Iraq withdrawal may signal a broader US rethink on Middle East and Ukraine wars

The departure of the last US troops from Iraq on September 30, 2026, has raised questions in Washington and the wider region

ISLAMABAD: The departure of the last US troops from Iraq on September 30, 2026, has raised questions in Washington and the wider region about whether the move represents more than the formal conclusion of America’s long military campaign against ISIS.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell described the departure from Erbil Air Base as an “orderly departure” and the successful conclusion of the 12-year campaign against ISIS. The withdrawal followed a two-phase arrangement agreed between Washington and Baghdad, with US forces first leaving federal Iraq before completing the pullout from the Kurdistan Region.

The final phase involved the departure of roughly 1,500 US and coalition personnel from Erbil. The US-led mission has now shifted toward Jordan, while Washington says it will maintain targeted training and intelligence cooperation with Iraqi forces.

The withdrawal comes after more than two decades of US military involvement in Iraq. According to Brown University’s Costs of War project, the financial cost of the post-2003 Iraq war and related operations has reached extraordinary levels, while thousands of US service members were killed and tens of thousands wounded.

The human cost for Iraq has been considerably higher. Brown University estimates that hundreds of thousands of people died as a result of direct violence and its consequences, while millions were displaced during the years of war, insurgency and sectarian conflict.

The original justification for the 2003 invasion also remains controversial. The George W. Bush administration argued that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, but subsequent investigations found no active stockpiles or nuclear weapons programme of the kind alleged before the invasion.

The strategic consequences of the war remain equally significant. Analysts have long argued that the removal of Saddam Hussein strengthened Iran’s influence in Baghdad, while China has expanded its economic relationship with Iraq, particularly in the energy sector.

For Iraqi Kurds and other groups that relied heavily on US military support, however, the withdrawal has generated concerns about future security. Washington says Iraqi forces are now capable of handling the country’s security responsibilities, but the experience of the 2011 US withdrawal and the subsequent rise of ISIS remains a warning.

The Iraq decision is also being examined in the context of President Donald Trump’s wider foreign-policy approach. The United States is simultaneously dealing with the consequences of its confrontation with Iran and continuing its major involvement in Ukraine.

Supporters of a broader US retrenchment argue that the Iraq withdrawal could provide a model for reducing direct military commitments while retaining intelligence, training and diplomatic influence from regional bases.

Under such a model, Washington could potentially seek a negotiated path in Iran while maintaining pressure through intelligence and regional partnerships. A similar approach could eventually be considered for Ukraine, where the United States has committed substantial financial and military resources without deploying combat troops on the same scale.

However, the comparison remains uncertain. The 2011 Iraq withdrawal was followed by the emergence of ISIS and the return of US forces in 2014. That history demonstrates the difficulty of leaving a conflict zone without creating new security risks.

For now, the Iraq withdrawal is best viewed as a significant strategic shift rather than definitive evidence of an American exit from other conflicts.

Whether it becomes the first step toward a wider US policy of reducing overseas wars—or merely another pause before renewed intervention—will depend on what Washington does next in Iran and Ukraine.