Dr Renad Mansour
Right, okay, let’s start.Good evening.Thank you, everyone, for joining in person and a very warm welcome to you and to those joining online.My name is Renad Mansour.I am a Senior Research Fellow with the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House and also the Director of the Iraq Initiative.And I’m very happy to be with you all and very happy to have this all-star lineup to discuss the topic today, the title being, “Caught in the Middle: Iraq’s Positioning in US-Iran Tensions.”
We’re joined today by, next to me, Denise Natali, is a member of the Council of Foreign Relations.She is the Director of the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defence University.She previously served as the Assistant Secretary for Conflict and Stabilization Operations at the Department of State in the US.
Next to Denise we have Dr Hamidreza Azizi, who is a Visiting Fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, SWP, in Berlin.He was an Assistant Professor of Regional Studies at Shahid Beheshti University previously.
We then have Sajad Jiyad, who is a Fellow at the Century Fund – International and Director of the Shia Politics Working Group.He’s an Iraqi Political Analyst based in Baghdad, Managing Director of Bridge, an Iraqi non-government organisation and consultancy focused on development projects.
And a very warm welcome, as well, to Stephen Hickey, who is the Director for the Middle East and North Africa, for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the FCDO.And he was appointed Her Majesty’s Ambassador to Iraq in September 2019.
So, we have a, sort of, a panel of both experts, but also those who have, in policy, previously in policy, to discuss one of the, sort of, I think, big questions for the Middle East this – sort of, this year.Which is since October 7th we’ve seen significant conflict and significant violence across the region, in Lebanon, in Syria, in Yemen, of course in Palestine, Gaza, Israel, elsewhere.But Iraq has somehow remained insulated.Although Iraq has similar connections through axis of resistance and some of the groups, it’s remained somewhat stable.And so, that’s, the, sort of, puzzle that we will be discussing today and looking forward, as well, what the trajectory of Iraq could be.
Currently, Baghdad is stable and in fact, if you look at the last 20 years, Baghdad is one of the more stable cities in the region, as such.So, the question is, what is happening and is this sustainable for Iraq, you know, with the – domestically, with the oil price being, for now, helping this, but also the consolidation of power in Baghdad?And really, the question we then have at the external side is Iraq has often been that battleground between the US and Iran.
We see today US-Iran negotiations and we’ll wait to see the ext – you know, whether – and we’ll discuss this as well, whether these negotiations will reach a nuclear deal or whether we will go back to a conflict.In which case, Iraq could be, again, one of the arenas of conflict between the two powers.
So, from the US perspective, you know, we’ll ask questions around whether the restrainers versus the hawks within the administration in DC, who will be guiding Iraq’s poli – sorry, US’s policy?And from Iran, we’ll ask, 2014 was a very bad year, how is Iran adapting – readapting to realities, and where does Iraq fit into that?And then we’ll go on to look at the domestics and finish, sort of, with that – what the UK, as well – the important role the UK plays.
But first, Denise – hang on, I have a few housekeeping notes that I haven’t said yet, that I need to say.So, this is on the record, so it’s not under the Chatham House Rule.It’s being recorded and it’s livestreamed.We have an online audience.I am to encourage you to tweet using the following hashtag and handles, #CH_Events and @ChathamHouse, and the – this event is organised as part of Chatham House’s Iraq Initiative.Denise.
Denise Natali
Thank you, Renad, and…
Dr Renad Mansour
Welcome.
Denise Natali
Thank you and thank you to Chatham House for sponsoring this event.I just want to start off and – with the – my standard disclaimer that I’m here in my personal views and I don’t – these are not going to represent the United States Government or the Department of Defense.So, how is the United States – how is the administration approaching Iran, you’re asking?
Dr Renad Mansour
Well, maybe if you can just, kind of, give us a sense of where – I mean, many people are trying to make sense of the US administration and where it’s going.If you…
Denise Natali
Sure.
Dr Renad Mansour
…can help unpick…
Denise Natali
Sure.
Dr Renad Mansour
…some of that.
Denise Natali
Sure, sure, sure.
Dr Renad Mansour
And then specifically on Iraq.
Denise Natali
So, I’ll make it very clear, ‘cause it really is very clear, and President Trump has outlined this in the America First Agenda, prior to being elected, and it has stayed the same since.And that is the United States will approach Iraq, it will approach its foreign policy with this America First Agenda, which is looking at – and it – the United States can lead the world, can ensure peace and prosperity by ensuring that American interests are served first.That does not mean isolationism, but it does affect the way the United States engages with the world and the types of alliances that it will maintain.
A couple of things before we can get into Middle East.This is a very – this is an approach that’s grounded in realism.It is not ideologically driven.This is very different from some of the previous administrations that have had an ideological tilt.And this is also an approach that rejects international interventionism or the democracy promotion missions and all of these thing – poli – I – events that had the United States everywhere in the world.It’s selective, it looks as countries – you know, and with bilateral relationships, that can help advance American interests.
So, with that said, the United States is going to approach the Middle East with these priorities.President Trump said this from the get-go, “We’re going to end forever wars,” and that still remains the same.Working on Russia-Ukraine, working on the Israel-Hamas war and bringing the hostages back.That still remains a priority and you’ve seen that with Special Envoy Witkoff.And the other part of the priority of the Middle East is deterring maligned Iranian influence, that will remain a priority and you’ve seen the ‘maximum pressure’ campaign be reinstituted.And the United – this administration has also, you know, pursued other measures more forcefully, ensuring that these sanctions are enforced in ways that the previous administration did not.
Going after Chinese companies as well, lifting some of the waivers on Iraq and also, negotiating with the Iranian Government in the effort to stop, or prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.So, it’s preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, deterring Iran’s sponsorship of terrorist organisations and some of these other missiles that are being developed and destabilising the region.That does not just mean maximum pressure, as we did in the first Trump administration.This is also, as we said, potentially reali – you know, potentially preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear by and through negotiations, as well.
And this gets back to the very non-ideologically driven aspect of this administration, which has, quite frankly, annoyed those ideologs who are, you know, a little bit peeved that there are even these negotiations going on in the first place.So, I – this I remain cautiously optimistic, but again, this is a very pragmatic approach and at the same time, if Iran does not agree or they cannot agree to these negotiations, there will be a continued and very forceful enforcement of the sanctions.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you.
Denise Natali
Sure.
Dr Renad Mansour
Hamidreza, on – sort of, from the Iranian perspective, following, you know, 2024, a year of major setbacks, how crucial are these negotiations with the US?We’ve seen some hiccups along the way.How, sort of, how positive or – how positive are you that they could actually reach a deal?And more generally, where does Iraq fit into Iran’s adaptation right now in the region?
Dr Hamidreza Azizi
Yeah, thank you.Thank you very much to this Chatham House for inviting me here.Let me start by the very important point you mentioned, the year 2024 and developments.So, zooming out a little bit, what has happened, where Iran is right now and the perception by the Iranian leadership itself.
So, if we look at the experience, the developments over the past year and a half, three things have happened that has pushed Iran towards some sort of rethinking and recalibration of its overall foreign policy and also, military defensive strategy.First one, of course, is the erosion of its regional deterrence network, the so-called Axis of Resistance.So, of course, there has been a strong ideological element to that, but in the end, when you, you know, go deep into the Iranian narrative of that, you know, the main purpose was to prevent a war from reaching Iran’s territory.That failed, and that failed drastically, especially last October, in the Israeli attacks.
The second one is Trump’s return to The White House, the resumption of ‘maximum pressure’, with all its implications, domestically, regionally and so on.And the third one is a very fragile domestic situation, marked by things like – I mean, we have seen recurrent protests over social issues, economic issues.So, on all these fronts, regional, kind of, let’s say, transregional or international and domestic, there are fragilities.And I would say it’s the combination of these three that has pushed Iran toward this kind of ‘recalibration’, as I call it, which includes, of course, negotiations with the United States.
So, this is very important in the sense that it is not just about sanctions relief.It is not just about, you know, kind of, economic dividends of a potential deal.Why I’m saying this, because of course, we don’t know the exact details of the talks right now ongoing between Iran and the United States, and by the way, I see it as a positive sign, because, you know, I remember – we all remember the period before 2015, the JCPOA.When – I mean, whenever there was a lot of details about what was actually going on in the talks, it meant that, you know, things were not going on the right direction.
So, this is a positive sign, I would say, but in any case, sanctions relief alone, that’s my main point, is not going to be enough for Iran to, kind of, make substantial concessions on its nuclear programme.Because an important element of that is, as I said, this, kind of, sense of fragility, especially at the regional level, sense of vulnerability.And when we look at the – some of the reports about the negotiations, like zero enrichment and so on, there’s a reason why we’ve seen outright rejection by the Iranian officials.Because to them, having at least the right of enrichment recognised by the United States is the only guarantee that, you know, there won’t be future setbacks, you know, caused by the United States’ activities around the region or against Iran directly, or by Israel.
So, throughout all these years, it turned out that the only thing – I mean, again, I’m speaking about the perception of the Iranian leadership.The only thing that prevents that – a major escalation, a major war, was not this regional network.It was Iran’s threshold capacity, basically, or this, kind of, threat of weaponisation should there be a military confrontation.So, I can see some room for even major concessions, like, I don’t know, for example, halting enrichment for some time as a trust building measure, but zero enrichment overall and this, kind of, you know, concertion as a replacement – regional concertion, for example, as a replacement for domestic enrichment, I really don’t see as – that as a positive.So, it can go both directions there.
Dr Renad Mansour
Can I ask, just very briefly, will there be concessions on regional networks?I mean, there’s also pushback from the US and others on Iran’s regional networks.Where – what’s Iran’s position there and specifically in Iraq?
Dr Hamidreza Azizi
That’s a – that’s very interesting, because it started – I mean, Iran’s changing regional position started before Trump and before all these developments, and it was regionally driven, regionally, kind of, oriented.For example, the deal with Saudi Arabia and what we are seeing right now in terms of Iran reaching out to Egypt, for example, or to a state of Lebanon.So, these are partly – I would say, the latest round and the latest wave of that, this is partly driven by that perception that I said that this regional network, this, kind of, attachment or support for non-state actors has not had the effect that it’s supposed to have, you know.So, there is – as part of this rethinking, Iran is now – I mean, we can see signs of a shift from working with non-state actors toward the state actors.
Dr Renad Mansour
So, what does that mean for Iraq?
Dr Hamidreza Azizi
For Iraq, specifically it means that Iran’s support for Shia factions will remain in place, but more in a political way.So, Iran supports, for example, the, kind of, factions within the Shiite Coordination Framework and it is in – it is supporting, basically, the new PMF law, where, of course, as it gives the PMF, overall seen as friendly towards Iran, a formal status in the Iraqi political system.But we are already seeing signs of Iran calling for restraint, you know, when it comes to the militias.
So, I would say trust building at the regional level is already happening.The escalation, we may call it some kind of tactical patience, I would call it strategic patience, and the aim for de-escalation.But overall, this is already happening, that’s what I want to say.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you, thank you.Sajad, Iraq has somehow, more or less, stayed insulated from all these conflicts in the region, although it’s deeply, you know, networked across.How has this happened, and can this continue?
Sajad Jiyad
It’s a good question.I think the fact that we’ve had stability for almost three years is a success.We would not have expected this three years ago, that Iraq would have been able to escape the tensions in the region, being involved in Syria or Lebanon or in Gaza.The fact that this government has survived.There were doubts that such a government could, you know, last a year, particularly with the fact that, you know, an important component of the political scene, the Sadrists, decided to withdraw.
So, it’s a qualified success and probably an unexpected one from an objective point of view.But of course, I think, you know, Iraqis’ stance has not really changed, government policy, I mean.It wants to be friends with the US; it needs to have good ties with Iran.This has been fairly consistent.I don’t think it’s changed since, you know, 2010 or earlier than that, and I think the Iraqi Government, the next Iraqi Government, will also pursue the same policy.Iran is a neighbour, Iraq needs to have strong ties with Iran, it also wants to have a good relationship with the United States, with the international community and it will do its best to remain neutral.
Now, the most important factor in all of this is, in my opinion, the outcome of US-Iran negotiations.If there is a deal, Iraq will benefit greatly, in my opinion.If those talks breakdown, I fear that Iraq will have a hard time preventing, you know, a conflict of interest between the two countries inside Iraq.So, for now, the outlook looks positive.I’m actually optimistic about this.I think Iran and the US will reach an agreement and I think that will reflect well for Iraq.But of course, there’s also, you know, domestic pressures.It’s not all about international region.There’s a lot of competition internally, there is a tremendous pressure in terms of demographics and resources.We know Iraq has not managed to diversify its economy.It’s, you know, extremely reliant on oil.As everybody is aware, oil prices are currently low, they could fall even lower and that puts tremendous strain on government finances.
So, there’s other pressures in additional to the regional and international ones, but at least from the – from my perspective, from looking ahead for, you know, foreign policy, for regional politics, it does look better the fact that Iraq has managed to stay out of recent conflicts, and it does look good for the future.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you.Stephen, in your role as the Director of Middle East, North Africa at the FCDM, but also your time as Ambassador in Baghdad, if we take these two scenarios that Sajad has outlined…
Stephen Hickey
Hmmm hmm.
Dr Renad Mansour
…deal or no deal, where does the UK stand on both and what are the implications for the UK and what can the UK do in both scenarios?
Stephen Hickey
Oh, thank you.Well, first of all, of those two scenarios, we strongly support the ‘deal’ option, and we are wokin – working closely with our partners in The E3 to support the negotiations, led by the US, with Iran, and we remain cautiously optimistic that a deal can be done.I think the title of tonight’s event, “Caught in the Middle: Iraq’s Positioning in US-Iran Tensions,” it really reminds me, actually, of where we were five years ago, during President Trump’s first term.And I remember being in Baghdad during the killing of Qassem Soleimani and the attacks by Iranian backed militias on the coalition.It really did feel then, five years ago, that Iraq was very much the square in which that conflict was being played out.
And as you and others have said, I think it’s very welcome that now, in 2025, it does feel very different.I think it’s very much to the credit of the Government Ira – of Iraq and Iraq’s wider political leadership that over the last 20 months, Iraq has succeeded, to some extent, in not getting involved in the wider conflicts that have been happening.But I agree there’s a real risk now, in the next year, that if the conflicts that we have seen over the last 20 months expand further, and they may do, I think it’s very important for Iraq’s stability. And everything that the Iraqi Government and the Iraqi society wants to achieve, tackling the economic challenges, tackling the climate crisis, reforming the security sector, it’s so much easier to achieve these objectives if Iraq stays out of any wider conflict.
I think to do that, it’s really important that there is continued support for security sector reform and taking more control of the militias that provide such a threat to Iraqis, but also to wider regional instability.I also very much welcome the gradual improvement between Iraq and its other regional neighbours, in particular the new Syrian Government in Damascus and the governments of the GCC.I think that’s very important for Iraq’s stability.And as the UK, we remain committed to Iraq for the longer-term, to the long-term project of strengthening the Iraqi state, strengthening Iraqi civil society, so that Iraq can have the security, the prosperity and all the – also the opportunity that Iraqi’s so deserve.
Dr Renad Mansour
Can I ask a follow-up question on Iraq’s integration with the GCC…
Stephen Hickey
Hmmm.
Dr Renad Mansour
…particularly?Because there was recently this Arab Summit and of course, Iraq is – you know, has been encouraged and it wants to reach out, but there still is this issue with one of its neighbours, Kuwait, their historical relationship.How significant is this, sort of, spat between the two countries over the maritime border and are there ways to really get Iraq into that GCC?
Stephen Hickey
Look, we are seeing the GCC and in particular, the UAE and Qatar, have more and more influence in the region and in the world.And if we want Iraq to follow this positive path and tackle the challenges it faces, it has no choice but to have good relations with the GCC states.Now, of course, things have been bumpy and maybe they will continue to be, but it’s in the interests of Iraq, but also Gulf countries, that that relationship improves.And the UK is committed to helping resolve, if there are any small issues, fixing those and building that partnership, because Iraq will need, over the longer [audio cuts out – 25:12] relations with Iran, but also with the GCC and with Syria and with Western countries, as well.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thanks.Denise, Stephen mentioned that this Trump administration is different to the Trump administration in which you were in, and one of the big differences is that Iraq is no longer caught in the middle.Under the previous Trump administration, the lens was very much through Iran, the lens on Iraq was through Iran.Has that changed now, or – and what should we be looking out for to, kind of, see whether it has – is changing?
Denise Natali
The – this – the current ad – Trump administration also does not prioritise Iraq in its foreign policy.Priority is, you know, outpacing China, it’s looking at our homeland security in our borders, it’s looking at ending forever wars.So, similarly to the previous first Trump administration, Iraq’s not a priority and the United States will continue to look – regard Iraq through the prism of Iran.That is the way it is happening, whether it – you know, one likes it or not, and so, that is to what extent is Iraq enabling the US to enforce the sanctions?Is Iraq supporting?How can Unite – Iraq su – help the United States get these sanctions enforced and address Iran?
It will be largely a security focused look at Iraq.Does not mean that the United States doesn’t engage with Iraq, but it won’t be to the extent to which Ambassador Hickey talked about, how do we help Iraq build its institutions?I don’t know if – you know, there’s been significant cuts across United States, Department of State, in terms of our funding for these foreign assistance programmes and a lot of that ca – is from Iraq, as well.So, you – I would not expect the United – to look at the United States engaging in these institution building, civil society building.They can occur from private organisations, but that is one shift that I would think that is likely to occur from the previous – the first Trump administration.
And there can also still be a regard to Iraq in terms of opportunities for business, opportunities for Iraq to lead security and to handle security and economic prosperity in the region, as well.That can be through alter – developing alternative energy sources, apart from Iran, and there – that is where you can find some openings.But the United States will continue look at Iraq or regard Iraq through the prism of Iran and the extent to which Iraq can deter Iranian backed militias from harming US assets or US personnel.Again, you go back to these three questions that are asked across the government, “How is this enabling American’s prosperity, our security and our stability?”So, that is the way I would – I see it.It’s much more narrow and much more focused.
And a final point I want to make, because this does affect what we should expect.In the first Trump administration there were much larger groups of people who were of the neo-Conservative ilk, and I say that because I don’t want to get into the details, but they had a different regard of the way we engage with Iraq.And you have more a restrainer group, which is we’re not going to project American power by being in the region with our military forces the way these other groups are.So, I would look toward that trend in our policy, moving forward.
Dr Renad Mansour
Hamidreza, picking up on this point of Iraq looking to diversify its foreign relations in the region, its energy in the region, the Development Road, as, you know, that goes to Turkey, not through Iran, how – do – to what extent, you know, is Iran comfortable with some of these changes, as Iran seeks – you know, specifically on the issue of energy, Iran has been a major energy provider for Iraq and it’s given it some leverage.To what extent were – is Iran comfortable with Iraq’s ambitions to be integrated to the – in the region?
Dr Hamidreza Azizi
Overall, I don’t think it is a welcome move by Iran, from the Iranian perspective, and there is different reasons for that.One is, of course, when it comes to, for example, the infrastructural projects, geoeconomic initiatives, like the you mentioned, Development Road, so from the Iranian perspective, not only these projects are, kind of, competitors, they are seen by some as designed to limit Iran’s influence.And that’s why they are supported as, again, as they see it, by extra-regional powers, as well.
So, they look at the Development Road project, what they see, they see it as a, kind of, potential challenge for Iran’s economic role and, kind of, you know, strategic place in the region.And if we put it in the broad perspective of Assad’s fall, the, kind of, land corridor which in the eyes of the Iranian leadership, was not only supposed to be used to transfer weapons, but also in the longer-term perspective, to be part of a corridor – a transit corridor connecting Iran to the Mediterranean to be part of the BRI.So, then we can better assess or have a better assessment of the extent of the loss from the point of view of the Iranian leadership.This is the first point.
The second point is the kind of diversification that Iraqis follows has a clear Arab element and that is, again, something that is concerning to say the least, for Iran.Look at, for example, the recent Arab Summit and all the controversy and all the discussions around it, from whether or not to invite Ahmed al-Sharaa, to, like, Mohammed Al-Sudani publishing and I think it was the [inaudible – 31:49], right, the article on Iraq’s place and the, kind of, the idea of intra-Arab alignments or whatever.
So, these things are seen with a lot of concern because at the end of the day, this has been established Iranian policy to see Iraq as a stable Shia dominated country, but not a strong nationalist country that would, kind of, you know, become a challenge.Because the history of the War with Iraq and the overall perception of being located in a region full of different geopolitical threats, this has been the main driver of Iran’s quest for strategic depth.And at the core of this strategic depths has always been Iraq, and it goes even beyond the Islamic Republic, to the Shah era.
Anyway, so these two issues are the main challenges as seen by Tehran when it comes to Iraq’s multi-vector or multi-aligned foreign policy.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you.Sajad, two – I have two questions for you.One, with the cuts that – you know, the US cuts that Denise highlighted, but more generally the cuts, will this impact Iraq in any case – in any way?And the second one, with what Hamidreza just said in terms of Iran being a bit nervous about Iraq’s nationalism, our Arab nationalism, but at the same time, Iran in a weakened position regionally, is there a moment here for Iraqi leaders to try and exert some more sovereignty from Iran’s grip?
Sajad Jiyad
So, I’ll go with the second question first.I think…
Dr Renad Mansour
Good, ‘cause that’s a…
Sajad Jiyad
…it…
Dr Renad Mansour
…harder question.
Sajad Jiyad
Yeah, I mean, it’s an opportunity for a reset, I think.The relationship with Iran hasn’t been reset since, you know, 2011.That was the last reset.So, pre-2011, Iran was very concerned about US intentions and it wou – looked to disrupt US efforts in Iraq.Because Ir – US was, essentially, saying to Iran, “You’re next,” and so, Iran had a particular trajectory with regards to Iraq.It changed that in 2011, when US forces, you know, agreed to leave and US policy in Iraq began to change.
So, Iran’s reset with Iraq has – at a – from an Iraqi perspective, hasn’t happened yet, but I think this is the right time for it.And this is an opportunity for this government, or the next government, to really make a play for the, sort of, balanced relations and to ensure also that Iran is no longer as involved in Iraq’s politics with regards to, you know, pushing certain groups to do certain things or even political alliances or choosing particular leaders.All the countries have influence.Turkey does it, Iran does it, the US does it and others.But this is an opportunity for Iraq to at least try to limit some of that with respect to Iran, and I think that’s positive.
But also, I think Iran also recognises, you know, the major changes that have happened over the last 18 months and also that it can no longer afford to run its policy in Iraq purely through the IRGC.This now has to be done as state-to-state relations.I think Foreign Minister Araghchi’s visit to Lebanon, for example, is a case study of that.The fact that they want to engage on a state-to-state level, rather than through, you know, call them proxy groups or, you know, affiliates or whatever.And I think that’s positive, also, for Iraq.So, to me, again, I come back to the potential deal between the – between Iran and the US.If that goes through, I would expect the Iraqi Government, the next Iraqi Government, to be more forceful in the way it tries to limit the influence of countries like Iran, but also, likewise for – you know, it applies to Turkey and the United States.
On the first question, in terms of budget cuts, I mean, it will have an impact on civil society organisations and programmes, which if I’m honest with you, I think the political elite will be happy to see.They’re very nervous when it comes to, you know, funding by the United States for civil society organisations and so on.So, you know, it depends on which angle you look at it from.From Iraqi political lead, fantastic, you know, great to see these cuts, less funding.The White – the – you know, Washington has to talk to us directly, rather than talking to various players, to put pressure on us.But from, you know, local civil society organisations, maybe, you know, people who like to use the, you know, the labels of liberalism and reformist and so on, it is, you know, catastrophic.You know, the fact that Denise was saying, 97% - you know, the level of cuts with regards to Iraq programming from the United States, that is, you know, tremendous.And it’s not like there’s someone stepping up, either the European Union or the UK and so on.
So, I think that will have an impact, but in the grand scheme of things, you know, in terms of the political system, I would have to be brutally honest and say it’s inconsequential.
Dr Renad Mansour
Stephen, you’ve been incredibly busy, I think is the right way of saying it, in the last year or two.Where does Iraq fit in terms of the list of priorities for the UK and where will the focus be, moving forward?
Stephen Hickey
Well, I think it’s a good thing for Iraq that Iraq hasn’t been at the top of the news agenda or at the top of policymakers’ agenda for the Middle East for the last three or four years.And that’s a reflection of the fact that we have seen greater relative stability, and as I say, that’s, in part, credit to the Iraqi Government for tackling some of these issues.
I think for the UK and for most European governments, Iraq, though, remains a really critical partner for stability in the Middle East.We’ve seen what happens when Iraq fails and how that can destabilise the entire region.Of course, most recently with the development of Daesh and the need for the Global Coalition to partner with the Iraqi Government in tackling Daesh.So, I think there is an awareness, a deep awareness and acceptance of Iraq’s importance for regional stability.
My own view is that with Iraq, it’s really important that we take the long view, that we are not just distracted by whatever else is going on in the region at this particular moment in time.And for me, the long-term challenge is to build up the capacity of the state and of state institutions so that they can provide the stability that’s needed.And also, the stronger the Iraqi state and the stronger state institutions, the less opportunity there is for outside actors to interfere, to destabilise and to weaken.And at the same time, we mustn’t forget civil society.
Foreign funding will rise and it will fall.I mean, there are a number of supporters of civil society in Iraq.The UK is a supporter; the European Union is a supporter.So, we will continue to support civil society in Iraq, because I think we know how vibrant Iraqi civil society is.We know how important it is to holding the political system and the political class to account in future years.So, I am optimistic for the future of Iraqi civil society and certainly, the UK will remain committed to Iraq.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you.I’ll open up to questions.We’re also getting questions from online, so I’ll take two from here and then maybe one online.If you can just state your name and affiliation.Yes, please.Yeah, just wait for the microphone.
Safia Hassan
Hello, thank you.My name is Safia Hassan.I’m a Youth Peace Ambassador of Save the Children for Sudan, and I’m also a campaigner for the Sudan war.My question is to Stephen Hickey.I’m curious to know what the British Government’s stance is on the Sudan war and what is actively being done to ensure that humanitarian aid is getting to the refugees in neighbouring countries, despite the recent humanitarian funding cuts that has been done to NGOs.Thank you.
Dr Renad Mansour
Okay, so this is an event on Iraq.It’s a very important question, but there’s – if we can keep the questions to the topic of the day.Yes, please, here.Just – oh, microphone went away. Yes?
Jamil Gussan
Thank you.
Dr Renad Mansour
Jus…
Jamil Gussan
Jam…
Dr Renad Mansour
Oh, okay.
Jamil Gussan
Jamil Gussan, member of Chatham House.My question is directed to Denise.As someone who had worked with Mr Trump previously, can Trump be trusted in the Middle East and if so, why?
Dr Renad Mansour
Okay, can you just give it behind you, as well?We can take…
Jaafar El-Ahmar
Thank you.
Dr Renad Mansour
Can Trump be trusted?
Jaafar El-Ahmar
Jaafar El-Ahmar. My…
Dr Renad Mansour
Your affiliation, please?
Jaafar El-Ahmar
Next Century Foundation.My question is to Denise.Don’t you think the sentiments of the Iraqis in general are affected – deeply affected by the US policies towards the region, especially Palestinian issue where Gaz – on the ongoing war on Gaza and the horrific pictures we see?Just yesterday US vetoed UN Security Council Resolution to stop the war on Gaza.Don’t you think this engulfs the sentiments against United States, as you are talking about it, like, has to distant itself from Iran?Thank you.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you.I’m also going to ask a few of these online questions.The first one from Mehedi Al Shakria, your views on “Ayatollah Sistani’s role and the way forward for Iraq.”And also, a question from Hayder Al-Khoei, a former Fellow at Chatham House, who we all know.The question is, “Iraq is often talked about as a hostage of US-Iran conflict, with no agency, but what role do panellists see that Iraq can play in mediating between the US and Iran?”So, Denise, maybe we begin with you.You had two specific questions.
Denise Natali
Right, I can – I can’t speak to how the Middle East – people of the Middle East can trust President Trump.I can go back and look at what President Trump said he would do if he were to become President and what his agenda is today, right?And that is to en – and so, in that regard, he’s doing pretty much everything he said he was going to do.I don’t see any surprises.That’s why I’m always surprised when people say, “I don’t know, it’s very confusing what President Trump is doing.”It’s very clear, end forever wars, stop killings, wherever it may be, so that we can also tilt and shift our priorities to where they are, which is in the Indo-Pacific, outpacing China, focusing on the border of the United States.
So, negotiating the end of the Israel-Gaza war, I don’t think that’s going to happen overnight, in getting some of those hostages back, but that is continuing.Ending the war in Russia-Ukraine, that’s not going to be easy, that is continuing.So, there hasn’t been a deviation for many of this.When I say the word ‘trust’, to me, that would be is this person saying they’re going to do something and doing something else?And I don’t see that.And again, ensuring that Iran does not have a nuclear bomb and that this is not just about maximum pressure, it’s also about finding alternative ways.Because President Trump has said, “Hey, we want Iran to be a beautiful, successful country, but you just can’t have a bomb.”
So, I don’t – and again, you’re asking me what I think other people should think.I’m just looking at it in a very – in the perspective of is the President doing ex – what he said he was going to do?And the answer is yes.And this is also about, you know, peace through strength, ensuring that there’s a peaceful Middle East, but the United States is not going to be the one meddling in Middle Eastern affairs and telling countries, “This is how you should rule and this is how you should govern.”And President Trump was very clear when he met with – in Saudi Arabia and when he was in his Gulf trip a couple of weeks ago.So – and that was received very positively, that there’s also opportunities for business and growth and development and prosperity.And that is what this administration, in my personal view, is looking for, for the Middle East, a country where people of the Middle East are deciding their futures, not failed nation builders of the United States.
The second gentleman asked a question.I’m not – I’m sorry that I wasn’t really quite clear about…
Dr Renad Mansour
It’s about Gaza and I think the question was…
Denise Natali
So…
Dr Renad Mansour
…around…
Jaafar El-Ahmar
Do you think Iraq…?
Dr Renad Mansour
Yeah, you – yeah.
Denise Natali
I…
Jaafar El-Ahmar
If the US has become – and want…
Dr Renad Mansour
The gap.
Jaafar El-Ahmar
…to distance itself from Iran.But the sentiments of the Iraqis are not against Iran.They are against the US policy…
Dr Renad Mansour
Well, they can…
Jaafar El-Ahmar
…you talked about.
Dr Renad Mansour
…be both, but yeah, okay.So, the question is – I got it.It’s okay if I just quickly – so, basically, how can the US square its defence of Israel with its relationships and…
Denise Natali
Yeah, so…
Dr Renad Mansour
…in Iraq?
Denise Natali
I see what you’re saying, okay.So, again, in my view, the United States is approaching this, as Israel has been and will remain a very important strategic partner of the United States.Iraq is also an important strategic partner of the United States.But approaching the Ira – what has President Trump focused on when I started?It’s “America First.”So, how does this policy affect the United States?When we negotiated to stop bombing the Houthis, right, that was, “You stop attacking us, open the waterways and we will stop it.”We didn’t say you also have to stop attacking Israel.That doesn’t mean Israel’s not a partner, but it was, how is this affecting us?It’s been very clear, and we had this discussion of how this President – how this administration has a bit of a different approach and a much more focused approach on how this is affecting American interests.
So, again, I can’t shift and say the United States is now going to regard Iraq separately.It continues to look at Iraq through the prism of Iran.But this is about ending these wars and doing what it takes, whether that through – be through business deals, whether that be through X, to end these wars, so that the countries in the region themselves can’t – can determine their futures.
Dr Renad Mansour
Hamidreza, can Iraq mediate between Iran and [audio cuts out – 46:13]?
Dr Hamidreza Azizi
And that’s a good question.I mean, the short answer is that I don’t think – I mean, I’m speaking from what I understand from the Iranian policy, I don’t think that Iran is going to give such a big credit to Iraq for – partly for the reason that I mentioned, you know.The, kind of, strong, multi-vector foreign policy pursued by Iraq is not something that Iran wants to see, and mediating such a big issue like Iran-US tensions, that would be, of course, a huge credit to Iraq.But that’s not the whole story.
I mean, to put it briefly, Iran’s approach toward mediation, international mediation overall, not just on the nuclear issue, is very selective, very pragmatic and it is very much case-by-case, determined case-by-case, you know.And on top of that, it depends on whether the actor that is expressing willingness for mediation, first, can it bring something on the table in terms of not just being a venue or a facilitator, but being an actual mediator?And second, whether it is – I mean, whether there are competing interests.Like, if we look at how Iran reacted to the letter sent by – I mean, transferred by UAE, the US letter, they responded through Oman.Why?Again, because they didn’t want to give credit to the UAE.They don’t want to give credit to Saudi Arabia.
They do use these channels in order to lobby the United States not to attack, to tone down its rhetoric, all these things, but that’s a different story.So, for the same reasons Iran doesn’t have – Iraq doesn’t have something to bring on the table, and second, it can be problematic in the longer term, so I don’t think it is meant to be.
Dr Renad Mansour
Okay, thank you.So, moving from convener to mediator is…
Dr Hamidreza Azizi
Correct.
Dr Renad Mansour
…still a challenge.Sajad, I think you’re the perfect person to answer the question on Grand Ayatollah Sistani, given that you’ve just written a big book on the topic, “God’s Man in Iraq.”
Sajad Jiyad
Yeah, I mean, I think as I made clear, Ayatollah’s Sistani’s semi-retired.I don’t expect him to be willingly involved in any, sort of, you know, actions with regards to politics in the future, unless there’s some massive crisis that requires his intervention.But I think more broadly, it’s what he leaves behind, the legacy, and I think there’s several aspects to it.Number one, there is not going to be a theocracy in Iraq.There is an alternative model for having a active religious establishment that does not get involved in politics.And I think that’s important for Iraq, it’s also important for the region and also maybe a point of direction for Iran and maybe the future for Iran, as well.
So, I think that’s an important aspect of legacy.The second, the independence of the religious establishment, from political actors in Iraq, from regional actors, from international actors.The ability of the religious establishment to intervene at important points has been well established now.Whether it was the issue of the constitution and voting and democracy, when the US was, you know, was administering Iraq, or when, for example – the crisis of 2014, when Iraq looked like it was about to collapse.Or at times, for example, when he had to force Prime Ministers to resign because there as a real concern that the political system would break down.
So, that legacy is what established the protection of a re-establish – of the religious establishment and I think the fact that, you know, a very clear rejection of theocracy, to me, these points of legacy will remain.So, whoever succeeds him, whatever happens in the next couple of decades, I think that is probably the most significant thing he could’ve done.
Dr Renad Mansour
Stephen, maybe some reflections on the question of Iraq’s ability to be a mediator in the region and – yeah.
Stephen Hickey
Yeah, I think – I mean, first, Iraq in recent years has had some success as a mediator.I often think that Iraq didn’t get the credit that it should’ve got for helping to mediate tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia that led to the agreement in Beijing.
Dr Renad Mansour
Yeah.
Stephen Hickey
But when it comes to the United States and Iran, I don’t see an obvious opening there, to be very honest.I think it’s quite a crowded field already.There are a number of countries already seeking to at least support and encourage those negotiations.But I think Iraq does have a broader role in encouraging a diplomatic solution between Iran and the United States and also ensuring that militia groups in Iraq are not able to spoil the party and destabilise the situation.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you.Yes, we’ll take some question over the – yeah, these two neighbours next to each other.No, here, here, yes.
Dr Sara Razai
Hi, my name is Dr Sara Razai from the British Institute of International and Comparative Law.Just to – with regards to the comments – the initial comment made by Dr Natali on the realist approach to international relations and how US – the US America First policy.I’d – I, kind of, want to just throw this out to the panel members.Thank you for a very informative talk, but can you please just elaborate on the US commitment to international law and a bit of thoughts from the Ambassador and from the panel members, as well?So, how does international law fit into all of this, and do you see a relevance of international law moving forward?Thank you.
Dr Renad Mansour
Okay, and you can – right here.
Sara Al Khashlok
Hello, I’m Sara Khashlok.I am also from the British Institute of International…
Dr Renad Mansour
Ah.
Sara Al Khashlok
…and Comparative Law.So, my question, kind of, regards to the current and regional state in Iraq.What – specifically Ira – the Central Government in Baghdad has accused the Kurdish Regional Government of “smuggling for oil.”
Dr Renad Mansour
Hmmm.
Sara Al Khashlok
So, there is tensions domestically that I feel is not really addressed.And beyond that, with the fall of Assad, we have the issues of militarisation.In Bush’s administration there was the discussions of withdrawing troops, but now the Iraqi General Government – US Government is calling for stability with remaining troops in Iraq.So, again, there’s the change, the shift…
Dr Renad Mansour
Okay.
Sara Al Khashlok
…in the political climate in the region.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you.
Sara Al Khashlok
Thank you.
Dr Renad Mansour
We have a question here, waiting very patiently.
Ibrahim Aziz
Yes, sir.
Dr Renad Mansour
You have the best seat over here.
Ibrahim Aziz
I upgraded my…
Dr Renad Mansour
Welcome.
Ibrahim Aziz
…view of the questions.And my name is Ibrahim Aziz - 52:59.I am from Salahaddin University, from Kurdistan, from Erbil.Nice to see you, Denise, for a long time.
Denise Natali
Yeah.
Ibrahim Aziz
17 years. You taught me once.Nice to see you.My question for you is you have a failed country, a failed state, which is the – based on the democratic constitutionalism, and this is…
Dr Renad Mansour
Is that the US?
Ibrahim Aziz
No, no, Iraq.
Dr Renad Mansour
Okay, no, I just was…
Ibrahim Aziz
That’s not – you have a failed country, it is Iraqi state, based on that constitutionalism, power sharing.That system has been supported by the US at the beginning and still receiving the support for that kind of system, political system.For how long the United States will support this kind of system?
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you, thank you.I’m going to take two more questions online and then come back to the panel, one from the EU Ambassador to Iraq, Thomas Seiler.“Stabilisation of Iraq is certainly the key objective for the years ahead.Progress is slow, corruption still large.The population is losing patience, despite the positive trend.The EU supports stabilisation as much as possible.Would the panel see a role of the EU in regional co-operation of Iraq with its neighbours?”
And another question from Mervin Kensington.“Given that Iraq has a youth and vibrant population, how do you see the youth’s role in shaping Iraq’s foreign policy?Are there particular aspirations of concerns they express regarding US-Iran relations?”So, Denise, do you want to begin?
Denise Natali
Sure.I will address the – your question.I’m not an – I’m not a Lawyer and I don’t study international law, so I can just give you the – you know, my interpretation of how this administration would approach global agreements or, you know, it is often referred to the “liberal international order” and there’s a big – you know, people are upset that – what’s happening to the liberal international order.That’s one way of looking at it.Some folks in this administration would say, “Well, the liberal international order is a euphemism.It has brought order.The liberal international order is favourable to certain countries of the world, but not to a good deal of other countries in the world.”So, you know, this liberal international order was devised what, after World War II and you have a whole system here that this doesn’t necessarily bring order and it’s not necessarily set in what international law that benefits whom?
So, you know, there’s a counter argument here and that’s the approach, and the second part again, is if you’re looking at an America First agenda, how does this liberal international order that was devised how many decades ago advance American interests?So, you can either have a international order devised that’s set upon people, or you can have a decentralised – or a decentralised form of order, where instead of multilateral agreements, you have bilateral agreements.You can have multilateral organisations, but in this administration, how does this advance US interests?So, that is the way that they would approach it.Who is enforcing international law?And again, I go back to who does this benefit and who does it not benefit?So, that’s the approach to that.
There was another question about Iraq is a ‘failed state’.
Dr Renad Mansour
Failed state.
Denise Natali
Yeah.So, not the United States?
Ibrahim Aziz
No, but…
Dr Renad Mansour
Yeah, because he said you, so I’m just…
Denise Natali
I know.
Dr Renad Mansour
…posing it to you.
Denise Natali
I know, I know, we’ve – no, it’s very…
Dr Renad Mansour
It – but…
Denise Natali
…very good to see…
Dr Renad Mansour
…I get that.
Denise Natali
I used to teach at Salahaddin University years ago, as well.So – but United States, my understanding is the official policy has not changed, that the United States supports a unified, democratic and prosperous Iraq and they will continue to work with the Iraqi Government to do so.Now, you will – I would expect to see a shift in attention.You know, there was – years ago, when I was a – there was a lot of attention, right?We were going to go in and fix Iraq and really hunker down on getting the KR – the KD – the KRG and Baghdad together to develop this consociational system.The – you’re going to see a stepping back from that.
It doesn’t mean that the commitment to Iraq and that the policy is going to change, but a less efforts or investments being made into making sure that we’re building the institutions of the Iraqi state.So that, you know, that doesn’t mean we don’t support it, but how can Iraqis themselves do this, as opposed to the very activist approach that was taken for many, many years?That’s probably the shift that I would see taking, but I don’t see the United States getting on and saying, “Okay, that’s not going to work, so let’s support a independent Kurdistan region,” for example.
Dr Renad Mansour
Alright, and on that, Sajad, if you can…
Denise Natali
I don’t…
Dr Renad Mansour
…come in on the question of Baghdad-Erbil relations.The Prime Minister of the Kurdistan region was recently in Washington and signed several major deals and the Baghdad – so, the Sudani Government replied by saying, “We don’t recognise these legally.”How much do you see this as a problem moving forward?How do you see the relationship moving?
Sajad Jiyad
Yeah.
Dr Renad Mansour
We don’t have that much time and…
Denise Natali
I did want to – yeah.
Sajad Jiyad
Well, I mean, I think the – it’s obvious that this dispute between the Central and – or the Federal and Regional Governments, can be settled legally.I think this – there has to be a political agreement.And, you know, the last political agreement goes back to, I would say, 2005.So, until we have an update of that, I think these issues will persist.Federal Government is always going to push for a centralisation, for control of resources.Regional Government always push for, you know, more rights and the ability to act independently of Federal Government.That’s just normal, happens in other countries, as well.
Of course, Iraq is in a different position, where we don’t have that much experience with settling these disputes.So, it’s gone to the Federal Supreme Court, you know, there’s been international arbitration vis-à-vis exports via Turkey, but to me, it’s very obvious.There needs to be a political settlement, there needs to be an agreement, in order to facilitate, you know, the good relationship between Baghdad and Erbil.Right now we have issues between Erbil and Soleimani and then we have issues between Erbil and Baghdad and then we have issues between Baghdad and Turkey, Baghdad and US and so on.So, all of these, to me, cannot be settled through legal measures.They have to be a political agreement to reach a solution for these.
Dr Renad Mansour
Stephen, maybe over to you on this question, as well.
Stephen Hickey
Yes, so very quickly.I mean, first, on the question about Iraq’s political system, I agree with Denise.It won’t be for the United States or the United Kingdom to determine or influence Iraq’s political system, it’s for Iraqis.And we’re in a different space to where we were 20 years ago and yes, there are problems and then challenges with the current system, but it’s going to need to be Iraqis who are going to need to address those challenges.Yes, with support and technical assistance from the West, but we won’t be leading that.
Second, on the EU question, I mean, personally, I think it’s a fantastic thing that the EU is much more engaged in Iraq than it has been for a long time.We really welcome the EU’s expertise and technical assistance in stabilisation, and I would welcome the EU playing even more of a role in convening regional partners to support Iraq.
And then finally, on international law, I think it’s great to get a question about international law on the Middle East.I think we should be talking more about international law.I think it’s at the heart of so many of the region’s problems, whether it is in Iran, whether it’s disputes within countries, whether it’s applying international law to the different conflicts in the region.And the UK Government strongly supports international law, the ICJ and the ICC and we want to work with our partners to ensure international law is upheld.And I think strongly in all of our interests that we support the rules-based international system and international law.
Dr Renad Mansour
Thank you so much.We’ve run out of time, but I wanted to thank Stephen, Sajad, Hamidreza, Denise, for sharing these – you know, your brilliant contributions and thoughts with us.And thank you to the audience for joining us for this Iraq Initiative event and we look forward to continuing this dialogue and seeing you again soon at Chatham House.Thank you very much and have a good evening.
