iran

were U.S. intervention and tensions run high. The article does present a question to reader which

is thought proving one about the future. If Iraq ejects U.S. troops, how would Trump react? This

makes the reader think but also the article does not answer its own question as to what would

happen. The article states that the Trump administration and its goals in the Middle East do not

aline. That does not answer the question in my opinion but provides more questions. Such as
 Running head: Why is the U.S. Still in Iraq? 12

why do the goals not a line and what should be done differently? This article is not out to make

policy suggestions so this question seems out of place.

Tristam, P. (2018, August 14). U.S. Policy in the Middle East: 1945 to 2008. Retrieved from
https://www.thoughtco.com/us-and-middle-east-since-1945-2353681

This source has a general overlook of U.S. involvement in the Middle East through

the different presidents from 1945 to 2008. The article gives a historical timeline of events that

the U.S. has been involved in. From the creation of Israel to Operation Desert Storm the U.S. has

been heavily involved in Middle Eastern politics. This article is not persuasive in its manner but

recounts the facts of history. This article has given me greater insight into the background of the

modern problems we still encounter today. This article ends with the Bush administration, but

there have been many developments in the Middle East since then that the article negeltics. The

article does not shed much light on the current U.S. involvement and why the troops are still

deployed in the Middle East However, big events for example, like the creation of Israel,

Operations Desert Storm/Shield, the Camp David Accords connect to my other sources. These

are all events that has lead up to the current U.S. involvement in the Middle East. The source

builds to the current situation in the Middle East does not explain the future.

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-military-strategy-iraq