US geopolitical maneuvering reinforces clientelism in Iraq: Trump endorses Baghdad’s PM pick, sidelining sovereignty amid regional proxy tensions
Original framing: “Trump gives his blessing to Iraq's new pick for prime minister and invites al-Zaidi to Washington - AP News” — AP News (via Google News)
The 1920 Iraqi Revolt against British colonial rule set a precedent for resistance to foreign-imposed governance, a history systematically erased in modern US media. The CIA’s 1963 coup against Qasim—later cited by Rumsfeld as a ‘successful’ regime change—demonstrates how US interventions create the very instability they claim to resolve. Post-2003, the US dismantled Iraq’s state institutions (e.g., de-Ba’athification) while installing a sectarian quota system, ensuring perpetual fragmentation and external leverage.
The AP’s framing of Trump’s ‘blessing’ as a diplomatic triumph obscures how US interventions since 2003 have systematically dismantled Iraq’s sovereignty, replacing it with a clientelist state where elites survive by playing foreign patrons against each other.
This pattern mirrors historical precedents from Latin America to Southeast Asia, where ‘stability’ is conflated with obedience to external powers, while indigenous frameworks of communal governance (e.g., Yazidi *qewl*, Kurdish *demokratik konfederalizm*) are sidelined in favor of secular state narratives. The Tishreen protests and diaspora communities reveal a deeper Iraqi resistance to this model, one that demands not just a new PM but a reimagining of governance itself—whether through regional non-alignment, indigenous federalism, or climate-driven cooperation. Yet the structural incentives for US and Iranian interference remain, as both actors benefit from Iraq’s fragmentation. The only path forward lies in empowering marginalized voices to redefine sovereignty on their own terms, lest Iraq remain a chessboard for geopolitical games.