• The Pentagon confirmed that U.S. and coalition forces formally concluded Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq on September 30, with the final personnel and equipment departing Erbil Air Base.
  • President Trump announced the withdrawal on Truth Social, but the timetable was negotiated under the Biden administration in 2024.
  • The coalition headquarters is shifting to Jordan, while U.S. forces continue counterterrorism operations in Syria; Iraqi officials declared a holiday to mark the sovereignty milestone.

A Long-Awaited Exit

The last American forces have left Iraq, ending a military presence that began with the 2003 invasion. On September 30, the Pentagon said U.S. and coalition forces formally concluded Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq, with the final personnel and equipment departing Erbil Air Base. The withdrawal follows a 2024 U.S.-Iraq agreement and a phased drawdown; roughly 1,500 U.S. personnel had remained in the Kurdistan Region after forces withdrew from most of the country earlier in 2026.

President Trump announced the departure on Truth Social, saying, "I am pleased to announce, the last American forces are leaving Iraq." The White House did not respond to requests for comment on the specifics of the withdrawal. While Trump took credit for the final departure, the timetable itself was negotiated under the Biden administration in 2024 and then implemented by the current administration.

Shifting Security Architecture

The coalition headquarters and relevant anti-ISIS activity are shifting to Jordan, while U.S. forces continue counterterrorism operations in Syria. The Pentagon says it will retain targeted training and intelligence support for Iraqi partners. Iraqi officials publicly framed the day as a sovereignty milestone, holding ceremonies and declaring a holiday. The government says the country is transitioning from a coalition framework to a more equal bilateral defense relationship with Washington.

"This is a historic day for Iraq," said Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi in a televised address. "We are taking full responsibility for our security." However, Kurdish leaders are particularly concerned about losing a U.S. security backstop. They fear exposure to attacks by Iran or Iran-backed militias, though Baghdad says it will not leave the region undefended and is considering air-defense purchases from South Korea, Turkey, and the United States.

Economic and Political Implications

Iraq is a major oil producer, so a stable security transition matters to global energy markets even though the withdrawal itself does not directly change oil supply policy. A deterioration in internal security, militia activity, or regional confrontation involving Iran could raise risk premiums for Iraqi infrastructure, trade routes, and investment. Iraq remains economically intertwined with both the United States and Iran. Iraqi oil revenue has long been deposited in accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, giving Washington significant leverage over Iraq's currency and financial system—an issue cited by militia figures who argue that military departure alone does not end U.S. influence.

The immediate economic effect is likely limited; the larger question is whether Iraq can preserve enough domestic security to support investment, reconstruction, tourism, and oil-sector operations. Iraq's cities have seen relative calm and visible building activity, but many Iraqis remain priced out of new housing and consumer development.

Politically, the move is potent because it ends a U.S. military presence that began with the 2003 invasion, while shifting security responsibility decisively to Iraq. Tehran and aligned Iraqi armed groups see the departure as a strategic victory. Iran has long called for U.S. forces to leave Iraq and has deep influence through political allies and armed groups. Analysts warn those groups could gain greater leverage over Iraqi institutions without a Western military presence.

The Iraqi government is under U.S. pressure to disarm Iran-backed paramilitaries operating outside state control. Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi had committed to a September 30 target but requested an extension to next June; powerful groups have resisted surrendering weapons while claiming Iraq remains vulnerable. In Baghdad and Najaf, Iraqi forces paraded and supporters of pro-Iranian militias celebrated. Some demonstrators characterized the departure as a victory over U.S. occupation.

At the same time, Iraqis and security analysts voiced concern over a potential security vacuum. The core fear is that ISIS sleeper cells could exploit gaps, or that armed militias could increase their influence while remaining outside full state command. Iraq's experience in 2011–14 is central to this debate. After the earlier U.S. withdrawal in 2011, ISIS captured roughly one-third of the country in 2014 after major Iraqi army units collapsed; U.S. troops returned at Baghdad's request to support the fight against ISIS.

The human legacy remains substantial. More than 4,400 U.S. military deaths and a conservative Iraq Body Count estimate of at least 200,000 Iraqi civilian deaths have been recorded since the 2003 invasion and ensuing conflict.

Iraq has separately begun discussing the closure or drawdown of Turkish military sites inside the country, including the Bashiqa-Zilkan camp near Mosul. This means the U.S. exit does not by itself end all foreign military presence or influence in Iraq.

What's Next

In the near term, Iraq will test whether its army, federal forces, and Kurdish Peshmerga can coordinate effectively against ISIS cells, especially in disputed northern territories. Militia disarmament and state control over weapons will be a decisive indicator of whether the withdrawal strengthens Iraqi sovereignty or enables non-state armed groups. The transition is likely to leave Washington engaged through training, intelligence-sharing, diplomacy, financial leverage, and operations based in neighboring Jordan rather than through a standing force in Iraq.

The best-case scenario is a durable Iraqi-led security system, reduced political friction over foreign troops, and a normalized U.S.-Iraq defense partnership. The principal downside risks are renewed ISIS insurgency, intensified Iran-aligned militia influence, attacks in the Kurdistan Region, and Iraq becoming a more exposed arena for broader U.S.-Iran or Iran-Israel tensions. Experts cited by Reuters emphasize that the critical unknown is whether Iraq has a credible post-coalition security plan. The outcome will be judged less by the symbolism of troop departure than by whether public safety and political stability hold in the years ahead.

Correction: An earlier version of this article misstated the number of U.S. personnel remaining in the Kurdistan Region. It was approximately 1,500, not 2,500.