Yuksel Serdar Oguz
20 June 2014•Update: 21 February 2017
WASHINGTON
The power vacuum emerging in Iraq has to be filled by the United States, according to Republican Senator John McCain. The alternative is for Iran will fill the void, he said at the conservative Washington-based think-tank American Entrepreneurs Institute on Wednesday.
With two years passed since U.S. troops withdrew from Iraq, Sunni militant group Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, known as ISIL, and its allies took control of the country’s second-largest city Mosul on June 10. The next day they took Saddam Hussein’s hometown Tikrit and threatened the capital Baghdad, sending shockwaves through the region and rocking U.S. public opinion.
The public opinion has been preoccupied with discussions about the various military options available to Obama, including air-strikes and the deployment of special forces to assist Iraqi troops. The conservatives however, are more concerned about the possibility that the U.S. might co-operate with Iran in the battle against ISIL.
When challenged about this possibility on Monday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said he would not rule out such a partnership, as long as Iran’s efforts are constructive. Senator Lindsey Graham and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel also acknowledged the possibility.
That idea frightens American conservatives, who have warned the Obama administration not to co-operate with Iran. John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, told reporters Wednesday that he "absolutely" does not agree with the idea.
"I can just imagine what our friends in the region, our allies, will be thinking by reaching out to Iran at a time when they continue to pay for terrorists and foster terrorism, not only in Syria and in Lebanon but in Israel as well," he said.
McCain said that Iran is "the worst actor" to play a role in Iraq.
"Iran's presence in Iraq militarily poses a great risk to us. Iranians remain to be threat for Americans there," said McCain.
General Jack Keane, former vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army, said it is of no interest for the U.S. to co-operate with Iran.
General Keane said allowing Iran to become involved would preserve Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s position as a client for Iran, without achieving the removal of ISIL because their presence suits Iran.
"Then Iraq will be another Syria which has been crumbling in sectarian conflict fueled by Assad, another client to Iran and Iran's proxies," said Keane.
Experts believe however that the situation is more complicated than popularly perceived and that Iran cannot stay distant because Iraq has greater importance for it than Syria.
Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Washington-based American Progress Action Fund, and former Assistant Secretary of Defense, told the Anadolu Agency that there needs to be a solution that is viable for the whole region.
"It can’t be just us. If Iran is willing to play a constructive role with Turkey, the Saudis and everybody in stopping the violence, then they should be included," said Korb. “People say, ‘how can you partner with the Iranians?’ Who did we partner with in World War II? Joseph Stalin.”
Faysal Itani, counter-terrorism expert at the Atlantic Council, a think-tank in Washington, said Iran could use the same tactics in Iraq as it has used in Syria.
“They’ve done quite well in preserving core areas of the regime in Syria. I don’t see why they wouldn’t attempt the same strategy in Iraq itself," said Itani.
The White House is stuck trying to make a decision from all of these options.
White House spokesperson Jay Carney clarified on Tuesday the limits of any cooperation with Iran, saying it would not include any military engagement.
"The solution to Iraq's security challenge does not involve militias but the strengthening of the Iraqi security forces to combat threats,” said Carney. “Any engagements we have with the Iranians will not include a discussion of military coordination or strategic determination about Iraq's future over the heads of the Iraqi people."
