Withdrawing troops may be easing America’s military footprint abroad, but U.S. policy changes are also redrawing the power balance in the Middle East.
According to Fox News, the Biden administration’s decision to reduce U.S. military forces in Iraq follows a similar move made shortly before by the Trump administration in Syria, alarming analysts who warn this strategy will maximize Iran’s growing dominance in both nations.
This week, the White House confirmed a drawdown of American troops currently stationed in Iraq, citing diminished threats from ISIS and a broader aim to eventually end prolonged military engagements in the region. This update arrives just six months after a similar reduction order was implemented in Syria during the Trump administration, as both administrations seek to bring decades-long U.S. military commitments to a close.
Security experts caution that these withdrawals will create a significant power vacuum, enabling Iran to expand a regional network that critics have dubbed a “shadow empire.” This influence is deeply rooted in political, economic, and military sectors across both Iraq and Syria and has been decades in the making.
Iran’s Strategic Roots and Cross-Border Operations
Iran has long pursued regional influence, but its operations in Syria and Iraq have become more advanced and deeply integrated in recent years. Its involvement in Syria dates back several decades, according to Gregg Roman of the Middle East Forum, underscoring that its alliance with Damascus began in the 1980s and gradually evolved into a far-reaching enterprise.
This influence intensified after the Syrian civil war erupted, allowing Iran to entrench itself militarily through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and foreign Shia militias. These forces, which include combatants from Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, and Syria, have helped Iran reshape the country’s civil and security infrastructure, according to a report by the Middle East Forum. The report revealed that Iran has constructed tunnels, weapons depots, and administrative systems in Syria while shaping social institutions to reflect Iranian interests. The IRGC also leads an international command structure, drawing officers from several nations and operating largely independent of any central Syrian authority.
Post-Assad Syria Faces Growing Iranian Pressure
Since the sudden fall of the Assad government in December 2024—following an unexpected takeover of Damascus by the Sunni paramilitary group Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham—Iranian-backed factions have attempted to exploit the leadership vacuum. Despite its former designation as a terrorist group by the U.S., HST has failed to unify the post-Assad government, sparking new layers of instability.
The fragmented political environment presents a golden opportunity for Tehran. Without broad coordination from regional groups such as the Kurds in the northeast or the Druze in the southwest, Iran appears poised to further expand its role throughout a weakened Syria. This mirrors previous Iranian strategies seen in Afghanistan and Iraq, where the nation backed militia groups or non-state actors to secure influence after U.S. military disengagements. These tactics are viewed by analysts as part of a long-term geopolitical blueprint.
Iran’s Role in Iraq’s Military and Government Structures
For more than two decades, Iran has been cultivating networks through Iraqi Shia militias opposed to the U.S. presence in the region. These groups fall primarily under the Popular Mobilization Forces, or PMF—nominally part of the Iraqi military but heavily guided by Tehran.
Bill Roggio, a terrorism analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, observed that Iran has developed a comprehensive strategy blending military capabilities with political and economic leverage. He notes proximity plays a crucial role in Iran’s strategy, increasing Tehran’s ability to exert sustained influence. Roggio added that the militias directed by Iran control a significant portion of the Iraqi parliament and have accumulated economic power as well. According to him, the ultimate aim is to transform the PMF into an Iraqi equivalent of Iran’s IRGC, forming what he calls a parallel armed force aligned with Iran rather than Baghdad.
Concerns Over U.S. Strategy and Global Ramifications
Roggio and other analysts argue that U.S. withdrawal decisions often underestimate Iran’s broad, long-term ambitions. He criticized the United States for lacking clarity in its Middle East strategy, asking whether current troop deployments are designed to counter ISIS or to obstruct Iranian advances.
He also highlighted that the U.S. frequently evaluates foreign policy through short election cycles, while Iran sets objectives that span decades. This mismatch in strategic outlook, he warns, enables Tehran to outmaneuver Washington time and again. “The Iranians are patient,” Roggio said. “They’re operating on timeframes of decades and generations. And we aren't.”
A Replicable Model for Regional Takeover
The Middle East Forum’s investigative report stressed the global significance of Iran’s playbook in Syria and Iraq. The ability to create self-sustaining parallel structures—military, governmental, and societal—despite foreign opposition and internal conflict could serve as a model for future operations elsewhere across the Middle East. From large-scale tunnel networks and cross-border militias to influence over parliamentary decision-making, Iran’s deeply embedded tactics have become increasingly efficient. These efforts forge an unofficial empire of aligned actors that simultaneously weaken U.S. influence and embolden Tehran’s role on the global stage.
In essence, the growing concern among experts is not simply the presence of Iranian troops or the withdrawal of American forces. It is the slow transformation of national governments into entities increasingly shaped, sustained, and often controlled by one of the region’s most consistent and strategic powers.
