​​​​​​​US devotes to Moscow and Beijing 

US President Joe Biden announced that 31^st, August would be the end date of the withdrawal of his country's troops from Afghanistan. In a speech, he said that Washington had "achieved its goals" in combating the terrorist threat, and went not to Afghanistan to "build a nation" but to "hold the Afghan responsible," in his words, expressing his "confidence in the ability" of the Afghan army to counter the Taliban, which had expanded its control in a range of areas.

United States President has also confirmed that the United States will complete its combat mission in Iraq by the end of this year, with a number of its troops continuing to take over the tasks of training and providing military advice to the Iraqi army.

Biden's announcement followed talks at the White House with Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Kazemi this week. Currently, US troops of 2,500 are in Iraq to help local forces confront the remaining ISIS mercenaries.

coming period, but this announcement may be aimed at assisting the Iraqi Prime Minister, according to observers

American losses in Afghanistan and Iraq

Since the start of the war against the Taliban in 2001, US forces have suffered more than 2,300 deaths, some 20,660 soldiers have been wounded in the fighting, and a research by Brown University in 2019 estimated the loss of life between Afghanistan's National Army and police at more than 64,100.

In Iraq, from the interference in 2003 to August 2010, 4,421 military personnel were killed, in addition to 3,200 injured. Since its interference in 2014 to fight ISIS within the international coalition, America has lost 66 military personnel, while 305 people have been injured.

Did America achieve the goals it announced when it intervened ?

When America headed to Afghanistan a month after the 11 September 2001 attacks, which claimed the lives of some 300 Americans, US President George W. Bush, Jr., said that "military operations have very precise objectives and are directed at preventing Afghanistan from being used as a base for terrorism, and dismantling the military infrastructure of the Taliban regime."

Now, 20 years later, America has begun to withdraw from Afghanistan without achieving what it came for. It has not been able to destroy Al Qaeda, nor has it been able to dismantle the Taliban's military infrastructure, which has begun to advance and control large swathes in conjunction with the American withdrawal.

What about Iraq?

When America intervened in Iraq in March 2003. United States President George W. Bush, Jr., and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, said that the purpose of the interference was to "disarm Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, stop Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism and free the Iraqi people."

However, it was later revealed that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction and did not support Al Qaeda. With the high cost of the American invasion of Iraq, President Barack Obama announced at a press conference at the White House on 21^st, October 2011 that the remaining United States troops and trainers would be leaving Iraq at the end of the year.

After US withdrawing, what happened that Al Qaeds organization exploited the situation to be active again, took advantage from what so-called Arab Spring revolutions and Turkish- Qatari support for Islamist political groups for its benefit, resulting in establishing ISIS, which controlled large swathes of the territories in Iraq and Syria, announcing its alleged caliphate in June, 2014, forcing US to return again, but under the name the " Global Coalition to defeat ISIS."

America leaves behind deep differences that it has created in local communities.

In this context, the journalist for Middle Eastern affairs, Hassan Ramo, said that United States of America, when it intervened in Iraq and Afghanistan, wanted to deliver a message to the entire world that it was the world's first military force and to do whatever it wanted. It was never intended to democratize, solve the problems of the peoples of the region, or eliminate Al Qaeda and ISIS. Instead, it withdrew from Afghanistan and left the country in the face of a disastrous new war coming three decades after a war that had a heavy cost to the Afghan people that began with the Soviet interference in 1979 and continued with the American intervention. Neither Al Qaeda nor the Taliban could be eliminated.

"In Iraq, too, America has left behind a system based on division, which has proved that it will not be able to achieve democracy and stability in the country. It has also left a sectarian and nationalist conflict between Sunnis and Shia on the one hand, and between Kurds, Turkmen and Arabs on the other. This means endless rivalry and infighting with a political class running behind the satisfaction of outside forces, especially Turkey and Iran. "

New challenges and a change in strategies

Although the United States and its NATO allies did not achieve what they wanted in the region, they began to withdraw to counter the "growing Sino - Russian strategic threat," and began to deploy in other parts of the world to full - time Moscow and Beijing.

According to an analysis of the Middle East Institute, NATO was given a greater political role, while deterring Russian "aggression" on paper remained the primary objective, and intellectual and material resources in practice were increasingly directed at fighting terrorism. (Inspired by radical Islam), which caused a transformation in doctrine, equipment and training, concluded new partnerships in the region and continued the dialogue with Moscow, that is, taking away from its strategy Russian power.

But what shocked NATO was the "Russian aggression" in Georgia, Crimea and eastern Ukraine, in addition to the Cyber-attacks instigated by the Kremlin. With the West preoccupied with foreign wars, Russia developed its military machine (which remained well developed even after the collapse of the Soviet Union) as well as non-military means, from economic blackmail to misinformation, which played a much larger role than the military, and because NATO did not have sufficient knowledge about these matters, instead by strengthening its military presence in the Baltic States and Poland.

Many NATO members have also begun to see China as a rival with a global agenda that may turn into a strategy, being treated for some time, as an economic opportunity, but the mood has changed, which can be explained by the recent NATO summit statement, which has focused beyond doubt on the Chinese threat first and second.

According to a U.S. Department of Defense strategic assessment, China represents the greatest threat to the United States, and has officially been brought to the top of the list of most dangerous competitors.

The Chief of the Joint United States Staff also warned General Mark Milley against the continued growth of Chinese military capabilities, as a threat to "stability and world peace."

In a statement to the Senate, Milley said that China was increasing its military capacity "at a very dangerous and sustained rate."

In the face of what he perceived as a threat, Milley called in his statement to the Senate Armed Forces Committee "to ensure that our competitive and technological leadership is maintained."

Milley's remarks came after US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin asked the Pentagon to focus more on China.

It is reported that the Pentagon's National Defense Strategy of 2018 identified China as a strategic contender President, but the Task Force found that little had been done to meet the challenges posed by Beijing.

Based on the foregoing, it seems understandable that it is very difficult for Washington and its allies to focus on the terrorist threat that is sweeping the region and the Chinese-Russian threat at the same time.

Betraying allies and destroying the small amount of what has been achieved
 

the community of experts considers Washington's withdrawals to be a betrayal of its allies in the region, on the one hand, and the destruction of what it has accomplished, albeit minimal, on the other. In this context, the senior researcher at the American Newlines Institute, Nicholas Heras, says in a special statement to ANHA agency. The Biden administration does not view its policy as one that is leaving Iraq. President Biden wants to be able to say that he is reducing the risk to U.S. forces in the Middle East by changing how American forces interact with Iraqi forces.

"Stupidity is doing the same thing twice in the same way and the same steps and waiting for different results," says physicist Albert Einstein.

As for the researcher at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), Michael Rubin, he considered the American withdrawal, during a statement to ANHA agency. The American withdrawal is a betrayal not only of our allies in the region like the Syrian Kurds, but create a vacuum which militias associated with groups sponsored by Iran and Turkey will fill. The United States might believe the choice to withdraw is ours, but in the region, countries believe it is a sign of weakness and that will only increase violence.

Nicholas Heras said that "There are no changes expected in the U.S. policy on Syria, especially because the U.S. intends to keep its base in Erbil."

Regional and international powers are waiting for an opportunity to fill the vacuum

With the United States announcing its withdrawal from the region, many regional and international powers began preparing to fill the vacuum left by this withdrawal, led by Russia, Iran, Turkey and Pakistan.

Nicholas Heras added" The U.S. military presence in Iraq is not large enough to change either Iranian or Turkish policy in the Middle East, least of all in Iraq. Both Iran and Turkey will continue to try to expand their influence throughout the Middle East, and Iraq and Syria will be primary sites for their efforts. Similarly, China and Russia have their respective strategies to expand their influence in the Middle East, with China focusing more on economic influence and Russia more on securing permanent basing for its expeditionary military forces.

The expert group says that the hand of Tehran and even Turkey has become the dominant hand in the region, whether in Libya, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and even Afghanistan. Therefore, the US withdrawal will have negative consequences and will lead to the growth of Iranian and Turkish influence in the region.

In this context, the people follow America with their heart but Iran and Turkey with their brain. Throughout the region, America has taught its allies that the United States cannot be trusted, while Iran and Turkey have made clear that anyone who crosses them will be killed. Iranian and Turkish influence will increase exponentially in the region.

What about Russia and China?

As for the Chinese-Russian threat, Heras believes that "China and Russia have strategies to expand their influence in the Middle East, with China focusing more on economic influence and Russia on securing a permanent base for its exploratory military forces."

The U.S. will retain tens of thousands of military forces in the Gulf, which is a reality that constrains Chinese and Russian influence in the region. The United States will continue to be a strong power in the Middle East.

While Rubin believes that " The problem is much more Russia than China when it comes to the region in question. China's ability to operate in Afghanistan has proven limited, even when they won contracts. And, it is not clear their recent agreement with Iran will ever move from paper to reality.  Russia, however, is deeply interested in Syria and Iraq and will likely make great strides in furthering their influence.

Of course, this withdrawal will pose risks to the national security of the United States. Biden, according to Rubin, is "a strategically retarded man,"Yes, Biden is strategically senile. He cannot remember yesterday, let alone 20 years ago and so appear intent on repeating the mistakes of the pre-9/11 world.

The events indicate that, in addition to Washington's failure to defeat ISIS, "Sunni" formations affiliated with Turkey and "Shia" affiliated with Iran have emerged, at the expense of the moderate forces in the region, which makes it difficult to restore the confidence of those forces. in the United States.

T/S

ANHA