Tensions between the United States and Iraq escalated on Friday over the withdrawal of American troops, demanded by Baghdad but which Washington even refuses to discuss.
The desire for appeasement displayed in recent days by US President Donald Trump was not enough to relieve the fever attack caused by the death, on January 3 in an American strike in the Iraqi capital, of the powerful Iranian general Qassem Soleimani and his Iraqi lieutenant Abou Mehdi al-Mouhandis.
Thousands of anti-power demonstrators took to the streets on Friday in Iraq to conspire both Iran and the United States, relaunching an unprecedented revolt overshadowed by the surge in tensions between the two rival sponsors of Baghdad.
In Tahrir Square in the Iraqi capital, as in several cities in the south of the country, the demonstrators chanted “No to Iran! No to America!” in processions of unprecedented scale for weeks, found AFP journalists.
“Iraqis must lead Iraq, it is not the role of foreigners to make decisions there because they must come from the people”, also launched, in his weekly sermon, the great Ayatollah Ali Sistani, figure guardian of Iraqi politics, which sends Tehran and Washington back-to-back.
Buoyed by this heightened anti-American sentiment, the Iraqi Parliament voted on Sunday in favor of the expulsion of the 5,200 American soldiers deployed in Iraq – and potentially soldiers from the entire international coalition against the jihadist Islamic State (IS) group.
The Trump administration has so far turned a deaf ear, claiming it has received no notification of such an order from the Iraqi government.
But on Friday, Iraqi Prime Minister resigned Adel Abdel Mahdi said he had asked the American Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to send a delegation to “put in place the mechanisms necessary for the implementation of the decision of the Parliament for secure withdrawal of troops from Iraq “.
“At this stage, any delegation that goes to Iraq would be responsible for discussing the best way to reconfirm our strategic partnership, not to discuss a withdrawal of troops,” American diplomacy spokesperson Morgan Ortagus immediately replied. .
“Less resources”
“Our military presence in Iraq aims to continue the fight against IS,” she insisted.
As a sign that this is an explosive file, the question of whether or not to withdraw American troops was already the subject of an imbroglio earlier this week when the United States sent a letter to the Iraqi authorities. , written on behalf of General William H. Seely, commander of the US forces in Iraq, reporting on preparations for departure. The Pentagon had to deny by assuring that it was a document sent by “error”, without dissipating some confusion.
Especially since Donald Trump’s desire to “end the endless wars” and to disengage American forces from costly operations in the Middle East is no mystery to anyone.
A withdrawal of American troops “would be the worst thing that could happen to Iraq,” the Republican billionaire said on Wednesday, referring to the danger that the imposing Iranian neighbor represents for this country. “At some point, we will leave”, “but this moment has not come,” he insisted, in an attempt to clarify the American position.
Asked Friday at the request of the Iraqi Prime Minister, Mike Pompeo delayed him.
“We are ready to continue the discussion with the Iraqis on the best structure” for the American presence, he said. “Our mission is very clear, we are here to train” the Iraqi forces “and continue the campaign against IS”: “we will continue this mission”.
“When we are able” to have “fewer resources dedicated to this mission, we will do it,” he promised, however.
While Donald Trump on Wednesday asked NATO to strengthen its involvement in the Middle East, presumably to compensate for a reduced future presence of the United States, Washington also welcomed a delegation from the Atlantic Alliance on Friday to discuss its ” increased role in Iraq. “
–
:quality(80)/cdn-kiosk-api.telegraaf.nl/6376f9e0-33ef-11ea-b47e-0255c322e81b.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)