After more than twenty years, the last American soldiers are departing Iraq, closing a chapter that began with the 2003 invasion of Baghdad and wound through occupation, counterinsurgency, and missions whose purpose grew harder to name with each passing year. The withdrawal is not merely a logistical event but a geopolitical reckoning — a moment in which the weight that American military presence once placed on the scales of the Middle East is quietly lifted. In its absence, Iran stands most ready to fill the space, while Iraq itself must now answer the oldest question of sovereignty: how to b
U.S. completes Iraq withdrawal as regional power balance tilts toward Iran
Iraq wants American forces out, but fears the vacuum they leave
Mark
So this is just the last troops leaving? Or is there something deeper happening here?
Mimi
It's both. Yes, the last soldiers are departing this week. But it's the end of a 20-year presence that started with the 2003 invasion. That's not a small thing—it's the closing of an entire era of American military involvement in Iraq.
Luke
Wait—are we certain this is actually the final withdrawal? The U.S. has announced pullouts before and then kept advisors, contractors, or special operations forces. What's the actual definition of "complete" here?
Mimi
Fair question. The reporting says forces are departing from bases, and Iraq's government has formally requested it. But you're right that the definition matters.
Mark
And the Iran angle—is that speculation or is that actually happening?
Mimi
Iran has been building relationships with Iraqi militias and political parties for years. With American forces gone, there's less external constraint on those relationships. That's not speculation; it's observable fact.
Luke
But does that mean Iran "controls" Iraq now? Or just that Iran has more room to operate? Those are very different things.
Mimi
Much more the latter. Iraq's government still has agency. But the power balance has shifted in Iran's favor—that's the reporting.
Mark
What happens to Iraq's security now? Can they actually defend themselves?
Mimi
That's the central question. Iraqi forces have been trained by Americans, but they've never had to operate independently at this scale. They've made progress against ISIS, but the long-term picture is uncertain.
Luke
And we don't know yet how that plays out. The reporting can tell us what's changing, but not whether Iraq will succeed or fail in managing its own security.
Mark
So this is really about watching what happens next.
Mimi
Exactly. The withdrawal is the event. What comes after is the story.
El Pulso
- Two decades of American military presence in Iraq end this week as the final troops depart bases that once anchored the largest U.S. footprint in the Middle East.
- Iran, long cultivating political and military ties inside Iraq, now faces far fewer external constraints on expanding its influence across Iraqi territory.
- Iraq's security forces — trained and equipped under American guidance — must now hold the line against ISIS remnants and militia pressure without the institutional support they have depended on.
- Iraq's government formally requested the withdrawal to assert sovereignty, yet privately fears the security vacuum it creates — a paradox that will define the country's immediate future.
- Gulf states that relied on American military presence as a check on Iranian ambition must urgently recalibrate their own strategies as the regional balance shifts further.
- The departure signals a broader American reorientation away from the Middle East, raising unresolved questions about U.S. credibility and the global distribution of power.
After more than twenty years, the last American soldiers are departing Iraq, closing a chapter that began with the 2003 invasion of Baghdad and wound through occupation, counterinsurgency, and missions whose purpose grew harder to name with each passing year. The withdrawal is not merely a logistical event but a geopolitical reckoning — a moment in which the weight that American military presence once placed on the scales of the Middle East is quietly lifted. In its absence, Iran stands most ready to fill the space, while Iraq itself must now answer the oldest question of sovereignty: how to be free and secure at the same time.
The last American soldiers are leaving Iraq this week, ending a military presence that began with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003 and never truly concluded — even as its stated purpose shifted from regime change to counterterrorism to advising local forces. The departure closes a chapter written in enormous cost: thousands of American service members killed, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians dead, and trillions of dollars spent on objectives that were either abandoned or proven unreachable through military means.
What the withdrawal leaves behind is a changed strategic landscape. Iran, which shares a border with Iraq and has spent years embedding itself in Iraqi politics, militias, and government institutions, now stands to deepen that influence without American forces present to monitor or constrain it. Iraqi militias with Iranian backing, long operating in the shadow of American bases, will face fewer external limits on their reach.
Iraq itself faces a genuine paradox. Its government formally requested the withdrawal, asserting the right to manage its own sovereignty and security. Yet the country remains fragile — ISIS is degraded but not gone, and the security apparatus built under American guidance now loses the institutional knowledge and material support that sustained it. The nation must navigate its own defense without the guarantor that has shaped its politics for a generation.
The consequences ripple outward. Gulf states that long treated American military presence as a counterweight to Iranian expansion must now recalibrate their strategies and their relationships with both Washington and Tehran. And for the United States, the departure reflects a broader reorientation — a deliberate shift of strategic attention away from a region that consumed its focus for two decades, toward other challenges and other theaters. That shift, too, carries a weight of its own.
The last American soldiers are leaving Iraq this week, closing a chapter that opened with invasion and has run through two decades of occupation, counterinsurgency, and an evolving mission that few Americans could clearly name by the end. When the final troops depart from Iraqi bases on Wednesday, they will take with them the largest sustained U.S. military footprint in the Middle East—a presence that began in 2003 with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and never truly ended, even as the stated rationale shifted from regime change to counterterrorism to advising local forces.
The withdrawal marks more than a logistical conclusion. It represents a fundamental recalibration of power in a region where American military weight has long been the counterbalance to other regional actors. With U.S. forces gone, the strategic landscape tilts noticeably. Iran, which shares a border with Iraq and has spent years cultivating political and military relationships there, stands to expand its influence across Iraqi territory in ways that were constrained by American presence. Iraqi militias with Iranian backing, which have operated in the shadows of American bases, will face fewer external constraints on their activities.
The timing of this withdrawal comes as Iraq itself remains fragile. The country has made progress in degrading ISIS remnants, but the security apparatus still depends heavily on external support. Iraqi security forces have been trained and equipped by American advisors; that institutional knowledge and material support will now be absent. The question of how Iraq maintains order and territorial integrity without that American military umbrella remains unresolved.
For the United States, the departure represents a recognition that the original objectives in Iraq—whether defined as preventing weapons of mass destruction, establishing democracy, or containing terrorism—have either been achieved, abandoned, or proven unachievable through military means. The costs have been immense: thousands of American service members killed, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians dead, and trillions of dollars spent. The benefits remain contested and incomplete.
Iraq's government has formally requested the withdrawal, asserting its sovereignty and its desire to manage its own security. Yet the country faces a paradox: it wants American forces out, but it also fears the security vacuum their departure creates. That tension—between nationalist sentiment and practical vulnerability—will define Iraq's immediate future. The nation must now navigate its own defense and foreign policy without the security guarantor that has shaped its politics for the past two decades.
The regional implications extend beyond Iraq's borders. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and other Gulf states have long relied on American military presence as a counterweight to Iranian expansion. With the U.S. footprint shrinking, these countries will need to recalibrate their own security strategies and their relationships with both Washington and Tehran. The balance of power in the Gulf, already shifting, will shift further.
For Iran, the American withdrawal represents a strategic opportunity. The country has invested heavily in cultivating relationships with Iraqi political parties, militias, and government officials. With American forces no longer present to monitor or constrain Iranian activities, Tehran can deepen those relationships and expand its economic and political reach into Iraq. The question is whether Iraq's government can maintain its independence while managing that pressure, or whether it will be pulled further into Iran's orbit.
The withdrawal also signals a broader American reorientation. The United States is redirecting military resources and strategic attention toward other regions and other challenges. The Middle East, which consumed enormous American attention and resources for two decades, is no longer the primary focus of U.S. foreign policy. That shift itself carries consequences—for the region, for American credibility, and for the balance of global power.
Citas Notables
Iraq's government has formally requested the withdrawal, asserting its sovereignty and desire to manage its own security— Iraqi government position
Quieres la nota completa?
Lee el original en The Washington Post ↗
War & Conflict