Putri Anggraini
The United States has completed the full withdrawal of its troops from a military base in Baghdad, bringing an end to a presence that began with the 2003 US-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. The departure was reported by Al Jazeera's Jack Hewson from the Iraqi capital, who described military jets leaving the city as the final personnel vacated the site. The withdrawal marks the closure of one of the most visible symbols of America's long military engagement in Iraq, a presence that spanned roughly two decades and shaped the country's post-invasion political and security landscape.
The base in question had served as a key logistical and operational hub for US forces throughout their time in Iraq. For years, it functioned as a staging point for counterterrorism operations, training missions for Iraqi security forces, and advisory roles that evolved as Washington shifted its posture from a full-scale combat occupation to a more limited support mission. Its location in Baghdad gave US commanders direct access to Iraqi government officials and military leadership, making it a central node in the bilateral security relationship.
The 2003 invasion, launched by a US-led coalition, quickly dismantled Saddam Hussein's regime but also unleashed a prolonged period of instability. What followed was a violent insurgency, sectarian conflict, and the rise of extremist groups that at times controlled significant swaths of Iraqi territory. American troop levels fluctuated dramatically over the years, peaking during the so-called surge of 2007 and then declining as Washington sought to hand over security responsibilities to Iraqi forces. The base in Baghdad remained a constant through these phases.
A formal end to the US combat mission was declared in 2010, and the last American troops left Iraq in December 2011. However, the rise of the Islamic State group in 2014 drew US forces back into the country, this time under the framework of an international coalition aimed at defeating the militants. The Baghdad base once again became a focal point for coalition operations, including airstrikes, intelligence sharing, and the training of Iraqi units that eventually reclaimed major cities from extremist control.
The territorial defeat of the Islamic State group in Iraq was declared in 2017, but US personnel remained in the country in a reduced capacity. Their stated mission focused on advising, assisting, and enabling Iraqi security forces, as well as conducting targeted counterterrorism operations. Over time, the presence became politically contentious, with various Iraqi factions calling for a timetable for departure. Those calls grew louder following high-profile incidents that strained relations between Washington and Baghdad.
The completion of the withdrawal from the Baghdad base is likely to be framed by US officials as a milestone in the transition to a normal bilateral security partnership. It may also be presented as a fulfillment of commitments to reduce the American military footprint in the region. Analysts, however, will be watching closely to see whether the departure leaves a gap that could be exploited by remaining extremist cells or by regional actors seeking to expand their influence in Iraq.
For the Iraqi government, the withdrawal carries both symbolic and practical significance. Politically, it allows Baghdad to assert greater sovereignty over its own security affairs and to respond to domestic constituencies that have long demanded an end to foreign military presence. Practically, it places greater responsibility on Iraqi security forces to maintain stability, conduct intelligence-gathering, and respond to any resurgence of militant activity without the direct support that US personnel have provided in recent years.
Regional dynamics are also likely to be affected. Iraq sits at the intersection of competing interests involving Iran, Gulf states, Turkey, and the United States. A reduced American military presence could shift the balance of influence in Baghdad, potentially creating opportunities for Tehran to deepen its already substantial ties with Iraqi political and militia groups. How Washington manages its relationship with Iraq after the withdrawal, including through diplomatic channels and arms sales, will be a key indicator of its continued engagement.
The manner of the departure itself, with military jets seen leaving the city, underscores the scale of the logistical operation involved in closing a major base. Such drawdowns typically involve the removal of sensitive equipment, the transfer or disposal of vehicles and supplies, and the handover of facilities to local authorities. The process is often accompanied by security concerns, as convoys and aircraft can be vulnerable during the final stages of a withdrawal.
Public reaction in Iraq is likely to be mixed. For many Iraqis, the American presence has been a source of resentment and a reminder of a war that caused immense suffering and displacement. For others, particularly those in areas that faced the brutality of extremist rule, US support was seen as a necessary counterweight. The departure will therefore be interpreted differently across the country's political and sectarian spectrum, and could feature prominently in upcoming political debates.
From a US perspective, the closure of the Baghdad base fits into a broader pattern of recalibrating military commitments in the Middle East. Washington has in recent years sought to focus more on great-power competition, particularly with China and Russia, while relying on regional partners to shoulder more of the burden of local security. The withdrawal is consistent with that strategic logic, though critics may argue that it signals a retreat that could embolden adversaries and unsettle allies.
The human cost of the two-decade engagement remains a central part of the story. Thousands of US service members died in Iraq, and many more were wounded. Iraqi civilians bore an even heavier toll, with estimates of hundreds of thousands killed and millions displaced over the years of conflict. The base's closure does not erase those losses, but it does mark a formal endpoint to a chapter that began with shock and awe and ended with a quiet departure.
Looking ahead, the key questions will revolve around what replaces the US presence. Iraq's security forces have grown in capability but still face challenges, including corruption, political interference, and the persistence of militia groups outside formal state control. Intelligence sharing, air support, and training are areas where continued cooperation, even if remote or conducted from outside the country, could prove important in preventing a resurgence of extremism.
The withdrawal also raises questions about the future of US-Iraq relations beyond the military sphere. Economic ties, energy cooperation, and diplomatic engagement will now carry more of the weight of the partnership. Iraq's oil wealth and strategic location make it a significant player in the region, and both Washington and Baghdad have reasons to maintain a working relationship even after the troops have gone.
For Al Jazeera's audience, the images of departing jets and the final closure of the base serve as a visual bookend to a conflict that dominated global headlines for years. The network's correspondent in Baghdad provided on-the-ground reporting as the last personnel left, capturing a moment that many Iraqis and Americans alike had long anticipated. Whether the departure leads to greater stability or new uncertainties will only become clear in the months and years ahead.
Comments (0)