Baghdad After Damascus: Questions About the Day After

 
US helicopters accompany Secretary Antony Blinken as he heads to the US Embassy in Baghdad on December 13, 2024 (Reuters)
US helicopters accompany Secretary Antony Blinken as he heads to the US Embassy in Baghdad on December 13, 2024 (Reuters)
TT
20

Baghdad After Damascus: Questions About the Day After

 
US helicopters accompany Secretary Antony Blinken as he heads to the US Embassy in Baghdad on December 13, 2024 (Reuters)
US helicopters accompany Secretary Antony Blinken as he heads to the US Embassy in Baghdad on December 13, 2024 (Reuters)

On November 24, 2024, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq claimed what seemed to be its final attack on Israel. The announcement came two weeks after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad fled to Russia, with armed groups declaring “Syria is free.”

The claim, shared on a Telegram channel, marked the end of the “Axis of Resistance” operations before a ceasefire took effect in Lebanon.

On November 27, 2024, Syrian factions advanced in western Aleppo, sparking political alarm in Baghdad.

Rumors spread that “Baghdad could be the next target” after Assad fled to Russia, prompting increased diplomatic talks with Western and Arab capitals.

Iraqi forces have mobilized along the Syrian border, citing concerns over the infiltration of “armed elements” and fears of a broader collapse.

This buildup began earlier, during the Syrian factions’ rapid advance toward Damascus in just 10 days.

Since November 27, Iraqi army and Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) leaders have visited the border more than six times, the latest on December 13, 2024.

Iraq faces uncertainty after the fall of Assad, Iran’s retreat, and the decline of Hezbollah’s power. Key questions now center on the “new rulers” in Damascus, the “future of Iranian influence,” and the “direction of Iraq’s political process.”

The urgency of these issues grew after UN envoy Mohammed Al-Hassan met with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Najaf on December 12, 2024.

“I briefed Sayyed al-Sistani on recent UN discussions about Iraq,” Al-Hassan said.

“The region is changing rapidly, and Iraq needs bold, urgent decisions. We urge leaders to act quickly and take overdue steps toward reconciliation and unity,” he added.

Asharq Al-Awsat spoke to representatives of six Iraqi parties about Al-Hassan's remarks.

Many speculated about a “collapse of the political system” or a return to pre-2003 Iraq, with most concerns coming from traditional Shiite parties.

Recent events have revolved around Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani. On December 10, 2024, US CENTCOM chief Gen. Michael Kurilla met Kurdish SDF officials in Syria before heading to Baghdad to meet Sudani, who reaffirmed Iraq’s position on “respecting the Syrian people’s choices.”

The following day, Sudani visited Jordan to meet King Abdullah II, who later traveled to Abu Dhabi to meet UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed. Sudani returned to Baghdad, received a call from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and met with a US delegation. Meanwhile, Germany’s defense minister visited Baghdad and Erbil.

Talks across the region have focused on “securing borders” with Syria. International discussions, involving US President Joe Biden and other Western officials, highlight a global push to bolster security in Syria’s neighboring states.

Despite these efforts, Shiite leaders in Baghdad remain unclear on Iraq’s future or how to handle mounting regional pressures.

A former government advisor described Iraq’s current situation as the most fragile in years, with Syria’s shifting dynamics raising serious questions for Iraq’s political stability.

Iraq Faces Rising Tensions After Assad’s Fall

Mutual fears are growing across the Iraq-Syria border. In Syria, concerns focus on Iraqi groups alarmed by the new regime, while in Iraq, fears center on potential unrest at the Sayyida Zainab shrine in Damascus, which could destabilize the region.

A senior Shiite figure told Asharq Al-Awsat that Assad had granted Iran full security control over the shrine, but this arrangement ended with his departure.

“Now, everyone is afraid,” the source said, though international assurances suggest Damascus will not unravel as quickly as Assad’s fall.

Since Assad fled to Moscow, Iraqi Shiite communities have voiced concerns over the safety of Shiite shrines in Syria, amplified by a flood of social media posts. However, Iraqi diplomats have engaged regional powers to prevent escalation, warning that even a minor misstep could ignite conflict.

Inside Iraq, fears are mounting among Shiite leaders about losing control over factions or being outmaneuvered by Sunni and Kurdish rivals. These groups might exploit Iran’s retreat, seen by some as a "tactical withdrawal," to shift Iraq’s political balance.

Shiite politicians also worry the Iraqi premier could distance himself from Iran-aligned factions and pursue a new political deal, using “protecting Baghdad” as his justification.

“Sudani holds a strong card,” one political adviser noted.

Publicly, Shiite leaders focus on warnings about Syria’s “extremist rule” and the risk of militants crossing into Iraq. Privately, they remain unsettled about Iraq’s next steps as regional dynamics shift.

Recent developments underscore these tensions. Sudani reportedly sent a message to Syrian authorities, pledging non-interference while seeking assurances about the safety of Shiite communities.

Iraq’s stance toward Syria shifted after airstrikes hit convoys carrying Shiite fighters and Syria’s army collapsed. These events freed Sudani from earlier obligations to Iran-backed factions, allowing him to adopt a more flexible position.

Iraq's Political Crossroads: Regional Pressures and US Strategy

A Western diplomat in Baghdad, who spoke anonymously, said that “stability in Iraq is now a top priority for the international community,” but regional pressures are pushing to dismantle the militias that have fueled instability.

This comes as political discussions focus on a question raised by many: Is the fall of regimes in the Resistance Axis moving toward Iraq? Some consider it an unlikely scenario without solid evidence.

An Iraqi politician, who claimed insight into US-Iraq talks, suggested that the US has engaged Israel, which wants to “finish the job of removing the Resistance Axis, with Iraq as the last standing member.”

The theory suggests that Israel sees Baghdad as “Iran's most important asset,” and Tehran might use Iraq’s resources to revive the collapsing axis, meaning the crisis won’t end with Assad.

To counter Israel’s objectives, the US reportedly proposed an “alternative plan” with similar goals.

An Iraqi adviser explained that the new approach involves disarming militias, integrating the PMF into the state, and removing militia offices from Sunni areas.

This adviser also said that the US wants to hold new elections in Iraq and believes “Iran will have to accept this new reality.”

However, figures from Iraq’s Coordination Framework dismissed this as “fantasy,” although they acknowledge that messages reaching Baghdad indicate that “cutting Iraq’s ties to Iran is now seen as essential.”

Sidelining entrenched groups in Iraq’s government is difficult, and some believe this could only be achieved through negotiations with Iran.

A political adviser noted, “It’s hard to remove Iranian influence so easily. They are involved in ongoing discussions in the region, and if Iraq’s political situation changes, Iran will be a part of it.”

The Middle East’s Shifting Landscape and Sudani’s Challenge

In political circles, a simple question is being raised: “Why should Baghdad be targeted when it stayed out of the support war and didn’t intervene to prevent Assad’s fall?” This reflects a desire to avoid the consequences of the post-conflict situation.

But this is not the regional reality. A series of events suggests that Iraq must change to avoid difficult choices ahead.

A Western diplomat told Asharq Al-Awsat, “The region has changed... it’s clear that the dynamics have shifted, and players must adapt.”

For the first time since 2003, excluding the threat from ISIS in 2014, Iraq’s Shiite forces face mounting pressures, forcing them to decide how to adapt politically.

During his visit to Baghdad on December 13, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken didn't wear a bulletproof vest, unlike his November 2023 trip, symbolizing a more relaxed approach.

He joked with Sudani, saying, “It’s wonderful to fly in from the airport and see the vitality of the city.”

However, Blinken’s reassuring words—calling it the right moment for Iraq to strengthen its sovereignty—are met with skepticism in Iraq.

Officials fear these may be just the comments of a diplomat in his final month, with a Republican administration likely to take a harder line on Iran, and Iraq possibly being the last target of “maximum pressure.”

Iraqi politicians are convinced that “something will happen,” but opinions differ on what that might be. There's speculation about a possible Israeli strike, or if Washington plans to protect Iraq through a new deal aimed at limiting Iranian influence.

Sudani’s aides downplay the likelihood of military strikes but hint at necessary political changes, which could soften the impact of a future US administration under Donald Trump.

However, these changes could create risks, as Sudani’s opponents in both Baghdad and Tehran fear unforeseen consequences.



What to Know about the Tensions between Iran and the US before Their Third Round of Talks

The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)
The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)
TT
20

What to Know about the Tensions between Iran and the US before Their Third Round of Talks

The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)
The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)

Iran and the United States will hold talks Saturday in Oman, their third round of negotiations over Tehran’s rapidly advancing nuclear program.

The talks follow a first round held in Muscat, Oman, where the two sides spoke face to face. They then met again in Rome last weekend before this scheduled meeting again in Muscat.

Trump has imposed new sanctions on Iran as part of his “maximum pressure” campaign targeting the country. He has repeatedly suggested military action against Iran remained a possibility, while emphasizing he still believed a new deal could be reached by writing a letter to Iran’s 85-year-old Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to jumpstart these talks.

Khamenei has warned Iran would respond to any attack with an attack of its own.

Here’s what to know about the letter, Iran’s nuclear program and the tensions that have stalked relations between Tehran and Washington since the 1979 revolution.

Why did Trump write the letter? Trump dispatched the letter to Khamenei on March 5, then gave a television interview the next day in which he acknowledged sending it. He said: “I’ve written them a letter saying, ‘I hope you’re going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing.’”

Since returning to the White House, the president has been pushing for talks while ratcheting up sanctions and suggesting a military strike by Israel or the US could target Iranian nuclear sites.

A previous letter from Trump during his first term drew an angry retort from the supreme leader.

But Trump’s letters to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in his first term led to face-to-face meetings, though no deals to limit Pyongyang’s atomic bombs and a missile program capable of reaching the continental US.

How did the first round go? Oman, a sultanate on the eastern edge of the Arabian Peninsula, hosted the first round of talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff. The two men met face to face after indirect talks and immediately agreed to this second round in Rome.

Witkoff later made a television appearance in which he suggested 3.67% enrichment for Iran could be something the countries could agree on. But that’s exactly the terms set by the 2015 nuclear deal struck under US President Barack Obama, from which Trump unilaterally withdrew America.

Witkoff hours later issued a statement underlining something: “A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal.” Araghchi and Iranian officials have latched onto Witkoff’s comments in recent days as a sign that America was sending it mixed signals about the negotiations.

Yet the Rome talks ended up with the two sides agreeing to starting expert-level talks this Saturday. Analysts described that as a positive sign, though much likely remains to be agreed before reaching a tentative deal.

Why does Iran’s nuclear program worry the West? Iran has insisted for decades that its nuclear program is peaceful. However, its officials increasingly threaten to pursue a nuclear weapon. Iran now enriches uranium to near weapons-grade levels of 60%, the only country in the world without a nuclear weapons program to do so.

Under the original 2015 nuclear deal, Iran was allowed to enrich uranium up to 3.67% purity and to maintain a uranium stockpile of 300 kilograms (661 pounds). The last report by the International Atomic Energy Agency on Iran’s program put its stockpile at 8,294.4 kilograms (18,286 pounds) as it enriches a fraction of it to 60% purity.

US intelligence agencies assess that Iran has yet to begin a weapons program, but has “undertaken activities that better position it to produce a nuclear device, if it chooses to do so.”

Ali Larijani, an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, has warned in a televised interview that his country has the capability to build nuclear weapons, but it is not pursuing it and has no problem with the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspections. However, he said if the US or Israel were to attack Iran over the issue, the country would have no choice but to move toward nuclear weapon development.

“If you make a mistake regarding Iran’s nuclear issue, you will force Iran to take that path, because it must defend itself,” he said.

Why are relations so bad between Iran and the US? Iran was once one of the US’s top allies in the Middle East under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who purchased American military weapons and allowed CIA technicians to run secret listening posts monitoring the neighboring Soviet Union. The CIA had fomented a 1953 coup that cemented the shah’s rule.

But in January 1979, the shah, fatally ill with cancer, fled Iran as mass demonstrations swelled against his rule. The revolution followed, led by Khomeini, and created Iran’s theocratic government.

Later that year, university students overran the US Embassy in Tehran, seeking the shah’s extradition and sparking the 444-day hostage crisis that saw diplomatic relations between Iran and the US severed. The Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s saw the US back Saddam Hussein. The “Tanker War” during that conflict saw the US launch a one-day assault that crippled Iran at sea, while the US later shot down an Iranian commercial airliner that the American military said it mistook for a warplane.

Iran and the US have see-sawed between enmity and grudging diplomacy in the years since, with relations peaking when Tehran made the 2015 nuclear deal with world powers. But Trump unilaterally withdrew America from the accord in 2018, sparking tensions in the Middle East that persist today.