فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک

فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک

National Interests of the United States in the Global Coalition against ISIS in Iraq and Its Geopolitical Implication: A Critical Analysis

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
Dina Yulianti 1
Mohamad Hery Saripudin 1
Mandla A Mubecua 2
Anggit Akbar Anugrah 1
1 Department of International Relations, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang, Indonesia.
2 Business School, Faculty of Management Sciences, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa.
10.22034/igq.2025.512208.2026
چکیده
Although the Iraqi government declared its military campaign against ISIS concluded in 2017, and the Pentagon officially acknowledged this in 2019, the United States has maintained its military presence in Iraq. This study examines the underlying motives behind the continued U.S. involvement in Iraq under the justification of "fighting ISIS." Adopting a critical perspective on national interest, it explores the intersection between U.S. strategic objectives and the agendas of powerful economic actors, while situating this within the broader geopolitical landscape. Employing qualitative methods, the study analyzes secondary data from journal article, books, online media, news sources, and official government reports. The evaluation of U.S. national interest focuses on three key dimensions: security, economy, and politics. In terms of security, the U.S. has struggled to establish long-term stability in Iraq or to enhance regional safety, particularly in light of intensifying rivalries with regional powers such as Iran and Turkey. Economically, while the U.S. invested significant taxpayer funds in the conflict, the primary beneficiaries have been major oil and defense corporations, reflecting the entanglement between foreign policy and corporate interests. Politically, U.S. influence in Iraq has waned, challenged by both growing domestic opposition and the expanding geopolitical footprints of competing actors, notably Iran, Russia, and China. Given these findings, the study argues that the United States must reassess whether its ongoing military engagement in Iraq aligns with its broader strategic interests amidst the shifting geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East.
کلیدواژه‌ها
Critical Foreign Policy
US Military
Security
Economy
Political Interest
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

National Interests of the United States in the Global Coalition against ISIS in Iraq and Its Geopolitical Implication: A Critical Analysis

نویسندگان English

Dina Yulianti 1
Mohammad Hery Saripudin 1
Mandla A Mubecua 2
Anggit Akbar Anugrah 1
1 Department of International Relations, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang, Indonesia.
2 Business School, Faculty of Management Sciences, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa.
چکیده English

Although the Iraqi government declared its military campaign against ISIS concluded in 2017, and the Pentagon officially acknowledged this in 2019, the United States has maintained its military presence in Iraq. This study examines the underlying motives behind the continued U.S. involvement in Iraq under the justification of "fighting ISIS." Adopting a critical perspective on national interest, it explores the intersection between U.S. strategic objectives and the agendas of powerful economic actors, while situating this within the broader geopolitical landscape. Employing qualitative methods, the study analyzes secondary data from journal article, books, online media, news sources, and official government reports. The evaluation of U.S. national interest focuses on three key dimensions: security, economy, and politics. In terms of security, the U.S. has struggled to establish long-term stability in Iraq or to enhance regional safety, particularly in light of intensifying rivalries with regional powers such as Iran and Turkey. Economically, while the U.S. invested significant taxpayer funds in the conflict, the primary beneficiaries have been major oil and defense corporations, reflecting the entanglement between foreign policy and corporate interests. Politically, U.S. influence in Iraq has waned, challenged by both growing domestic opposition and the expanding geopolitical footprints of competing actors, notably Iran, Russia, and China. Given these findings, the study argues that the United States must reassess whether its ongoing military engagement in Iraq aligns with its broader strategic interests amidst the shifting geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Critical Foreign Policy
US Military
Security
Economy
Political Interest
1.       Abdullah, R.K; Daud, S. (2025). From Ideology to Impact: A Comparative Study of Al Qaeda and ISIS Threats to Iraqi Social Peace. Geopolitics Quarterly, 20 (4), 137-157.
2.       Aditya, R; Muslimah, S. (2016). Tinjauan Hukum Internasional Atas Serangan MiliterAmerika Serikat Terhadap Islamic State of Iraq and Syria di Wilayah Negara Irak dan Suriah. [International legal review of the US military attacks against the ISIS in the territory of the states of Iraq and Syria]. Belli ac Pacis, International Law Journal. 2(1), 40-53.
3.       Aljazeera. (2023). US launches strikes on Iraq over drone attack blamed on Iran-aligned forces. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/26/us-strikes-iraq-after-blaming-iran-backed-groups-for-drone-attack.
4.       Anbori, A.; Al-Mumin, A.; Ab. Waha, A.; Beaumont, R. (2024). Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq: Obedience to Law Dilemma. Geopolitics Quarterly, 20 (Special Issue, winter), 231-272.
5.       Ansari, S. (2024). The Military-Industrial Complex: How Ongoing Conflicts Drive Profits for Defense Contractors. https://www.economics- online.co.uk/managing_the_economy/the-military-industrial-complex-how-ongoing-conflicts-drive-profits-for-defense-contractors.html/.
6.       Azzam, F; Hindawi, C.P. (2016). The Arab Region. Dalam A. Bellamy, & T. Dunne, The Oxford Handbook of The Responsibility to protect (hal. 451-468). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7.       BBC. (2017). Iraq declares war with Islamic State is over https://www.bbc. com/news/world-middle-east-42291985.
8.       Bellamy, A. (2014). Legality, Legitimacy, and Human Protection: Interna- tional Intervention against ISIS in Syria. Dipetik Desember 21, 2022, dari The Global Observatory: https://theglobalobservatory.org/2014/10/ legality-legitimacy-human-protection-international-intervention-isis-syria-r2p/.
9.       Beni, Z.H.; Ezatti, E. (2024). He Consequences of Regime Change in Iraq; Formation and Continuation of Geopolitical Crises. Geopolitics Quarterly, 19 (3), 34-61.
10.   Blanchard, C.M; Humud, C.E. (2018). The Islamic State and U.S. Policy. Congressional Research Service. .https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/ R43612.
11.   Burchill, S. (2015). The National Interest in International Relations Theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
12.   Byman, D. (2016). Understanding the Islamic State - A Review Essay. International Security 40:4, 127-165.
13.   Cameron; Glenn. (2016). Timeline: US Policy on ISIS. Dipetik 12 21, 2022, dari Wilson Center: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/timeline-us-policy -isis.
14.   Carnegie Corporation of New York. (2023). The Costs of War. https:// www.carnegie.org/our-work/article/costs-war/.
15.   Chomsky, N. (2004). Language and Politics. Oakland: AK Press.
16.   Coffey, L; Phillips, J. (2020). The Middle East Strategic Alliance: An uphill struggle. Heritage Foundation. https://www.heritage.org/middle-east/report/ the-middle-east-strategic-alliance-uphill-struggle.
17.   Connable, B; Dobbins, J; Shatz, H.J; Cohen, R.S; Wasser, B. (2020). Weighing U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq: Strategic Risk and Recommendation. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/ rand/pubs/perspectives/PE300/PE362/RAND_PE362.pdf.
18.   Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: SAGE Publications.
19.   Doeser, F; Eidenfalk, J. (2019). Using Strategic Culture to Understand Participation in Expeditionary Operations: Australia, Poland, and the Coalition against the Islamic State. Contemporary Security Policy, 4-29.
20.   Dorobantu, O. (2021). The implications of U.S. withdrawal from Iraq for USCENTCOM priorities and great power competition. Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies. https://2024.nesa-center.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021-02-24-Strategy-Paper-07-The-Implications-of-US-Withdrawal-from-Iraq-for-USCENTCOM-Priorities-and-GPC.pdf.
21.   Dury-Agri, J.R; Kassim, O; Martin, P. (2017). Iraqi Security Forces and Popular Mobilization Forces: Orders Of Battle. Institute for the Study of War. http://www.jstor.com/stable/resrep17468.6.
22.   Egel, D; Johnston, T; Connable, B. (2023).  The Future of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces: Lessons from Historical Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration Efforts. .https://www.rand.org/pubs/ research_reports/RRA722-1.html  
23.   Farouk, Y. (2019). The Middle East Strategic Alliance has a long way to go. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.https://carnegieendowment. org/research/2019/02/the-middle-east-strategic-alliance-has-a-long-way-to-go.
24.   Gomes, A; Mikhael, M. (2018). Terror or Terrorism? Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State in Comparative Perspective*. A Journal of the Brazilian Political Science Assosiation 12:1, 1-27.
25.   Hawley, E. (2017). ISIS Crimes against the Shia. Genocide Studies International. Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 160-181.
26.   Hazbun, W. (2023). U.S. military strategy in the Middle East and the challenge of demilitarization. In I. K. Harb & D. J. Kanber (Eds.), A US pivot away from the Middle East: Fact or fiction. (pp. 23–32). Washington, DC: Arab Center Washington DC.
27.   Hilmi, M. (2014). Geneologi dan Pengaruh Ideologi Jihadisme Negara Islam Irak dan Suriah. [Genealogy and influence of jihadist ideology of the ISIS] Jurnal Tasawuf dan Pemikiran Islam, 4(2).
28.   https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/1711
29.   Husari, R. (2013). Syria and the Changing Middle East Energy Map. https: //carnegieendowment.org/research/2013/01/syria-and-the-changing-middle-east-energy-map?lang=en.
30.   Jackson, R.H; Sørensen, G; Møller, J. (2019). Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches.  Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31.   Jaffarinia, A; Sohrabi, S; Heshmat-Abad, S.F.  (2023). Faw Grand Port: A new code in Iraqi geopolitics. Geopolitics Quarterly, 19(3), 358–381.
32.   Joselow, G. (2017). ISIS weapons arsenal included some purchased by U.S. government. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/isis-weapons-arsenal-included-some-purchased-u-s-government-n829201.
33.   Katzman, K. (2020). Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies. Congressional Research Service.https://www.congress. gov/crs - product/R44017.
34.   Korhonen, V. (2024). Total budgetary cost to the United States of the global war on terror between FY 2001 and FY 2020, by category.   https://www. Statista.com/statistics/1075849/total-us-war-costs-war-terror-category/.
35.   Lanlan, H. (2023). GT Investigates: How much have US 'Big Five' weapon manufacturers gained from arms sales to Ukraine? https://www.globaltimes .cn/page/202308/1295637.shtml. 
36.   Lederer, E.M.  (2023). Islamic State group still has thousands in Syria and Iraq and poses Afghan threat, UN experts say. https://apnews.com/article/ islamic-state-fighters-syria-iraq-875d5ee8a0978f3b28aeec210b33cd5f.
37.   Lee, S. (2024). Domestic distributional roots of national interest. American Political Science Review, 118(4), 1824–1839 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055423001284.
38.   MacDonald, P.K; Parent, J.M. (2024). The Dynamics of US Retrenchment in the Middle East. https://publications.armywarcollege.edu/News/Display /Article/3789938/the-dynamics-of-us-retrenchment-in-the-middle-east/.
39.   Magdoff, H. (1978). Imperialism: From the Colonial Age to the Present. New York: Monthly Review.
40.   Mahmoud, S. (2025). US warns Iraq against PMF legislation that could embed Iranian influence. The National News. https://www.thenationalnews. com/news/mena/2025/08/04/us-warns-iraq-against-pmf-legislation-that-could-embed-iranian-influence
41.   McCool, Davis III, "The Role of the Kurds in U.S. Foreign Policy" (2021). Honors Theses. 1711.
42.   Minardi, A. (2016). United States Counterterrorism on ISIS. Journal of Goverment and Politics 7:2, 180-207.
43.   Mokry, S. (2024). Grand strategy and the construction of the national interest: the underpinnings of Sino-US strategic competition. International Politics, 61, 742–760 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-023-00452-w.
44.   Moorman, C. (2024). The consequences of U.S. forces leaving Iraq and Syria. New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy. https://newlinesinstitute. org/state-resilience-fragility/the-consequences-of-u-s-forces-leaving-iraq-and-syria/.
45.   Mullins, A.M. (2023) The Ineffectiveness of the U.S. Strategy for Countering Terrorism in Iraq and Syria. Helms School of Government, Liberty University. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/ hsgconference /2023/foreign_policy/15/.          
46.   Nuechterlein, D.E. (1976). National Interests and Foreign Policy: A Conceptual Framework for Analysis and Decision-Making. British Journal of International Studies, Vol.2, No.3.
47.   Ogo, N.C; Nwokike, K.I; Mbam, N.M. (2024). National interest in international relations: Whose interest? Ideal International Journal, 17(4), 10–19. https://acjol.org/index.php/ideal/article/download/5963/5778.
48.   Putri, D.A; Sidik, H. (2020). Responsibility to Protect dalam Kasus Genosida oleh ISIL terhadap Yazidi-Irak melalui Intervensi Militer Amerika Serikat [Responsibility to protect in the case of ISIL genocide against Yazidis-Iraq through US military intervention]. Jurnal ICMES: The Journal of Middle East Studies, 4(1), 46-63.
49.   Rolandsen, Ø.H; Selvik, K. (2023). Disposable rebels: US military assistance to insurgents in the Syrian war. Mediterranean Politics. 29 (4): 528–549.
50.   Ruys, T; Ferro, L; Haesebrouck, T. (2019). Parliamentary War Powers and the Role of International Law in Foreign Troop Deployment Decisions: The US-led Coalition against “Islamic State” in Iraq and Syria. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 118-150.
51.   Saideman, S.M. (2016). The Ambivalent Coalition: Doing the Least one can do against the Islamic State. Contemporary Security Policy, 289-305.
52.   Salhani, J. (2023). Egypt, Jordan, and the US aid game. https://www. aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/12/egypt-jordan-and-the-us-aid-game.
53.   Schenker, D. (2025). If Iraq passes the new PMF law, the U.S. response should be severe. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. https:// www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/if-iraq-passes-new-pmf -law-us-response-should-be-severe.
54.   Setiawan, A; Alfajri. (2018). Operasi Kontra Teror Koalisi Global dalam Menghadapi Pergerakan Islamic States of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).[Global coalition counter-terror operations in facing the movement of ISIS]. Jurnal Dinamika Pemerintahan, Vol 2. No. 2, 143-173.
55.   The Cradle. (2024). Talks underway for US withdrawal as ISIS ‘no longer a threat’: Iraqi PM. https://new.thecradle.co/articles-id/19518
56.   The Global Coalition. (n.d.). Mission. https://theglobalcoalition.org/ en/mission/.
57.   Thrall, A.T; Goepner, E. (2017). Step Back: Lessons for U.S. Foreign Policy from the Failed War on Terror. Policy Analysis Cato Institute No. 814. https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/step-back-lessons-us-foreign-policy-failed-war-terror#.
58.   Toomey, B. (2025). U.S. expresses concern over Iraqi legislation enshrining militias as independent security force. Long War Journal. https://www .long warjournal.org/archives/2025/07/us-expresses-concern-over-iraqi-legislatio -n-enshrining-militias-as-independent-securityforce.php.
59.   US Central Command. (2023). Press Release: November 2023 Month in Review: The Defeat ISIS Mission in Iraq and Syria. https://www .cent com. mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/3609921/ nov -ember-2023-month-in-review-the-defeat-isis-mission-in-iraq-and-syria/.
60.   US Department of Defense. (2025). Release. Readout of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's Call with Israeli Minister of Defense Israel Katz. https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4091760/readout-of-secretary-of-defense-pete-hegseths-call-with-israeli-minister-of-def/.
61.   US Department of State. (2023). Fourth Anniversary of the Global Coalition’s Territorial Defeat of Daesh/ISIS in Syria and Iraq. https://2021-2025.state.gov/fourth-anniversary-of-the-global-coalitions-territorial-defeat-of-daesh-isis-in-syria-and-iraq/.
62.   Waśko-Owsiejczuk, E. (2023). U.S. national interests and strategic object- tives pursued in Iraq at the beginning of the twenty-first century.– Studia Polityczne, 51(1), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.35757/STP. 2023.51. 1.05.
63.   Wechsler, W.F; Katz M.N; Lister, C; Cronin, A.K. (2016). The ISIS Threat to U.S. National Security: Policy Choices. Middle East Policy 23:1, 1-24.
64.   Zakeri, M; Haji Yousefi, A.M. (2024). Thick recognition failure and terrorism emergence in the Middle East: ISIS in Iraq as case study. Geopolitics Quarterly, 20(4), 50–77.
65.   Zinn, H. (1997). The Zinn Reader: Writings on Disobedience and Democracy. New York: Seven Stories Press.
فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک
دوره 22، شماره 2
تابستان 1405
صفحه 263-286

  • تاریخ دریافت 17 اردیبهشت 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری 06 مهر 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش 08 مهر 1404