American forces are on track to leave Iraq entirely by the end of September, closing out a military presence that began with the 2003 invasion, but counterterrorism experts warn ISIS is quietly rebuilding to fill the vacuum.

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi met with Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of U.S. Central Command, and afterward declared September 30 the "fixed and final date for ending the military mission of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS in Iraq and completing the departure of its forces." A U.S. official separately confirmed the timeline, telling Newsmax that Washington expects to finish the pullout by that date.

The drawdown is already underway. Two Iraqi Kurdish officials, speaking anonymously because they were not authorized to comment publicly, said U.S. troops and military equipment began leaving Erbil roughly three weeks ago. The U.S. had maintained its last foothold in the semi-autonomous northern Kurdish region after pulling out of bases across the rest of Iraq last year.

Twenty-three years and 170,000 troops reduced to a handshake and a deadline

At its peak in 2007, the American counterinsurgency effort in Iraq involved more than 170,000 troops. The last combat forces departed in December 2011, but the rise of the Islamic State in 2014, when the group seized vast territory across Iraq and Syria, pulled American forces back in at Baghdad's request.

After ISIS lost its territorial hold, coalition military operations formally ended in 2021. Still, roughly 2,500 U.S. troops stayed behind for training and counter-ISIS operations. Washington and Baghdad agreed in September 2024 to wind down that residual mission, setting the stage for the withdrawal now underway.

By the time al-Zaidi announced the September 30 deadline during a White House visit, roughly 2,000 American troops remained. The Iraqi prime minister framed the departure as a transition, not an abandonment.

"On the 30th of September, the US forces will be out of Iraq, while these companies will be inside Iraq."

Al-Zaidi made the remark through a translator in the Oval Office, signaling that private contractors or commercial arrangements would continue even after uniformed personnel leave.

Iraqi government spokesman Haider Al Aboudi offered a similar message, telling reporters that "coordination is ongoing with the international coalition and work is underway to inventory the sites and hand them over to the competent Iraqi forces." He added that "the work is proceeding at an organised pace towards completing this file on September 30, and these sites will be in the custody of Iraqi security agencies."

Al Aboudi's statement marked the first official acknowledgment from either Washington or Baghdad that the withdrawal plan is advancing on schedule. But the rebranding matters: officials on both sides have described the post-withdrawal arrangement not as a clean break but as a "security partnership." American military assets may not vanish entirely, the nature of what remains is simply being reframed.

ISIS fighter ranks reportedly surging in Syria as U.S. prepares to leave

The withdrawal fulfills a longstanding Trump administration commitment to end open-ended military deployments in the Middle East. Trump also pulled U.S. troops out of Syria earlier this year and has forged a partnership with Syria's new president, Ahmed al-Sharaa. The broader posture shift reflects a president who has reshaped American engagement in the region around leverage and deal-making rather than permanent troop deployments.

But the security picture is not clean. Counterterrorism researchers say ISIS is using the transition period to rebuild. Dr. Omar Mohammed, a researcher at George Washington University's Program on Extremism, warned Fox News that "ISIS is waiting actively in the gaps, as it historically always has."

Mohammed pointed to the fall of Mosul in 2014 as a cautionary parallel:

"Mosul did not fall in 2014 because ISIS was strong. It fell because everything that would have detected its strength, presence, attention, honest reporting from the ground, had been withdrawn in the years before."

The numbers back up the concern. In neighboring Syria, ISIS fighter ranks have reportedly surged from roughly 2,000 to as many as 10,000 since the collapse of Bashar Assad's government in 2024. Whether that growth spills into Iraq after American forces leave is the question no official has answered publicly.

The U.S. official who confirmed the withdrawal timeline declined to say how many troops currently remain in Iraq or where they would be redeployed. That silence leaves a gap in public accountability, the American people are being told the mission is ending but not where the personnel and equipment are going next.

Iran-backed militias refuse to disarm despite Baghdad's deadline

Al-Zaidi has tried to pair the American departure with a domestic crackdown, setting the same September 30 deadline for non-state armed groups inside Iraq to surrender their weapons. His argument: once foreign troops leave, militias have no justification to carry arms.

Some of those groups disagree. Iran-backed militias, part of the Popular Mobilization Forces, which number roughly 238,000 members and receive billions in Iraqi government funding, have said they have no intention of disarming. Some PMF factions operate outside direct Iraqi government control, making the prime minister's ultimatum difficult to enforce even on paper.

That dynamic puts Baghdad in a bind. The Iraqi security forces, including the Kurdish Peshmerga, are being asked to lead the fight against ISIS remnants while simultaneously managing heavily armed, Iranian-funded paramilitaries that answer to Tehran more than to the Iraqi parliament. The unnamed U.S. official offered reassurance on the first challenge, saying Iraqi forces "will lead the fight against terrorists in Iraq," but said nothing about the second.

The threat from Iran-backed groups is not theoretical. U.S. bases in the northern Kurdish region have regularly come under attack, and the broader confrontation between Washington and Tehran has only intensified. Trump has warned Iran directly that the "clock is ticking" on diplomatic options, and he rejected Tehran's nuclear proposal as unacceptable earlier this year.

Ending the mission is the right call, but eyes-open execution matters

The case for leaving is straightforward. ISIS lost its territory years ago. Iraqi forces have been trained, equipped, and funded. American troops should not serve as a permanent garrison in a country that has asked them to leave. Trump promised to end open-ended deployments, and he is delivering.

The case for vigilance is equally straightforward. The 2011 withdrawal created a vacuum that ISIS filled within three years. The intelligence warnings are specific. The militia problem is unresolved. And Baghdad's track record of controlling its own territory without outside help is, to put it generously, mixed.

A Just The News report confirmed the withdrawal marks the end of a military presence stretching back more than two decades, a presence that cost thousands of American lives and trillions of taxpayer dollars. The question now is whether the "security partnership" that replaces it will include the intelligence-sharing, surveillance capacity, and rapid-response options needed to prevent a repeat of 2014.

No official on either side has answered that question in public.

Keeping promises matters. So does keeping watch. The troops are coming home, and the country they're leaving behind is already being circled by the same forces that made the last withdrawal a catastrophe.