Shafaq News

Just days after Iraq announced the withdrawal of US forces from Ain al-Asad airbase, Washington unveiled a new mission involving the transfer of ISIS detainees from northeastern Syria to Iraqi territory, an overlap that has reignited debate over whether the post-coalition phase strengthens Iraqi sovereignty or exposes new security risks.

The timing places Baghdad under pressure at a sensitive moment, as it assumes full responsibility for border control, detention facilities, and internal security amid shifting power dynamics in Syria and unresolved threats from ISIS sleeper cells.

Iraqi officials have framed the US pullout as the culmination of long negotiations and a symbolic restoration of sovereignty. Yet security observers argue that the withdrawal also shifts the burden of containment —particularly of ISIS detainees— squarely onto Iraqi institutions at a moment of regional volatility.

The transfer of ISIS prisoners, many held for years in makeshift facilities under Kurdish-led forces in Syria, is widely seen as a stress test for Iraq’s intelligence, detention, and border-control systems. Analysts, who spoke to Shafaq News, warn that any failure could allow dormant cells to reorganize or exploit porous terrain along the Iraqi–Syrian frontier.

At a broader level, the withdrawal signals a recalibration of the Baghdad–Washington relationship —from direct military presence to advisory and training cooperation— placing greater operational responsibility on Iraqi forces while reducing US exposure.

Retired Brigadier General Adnan al-Kinani argued that the withdrawal itself was expected, the result of years of negotiations between Baghdad and Washington. What troubles him, however, is the timing.

“The decision did not come as a surprise,” al-Kinani said, “but the regional developments, especially in Syria, required different calculations.”

He sharply criticized the Iraqi government for allowing ISIS detainees to be transferred from Syria at a moment he described as politically and security-wise fragile. According to al-Kinani, prioritizing prisoner transfers over strengthening external security cooperation reflects “confusion in managing security priorities.”

Political researcher Nawal al-Moussawi offers a more nuanced reading. In her view, the coalition’s withdrawal does not mark the end of its role —but rather a transformation. “The coalition exited through the door, but it may return through the window,” she said, suggesting that while its direct combat mission has ended, Iraq may eventually require international support to secure ISIS detention facilities.

Al-Moussawi emphasized that the detainee issue is not purely Iraqi. Thousands of ISIS prisoners hold foreign citizenship, particularly from European countries that refuse to repatriate them due to domestic political pressures. This makes the file “an international responsibility rather than a national one.”

She also noted that the coalition was formed under a UN Security Council mandate, giving it political weight as a balancing mechanism in the region. Unlike NATO-style deployments, the coalition provided Iraq with cross-border operational reach, including air assaults inside Syria to pursue suspects wanted by Iraqi courts.

From her perspective, the real consequences of withdrawal lie not in sovereignty —which she argues was not meaningfully undermined— but in the heightened risk of sleeper-cell activation and cross-border infiltration, particularly along rugged routes near Turkiye.

From inside parliament, Ahmed Karim al-Dulaimi links the withdrawal to internal political pressure, persistent attacks on coalition bases, and mutual understandings with Washington to redefine bilateral ties.

“The immediate outcome is a symbolic boost to sovereignty and the handover of bases,” al-Dulaimi said, while cautioning that the move exposes gaps in intelligence capabilities and technical support.

He added that while the withdrawal may reduce friction with some regional actors, it also raises Iraq’s responsibility to prevent any security vacuum, particularly in areas previously supported by coalition surveillance and intelligence sharing.

The starkest warning came from veteran Iraqi politician Mithal al-Alusi, who described the US withdrawal as leaving Baghdad “strategically exposed.”

According to al-Alusi, the decision reflects Washington’s perception that Iraq is no longer a reliable partner. “The United States does not view Iraq as a friend or ally,” he said, arguing that the pullout reduced US responsibility for defending Iraqi sovereignty.

He warned that Washington increasingly sees Baghdad as closer to Tehran and hostile regional axes than to an independent, sovereign state —an image he said the Iraqi government must urgently counter by rebuilding trust with the US administration and the broader international community.

These debates unfold against major developments in Syria, where government forces have regained areas previously held by the Syrian Democratic Forces, including prisons and camps housing thousands of ISIS fighters and their families near the Iraqi border, such as al-Hol, al-Hasakah, and Qamishli.

Security experts previously told Shafaq News that these shifts complicate control along the 618-kilometer Iraqi–Syrian border, particularly in Nineveh and Al-Anbar, describing the prison file as a “ticking time bomb.”

Estimates suggest that al-Ghwayran prison alone holds around 12,000 foreign ISIS fighters, including nearly 2,000 senior leaders, in addition to thousands of family members, making any breakdown in control a direct threat to Iraq’s internal security.

Last Wednesday, US Central Command announced the transfer of 150 ISIS detainees from Hasakah to Iraq to prevent escapes, with expectations that up to 7,000 more could follow.

Despite repeated assurances from Iraqi authorities that the borders are largely secured through layered defenses, analysts agree that the US withdrawal marks a turning point rather than an endpoint. The absence of coalition forces elevates the importance of intelligence coordination, detention management, and regional security cooperation, areas where any miscalculation could prove costly.

With thousands of ISIS fighters still concentrated near Iraq’s western frontier and the detainee file increasingly shifting onto Baghdad’s shoulders, the challenge ahead lies in sustaining it under pressure, and testing Iraq’s ability to manage this transition may determine whether the post-withdrawal phase brings stability or a renewed cycle of exposure.

Written and edited by Shafaq News staff.