US military presence should remain in Iraq: former US official
ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - The US should “maintain and stay the course” in Iraq, according to the former US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East, who shared his reflections and thoughts with Rudaw on a variety of topics including the recent missile attack in Erbil.
Appointed in October 2017, Michael Mulroy served under Secretary James N. Mattis and Secretary Mark T. Esper until December 2019, holding the responsibility for representing the US Department of Defense (DoD) for defense policy in the Middle East. He spoke to Rudaw’s Diyar Kurda from Washington DC on Thursday.
“The biggest shift [in US policy and strategy in Iraq] since I was there is this movement in Iraq where US military forces are there only in an advise and assist role,” Mulroy told Rudaw. “There is no longer a direct combat role alongside our Iraqi partners [but] we are still there, and I would hope that we remain there in a lesser role… advising the military, the Peshmerga, and the intelligence services.”
Questioned on the current US defense strategy in the region, Mulroy said he believed that the US should maintain a military presence and direct relationship “both with the Iraqi government and the Kurdish region, and the military in both areas,” saying it had proven to be an incredibly effective partnership.
“It is equally important to continue with the enduring defeat of ISIS [the Islamic State], and that really requires the US to maintain and stay the course… and not pull all of our military out,” the former official said.
Pressed on his thoughts regarding the recent missile attacks in Erbil, Mulroy said that the US was still “under negotiations to re-enter.. the JCPOA, the nuclear agreement,” and that while it made little sense to him, “sometimes the Iranians use these proxy attacks or direct attacks as a way to try to gain some kind of leverage in the negotiations… it’s possible that was the intent.”
Erbil was struck by twelve ballistic missiles from Iran on March 13. Asked why Iran would choose Erbil as a retaliation location, Mulroy speculated that there was a “close affinity between the US military and intelligence services, and the people of the Kurdish region of Iraq,” which is potentially one of the reasons Iran would strike.
Mulroy noted that ISIS has increased its attacks in recent months in both Iraq and Syria, and doubted that the militant group will ever be defeated. “It’s very difficult to end an ideology,” he said, combined with economic factors which make recruitment of these groups an attractive option.
Appointed in October 2017, Michael Mulroy served under Secretary James N. Mattis and Secretary Mark T. Esper until December 2019, holding the responsibility for representing the US Department of Defense (DoD) for defense policy in the Middle East. He spoke to Rudaw’s Diyar Kurda from Washington DC on Thursday.
“The biggest shift [in US policy and strategy in Iraq] since I was there is this movement in Iraq where US military forces are there only in an advise and assist role,” Mulroy told Rudaw. “There is no longer a direct combat role alongside our Iraqi partners [but] we are still there, and I would hope that we remain there in a lesser role… advising the military, the Peshmerga, and the intelligence services.”
Questioned on the current US defense strategy in the region, Mulroy said he believed that the US should maintain a military presence and direct relationship “both with the Iraqi government and the Kurdish region, and the military in both areas,” saying it had proven to be an incredibly effective partnership.
“It is equally important to continue with the enduring defeat of ISIS [the Islamic State], and that really requires the US to maintain and stay the course… and not pull all of our military out,” the former official said.
Pressed on his thoughts regarding the recent missile attacks in Erbil, Mulroy said that the US was still “under negotiations to re-enter.. the JCPOA, the nuclear agreement,” and that while it made little sense to him, “sometimes the Iranians use these proxy attacks or direct attacks as a way to try to gain some kind of leverage in the negotiations… it’s possible that was the intent.”
Erbil was struck by twelve ballistic missiles from Iran on March 13. Asked why Iran would choose Erbil as a retaliation location, Mulroy speculated that there was a “close affinity between the US military and intelligence services, and the people of the Kurdish region of Iraq,” which is potentially one of the reasons Iran would strike.
Mulroy noted that ISIS has increased its attacks in recent months in both Iraq and Syria, and doubted that the militant group will ever be defeated. “It’s very difficult to end an ideology,” he said, combined with economic factors which make recruitment of these groups an attractive option.