Why Iran and ISIS are Present in Iraqi PM Sudani’s Visit to Washington

What is the connection between Israel's position in U.S. domestic politics following the Gaza conflict and the upcoming visit of Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani to Washington in mid-April? The answer is Iran. What about the future of U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria during discussions between the U.S. and Iraq? The answer is that ISIS is a crucial factor, not just Iranian-backed militias in Iraq. How do the Muslim Brotherhood figure in light of Hamas’s stance in Gaza and within the context of its peculiar relationship with Hezbollah in Lebanon, whose strategic decision-making is subordinate to Iran's Revolutionary Guard? Part of the answer lies in Ismail Haniyeh’s visit to Tehran and secret U.S.-Iranian meetings in Oman, which are tackling the war between Israel and Hamas, de-escalation in Lebanon and Syria, and the Houthis' activities against international navigation in the Red Sea. And within all these issues lies the fate of the U.S. presidential elections in the race between Democratic President Joe Biden and former Republican President Donald Trump.

Starting with Iraq, Republican senators, led by Tom Cotton, have criticized al-Sudan's visit, deeming it untimely and suggesting that hosting him sends a message of appeasement to Iran rather than supporting Israel against Hamas. The White House had clarified that discussions would cover the U.S. military's role in Iraq and the commitment to defeating ISIS permanently.

The Biden administration fully realizes the extent of Iranian influence in Iraq and Tehran's use of Iraqi militias to strike American interests inside Iraq and in Syria, in addition to coordinating with Hezbollah as part of what is called the “Unity of Resistance Fronts”. It also understands that Mohammed Shia a-Sudani is trying to navigate carefully in the murky waters of Iraq to keep the relationship with Iran non-explosive, with Turkey non-hostile, and with the United States far from confrontation, but rather moving towards a strong bilateral security partnership as part of the so-called "strategic framework" for that relationship.

The recent terrorist attack carried out by ISIS Khorasan prompted the Biden administration to emphasize the continuing threat of the terror group in Iraq: A statement by U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Alina Romanowski said that ISIS's attack in Russia underscores the need to continue the "military alliance" with Iraq to fully defeat the organization - because ISIS has not ended yet and because it is necessary to defeat it everywhere.

Officially, Iraq says that the jihadist organization no longer poses a threat in Iraq. Iranian-backed factions did not initially comment on Romanowski's statements. Instead, leaders within the Coordination Framework adopted striking and contrasting positions departing from the escalation rhetoric, echoing what former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said about Iraq’s need for continued U.S. intelligence cooperation in Iraq and training and support.

The Coordination Framework is seeking American concessions during Sudan's visit to Biden, including lifting sanctions on Iraqi individuals and banks, in exchange for the factions' truce with the Americans. The recent truce remains in place following an agreement brokered by the commander of the Quds Force, Ismail Qaani, last month. This agreement, facilitated through talks in Oman, led to the release of frozen Iranian funds in exchange for reducing tensions in some ‘resistance’ fronts.

Some Republicans have voiced objections to the Biden administration's relationship with both Iraq and Iran, viewing it as a form of appeasement toward Iran. They are concerned about the implications for Iranian nuclear ambitions, the Iran-Israel relationship, and the consequences of American rapprochement with Iran amid a notable rift between the Biden administration and Benjamin Netanyahu's government in Israel.

However, these concerns do not diminish the seriousness of the threat posed by ISIS, particularly following the recent attack in Moscow, which resulted in the deaths of 140 people and prompted heightened security alerts in European capitals. The United States is reassessing the ISIS threat through its involvement in Iraq.

There are also mounting fears due to technological advancements and the use of technology by ISIS and other terrorist organizations to launch cyber-attacks on social media and internet infrastructure. Some even argue that artificial intelligence will be used to "revive" Osama bin Laden and reintroduce him, in image and sound, to the global scene to garner support for his ideas, as if he were still alive.

These organizations, such as ISIS-Khorasan, will no doubt draw inspiration from the experiences of the Yemeni Houthis and their successes in disrupting navigation in the Red Sea. They will also exploit the tragedy in Gaza to reassert themselves on the global stage. The Houthis have financially benefited and will continue to do so significantly due to their threats to Western ships and tankers through piracy. Moreover, they have struck silent deals with China and Russia, pledging not to target their ships but only Western vessels.

The capabilities of the Houthis are certainly not strictly homegrown but are backed by Iranian technology and intelligence, nothing that Iran excels in this field and is among the top five countries globally in cybersecurity. It is evident that the Biden team in secret negotiations with the Iranian team in Oman is certainly examining the Red Sea and the activities of the Houthis in it, but they are also delving into the Iraq file, along with the ongoing relationship between Tehran and Hamas leaders, as well as between Tehran and Hezbollah leaders.

Intentional ambiguity is part of Iran's strategy, especially in a time when it's betting on an administration that may not remain in the White House after the elections. Iran Favors President Biden because it has ties with his team, just as it had good relations with former President Barack Obama and his team - some of whom transitioned to the Biden administration. However, Tehran's leaders are not putting all their eggs in one basket; they understand the language of Donald Trump, whose main gambit is the art of the deal if successful, and the stick of sanctions if not.

At this critical juncture, Tehran's leaders are wary of provoking the United States into military action against them or falling into the Israeli trap of provocation, which could lead them into war through Hezbollah in Lebanon. They aim to maintain their influence in Iraq without resorting to overt bargaining but through implicit understandings. While Iranian leaders claim to prioritize the Palestinian cause in their calculations, they have made it clear they are not prepared to align with Hamas's agenda and timing. They await the outcome of ongoing negotiations mediated by Arab parties with Hamas, refraining from direct intervention to either support or hinder them. Additionally, they are closely monitoring the developments in U.S.-Israeli relations, avoiding baseless speculation as they are too astute and precise for speculative narratives.

The Biden administration is eager to end the Gaza conflict as it has become a detrimental factor in electoral considerations: Firstly, due to the Democrats' dissatisfaction with Netanyahu's disrespect towards the U.S. President and his determination to invade Rafah regardless of the human cost or U.S. opposition. Secondly, the Gaza conflict opens the door to accusations of weakness against what Americans label as terrorism by Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and their primary sponsor, Iran.

Moreover, the end of Joe Biden's term with two open-ended conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine would provide ammunition for Donald Trump's political agenda. Additionally, Israel and its lobby will not hesitate to crush Hamas and its leadership, as well as its military infrastructure, if the Biden administration fails to provide viable alternatives to Israel’s Rafah invasion plan which is advocated by the military establishment and enjoys popular support in Israel, and which Israel claims includes protecting civilians.

As the American presidential election campaigns progress, Iran will seek to maintain an air of mystery even as it figures more as a player. The upcoming visit of the Iraqi Prime Minister will shed light on Iran, its roles, proxies, militias, and nuclear activities.

Likewise, if the conflict in Gaza escalates, Iran will be in the spotlight. Thus, it has worked to persuade Hezbollah to scale back its military activities, which could invite Israeli retaliations that would not only be costly for Lebanon but also for Hezbollah and Iran itself.

The resurgence of ISIS is not merely a passing concern. However, ISIS is not the sole actor asserting itself on the international stage and influencing U.S. policies. Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood, in all its iterations, remain significant players due to their ideology and actions.