A heightened state of tension between the United States and Iran-affiliated factions, particularly in the aftermath of the fifth Gaza war, is significantly impacting Iraq’s security. This influence has become more pronounced following Washington’s blacklisting of certain factions, including the leaders of the Iraqi Hezbollah Brigades, notably the Secretary-General known as “Abu Alaa Al-Walai,” on the terrorism watchlist. This development carries various implications, including the erosion of U.S. forces’ prestige abroad, concerns about Iraq evolving into a hub that jeopardizes the interests of Washington and its allies, messages conveying the U.S.’s willingness to engage in regional affairs, and an increased likelihood of the expansion of American confrontations in the Middle East. Additionally, there is a looming risk of dragging Baghdad into a pressing political and security crisis, with Washington aiming to diminish regional cooperation ties among Iran-backed militias.

On November 17, the United States declared the inclusion of six individuals, leaders of the Iraqi Hezbollah Brigades, alongside the Saraya Al-Shuhada Brigades and its Secretary-General, “Abu Alaa Al-Walai,” on its designated terrorism list. This aligns with recent developments related to the escalation of activities by Iran-supported militias, prompted by recent drone attacks against U.S. military forces in Iraq and Syria. These developments intersect with Washington’s interests in the Middle East, given Tehran’s inclination to employ its tools to amplify tensions with the United States in the region.

The Hezbollah Brigades, a prominent armed entity in the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces, stand as a significant concern for the United States due to their escalating influence. This poses a threat to the military and logistical nexus between Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah, traversing through Syria and Iraq. According to the classification decision, the individuals newly listed on the terrorism watchlist from Hezbollah are accountable for armed operations against U.S. targets in the region, as well as aiding in the training of elements through the Quds Force. Similar concerns apply to the Saraya Al-Shuhada Brigades, constituting Brigade 14 within the Popular Mobilization Forces.

Escalatory Developments

The dimensions of the U.S. decision can be understood by shedding light on the current military escalation in Iraq between Washington and Iran-backed forces. Both parties are carrying out scattered attacks strategically and politically, impacting the security and stability of the country.

1. Execution of U.S. Military Strikes Against Iran-backed Factions in Iraq: On November 22, U.S. forces carried out a series of strikes against two locations in Iraq. The U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) stated that these strikes were in response to attacks on its forces by Iran-supported groups. Pat Ryder, the spokesperson for the Department of Defense, affirmed the U.S.’s right to self-defense following another American strike against a vehicle belonging to an Iran-affiliated militia implicated in the missile attack on Ain Al-Assad base. The Hezbollah Brigades acknowledged the loss of its members due to these strikes and threatened further operations against U.S. targets in the coming phase.
2. Concerns about the Intensification of Militia Attacks Against U.S. Targets: The Pentagon revealed that U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria faced 66 attacks since October 17, causing injuries among military personnel. This announcement led to internal criticism regarding Washington’s perceived laxity in securing its interests from attacks by Iran-affiliated militias. This, in turn, explains the U.S. administration’s desire to demonstrate a swift response to undermine any potential plans to attack its military bases in the Middle East, in addition to its diplomatic and economic sites.

3. Condemnation by the Iraqi Government of the U.S. Escalation Against Armed Factions: The Iraqi government has raised objections to the U.S. airstrikes, deeming them a violation of sovereignty and an overstep beyond the agreed-upon objectives of the coalition’s mission against ISIS. With approximately 2000 soldiers, the U.S. forces in the country are engaged in training and rehabilitating the Iraqi army, aiding in preventing the resurgence of the terrorist organization. 

Consequently, Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani has urged the army to uphold the law and prevent any external entity from launching attacks within the nation’s borders. The situation continues to draw Iraq into conflict with the United States amid the intricate and challenging variables of the current escalation. However, the resolution of the crisis hinges on the current government’s capability to shape the future coordination between Iraq’s national agenda and the representatives of regional powers in the country, alongside Washington’s perspective on the boundaries safeguarding its interests and allies.

Complex Concerns

The U.S. decisions regarding the classification of Iraqi factions and their members on terrorism lists are intricately tied to the intent of employing legal and military means of categorization. The primary goal is to counteract the escalating risks posed by these forces to Washington’s interests in the region. However, in the current scenario, the ongoing military escalation may potentially impact Iraq’s security, as outlined below:

1. Upholding the Prestige of U.S. Forces Abroad: The Pentagon’s official statement on numerous attacks against the country’s military bases in Syria and Iraq within a short span signals that the U.S. administration is choosing to impose consequences to safeguard its reputation in the region. The absence of a response could have been interpreted as Washington’s preoccupation and a lack of resolve in deterring assaults on its interests abroad. This, in turn, might open the door to further targeting by militias supported by Iran or others, whether in the Middle East or any other region.

2. Apprehension Regarding Iraq’s Transformation into a Terrorist Hotspot Threatening Washington and Its Allies: The United States harbors concerns about the region evolving into an uncontrollable militia landscape with local and regional support, posing a significant threat to its interests. This is particularly worrisome if entities collaborate with their branches extending from Yemen to Lebanon. Additionally, there is renewed messaging directed at Iran, indicating that its objectives are vulnerable to attack in accordance with the vision of American deterrence.

3. Conveying Signals of U.S. Preparedness to Engage in Regional Affairs: While the Russo-Ukrainian conflict has dominated U.S. attention in recent times, recent decisions indicate that the Middle East continues to hold significant importance for U.S. security and its shared interests with allies, particularly Israel.

4. Expanding Avenues for U.S. Involvement in the Middle East: Iran aims to pressure Washington by broadening conflict in the region, creating multiple tension hotspots that require attention from the U.S. government. Consequently, the Pentagon turns to military options to counteract the potential widening of these conflicts.

5. Pushing Baghdad into a Critical Political and Security Crisis: Militias mask their attacks against U.S. interests as responses to Washington’s support for Israel in its escalating conflict with Gaza. This strategy aims to undermine the Iraqi government’s ability to navigate the ongoing escalation crisis, setting it in opposition to Washington. This is particularly significant given that the government is part of the diverse societal fabric, inherently harboring internal divergences in perspectives.

Furthermore, the presence of the Popular Mobilization Forces, including factions aligned with Iran, within the army’s apparatus complicates decision-making unity and its preservation in Iraq. Despite the Prime Minister’s assertion of the government’s sole decision-making authority on internal and external matters, especially the repercussions of the Gaza war, disparities have emerged between the government’s evolving rhetoric and the activities of armed factions on the ground.

6. Curbing Regional Collaborative Channels Among Iran-affiliated Militias: The U.S. administration aims to diminish prospects for cooperation between Iran and its affiliated forces, notably the branches of Hezbollah and the Al-Nujaba Movement in the region. These groups have declared their intent to assail Washington’s interests and prioritize involvement in international agendas over domestic considerations.

Assorted Options

In conclusion, it can be asserted that the likelihood of escalating attacks against U.S. military bases by armed factions in Iraq is expected to increase in the upcoming phase. However, the immediate impact, particularly in terms of causing a substantial number of casualties, does not appear equally certain, although it remains a plausible scenario. This probability indicates a potential rise in political and security tensions within the country.

Hence, the government’s capacity to influence armed factions and regulate the tempo of their operations will contribute to crisis alleviation. Furthermore, the government’s decisions concerning international and local agendas will shape its future and the trajectory of political stability in the nation. Regarding U.S. orientations, they will be intricately connected to their specific interests, whether inclined towards escalation or seeking positions that align with their objectives.