MODERATOR: Welcome to today's background call previewing the announcement on a transition plan for Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq. I'm [Moderator] and I am honored to be joined by our speakers, [Senior Administration Official] and [Senior Defense Official]. We are now ready to begin. I will start with a few ground rules.
For starters, the speakers will identify themselves as they each speak. Please understand the names on the board may not represent the speakers themselves. This is an on-background call. Information may be attributed to a Senior Administration Official and a Senior Defense Official. We ask that the content of the call be embargoed until 3:15 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. We will now begin with opening remarks by [Senior Administration Official]. [Senior Administration Official], you now have the floor.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Ten years ago this month, at the request of the Government of Iraq to confront the urgent threat posed by ISIS, the United States began working with allies and partners by providing military operations, advisors, and support to Iraq through the Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve, otherwise known CJTF-OIR. This coalition, with more than 30 contributing nations, has made historic achievements including the territorial defeat of ISIS in Iraq in 2017 and in Syria in 2019. The ten-year mark of the D-ISIS Global Coalition is a natural time to assess the coalition's military mission in Iraq.
Over the last year, there have been ongoing discussions between the United States and Iraq under the Higher Military Commission, or HMC, and the U.S.-Iraq Joint Security Cooperation Dialogue, JSCD, to determine how and when the military mission would evolve based on security conditions in Iraq. In these discussions, important factors were reviewed, such as the threat posed by ISIS, the operational environment in Iraq, and the Iraqi Security Forces capability.
Together, the United States and Iraq are setting a timeline to transition the military mission to an enduring bilateral security relationship. This transition would be in accordance with Iraq's constitution and the 2008 U.S.-Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement.
This is exactly what President Biden and Prime Minister Sudani pledged to do when they met in Washington back in April. Since then, we've been working with the Iraqis and with our coalition partners to determine what that transition will look like and when that transition would happen. These discussions will continue beyond the announcement this - today - to shape the transition and the future of the U.S.-Iraq bilateral security relationship.
So today, we plan to announce that the United States and Iraq have decided on a two-phase transition plan for CJTF-OIR operations in Iraq. In the first phase, we'll be concluding the global coalition's military mission in Iraq - the Combined Joint Task Force-Inherent Resolve - and ending the presence of coalition forces in certain locations in Iraq as mutually determined. The transition period in Iraq will begin this September and end one year, concluding at the end of September 2025.
The U.S. and Iraq recognize that ISIS is - in Syria remains a significant threat to the region and are committed to continued working to ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS. So therefore, in the second phase to prevent the return of the ISIS terrorist threat from northeast Syria, the U.S. and the Government of Iraq have reached an understanding to allow the coalition to continue to support counter-ISIS operations in Syria from Iraq throughout the second phase of the transition until at least September 2026, subject to conditions on the ground and obviously consultations among future political leaders of Iraq, the United States, and coalition members. So to be clear, while CJTF military mission in Iraq will end by September 2025, the coalition's military mission operating in Syria will continue.
I'd like to emphasize that this is an evolution of the military mission in Iraq. We are moving towards the type of productive, long-term security relationship the United States has with partners around the world. To be clear, the United States is not withdrawing from Iraq. This announcement comes after a decade of success from extraordinary international cooperation between coalition partners, Iraqi Security Forces, and the U.S. military in territorially defeating ISIS in the core region of Iraq and Syria.
However, while ISIS is down, they are not out. ISIS continues to pose a real threat, although diminished, in Iraq and the wider region. Together, the U.S., Iraq, and the coalition remain committed to the defeat - to defeat the core ISIS threat. We plan to continue focusing on that important task we head into the future. We will continue to work with the Iraqi Security Forces, including the Kurdish Peshmerga forces, to build up their capabilities and ensure an Iraqi-led enduring defeat of ISIS.
This transition is not the end of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. The coalition will continue to support long-term efforts against ISIS in the region and around the globe. And the Government of Iraq, as a critical member of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS and in recognition of this threat, will continue to consult with the United States and members of the coalition on the nature and severity of the ISIS threat.
On September 30th, Monday, in Washington, D.C., Secretary Blinken will host the Ministerial of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, where Iraq will play a lead role. This ministerial demonstrates the coalition's continued recognition of the persistent threat ISIS still poses and their sustained commitment to diminishing ISIS's capabilities around the world.
So finally, the United States is committed to ongoing efforts to support a stable, secure, and sovereign Iraq that benefits the people of Iraq and the broader region. This transition well suits the United States to continue to pursue our longer-term goals in Iraq and in the region.
Thank you.
MODERATOR: Thank you, [Senior Administration Official]. I'll now turn to [Senior Defense Official]. [Senior Defense Official], you now have the floor.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Thank you, and good morning, everyone. I won't add a great deal to [Senior Administration Official]'s very thorough explanation of what we're announcing today, but I'll just make a few points to amplify a couple of things.
CJTF-OIR's mandate was always to support and not replace the Iraqi Security Forces - and in Syria, the Syrian Democratic Forces - our local partners in their fight against ISIS. And since it was deployed, the coalition forces in 2014, this coalition, with more than 30 troop-contributing nations, has had historic achievements in helping those partnered forces in Iraq and Syria retake more than 42,000 square miles of territory that was once held by ISIS. And that has produced the territorial defeat of ISIS in Iraq in 2017 and in Syria in 2019, liberating nearly 8 million people, including vulnerable religious and ethnic minorities, from its genocidal reign.
Today, the coalition's local security partners are better able to ensure that ISIS can never again cause havoc in the region, thanks to the support of the coalition, which has trained and equipped more than 225,000 security and police personnel and provided more than $4 billion worth of military equipment.
So as [Senior Administration Official] said, starting a year ago at the U.S.-Iraq Joint Security Cooperation Dialogue in August in Washington, our governments agreed on how to conduct the discussions on how and when the military mission of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS in Iraq would evolve on a conditions-based timeline according to the factors that [Senior Administration Official] mentioned - the threat of ISIS, the operational environment, and the capability of the Iraqi Security Forces.
The Higher Military Commission, which was the military-to-military dialogue to conduct those assessments, launched in January in 2024 and has continued on - throughout this year. In April, Prime Minister Sudani of Iraq conducted a historic visit to Washington, D.C., met with President Biden, Secretary Austin, Secretary Blinken. And together all expressed a shared commitment to the Higher Military Commission process to determine - help the leaders determine when and how the military mission of the Global Coalition in Iraq would end and transition in an orderly manner to enduring bilateral security partnerships, in accordance with Iraq's constitution and the U.S.-Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement.
U.S. forces remain in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi Government. The HMC was intended to inform discussions to responsibly transition CJTF-OIR in Iraq, and our Iraqi partners have assured us of their commitment towards working together to shape the future of the U.S.-Iraq bilateral security relationship and ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS.
So that dialogue between military professionals has continued and will continue, even beyond today's announcement. The process is complex, and we'll work together to ensure every part of that transition is orderly and responsible in the weeks and months ahead.
[Senior Administration Official] made the important distinction between CJTF-OIR, which is the coalition's military operation in Iraq and Syria since 2014, and the broader 87-member Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, so I won't repeat that. But the coalition does incredibly important work not just in the Middle East, but in other regions, like in Africa, like in Afghanistan, where ISIS activities are of significant concern to the coalition's members. And our agreement with Iraq to maintain a presence in Iraq, of the coalition to conduct counter-ISIS operations in Syria through at least September 2026 is evidence of Iraq's continued participation in that coalition as a member in good standing.
On the U.S.-Iraq bilateral security partnership, we - the Government of Iraq, has expressed continued willingness and interest to solidify and expand that partnership, including on counterterrorism cooperation. That - the details of that will take time to emerge, but it will be building on what already exists with an advise and assist mission of U.S. forces to help the Iraqi Security Forces conduct counter-ISIS missions, the continued support for Iraqi acquisition of U.S.-origin military equipment, joint trainings, and participation in other regional forums as well. And we're very confident that we have a good partner in Iraq, in the Government of Iraq, in continuing to build and deepen that security partnership.
Finally, I'll just say that this process of preparing for this transition has been done and will continue to be done in close partnership and consultation with other contributing nations to CJTF-OIR. We've previewed plans, we've taken feedback, we've supported strategic discussions of these objectives and are helping ensure that other countries that are transitioning to their bilateral security partnerships to Iraq are doing so in a coordinated fashion with us. NATO Mission Iraq will continue its institutional capacity building mission. We've received great feedback from the Government of Iraq who - whose officials say they appreciate the added value that NMI - NATO Mission Iraq - brings. And our team is working hard to ensure that the planning and logistical details are in place to ensure NMI can continue its very important work.
And so with that, I think I'll conclude, and we will be happy to take any questions.
MODERATOR: Thank you, [Senior Defense Official]. We are grateful for the remarks on this historic transition. It is now time to open the call to questions from the press. It is our hope to take as many questions as we can. We ask that you please be concise for the benefit of our colleagues. Please use the "raise your hand" button to be called upon and unmute yourself.
The first question I will hand over to Nadia Bilbassy-Charters from Al Arabiya. Nadia, you have the floor.
QUESTION: Thank you so much. Can you hear me?
MODERATOR: Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Okay, great. I'm just wondering, in addition to everything that was said, how do you assess the danger that U.S. troops - of course, from the pro-Iran militias inside Iraq - do you see them - that's been - the Iraqi Government has been able to control them? Do you see - as we go along and see this escalation between Israel and Lebanon and continuation with the war in Gaza, do you see a danger that it's linked to that - not just to ISIS, obviously, but to these groups inside Iraq? Thank you.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: This is —
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: (Off-mike.)
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Oh, sorry, go ahead.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, go ahead - go ahead, [Senior Administration Official].
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: All right. Well, first let me just say that on the broader issue of these militias and their attacks, the Government of Iraq has the responsibility to protect U.S. and coalition servicemembers from attacks by Iran-aligned militias. And attacks against the U.S. and the coalition servicemembers, as well as Iraq's security service members, undermine Iraq's sovereignty and security and stability, and discourages foreign investment and advancing its economic development. We've made it clear also that we'll not hesitate to take all appropriate actions to protect our personnel. And so this is - this is essentially our - where we come out on the concerns over the militias. Over.
MODERATOR: Thank you, [Senior Administration Official]. Our next question is to Jared Szuba from Al-Monitor. Jared, you now have the floor.
QUESTION: Hi, all. Thank you for doing this. First, for [Senior Defense Official], sir, you mentioned a potentially expanding counterterrorism bilateral relationship with the ISF in the future. We saw sort of sweeping ground combined operations in the Anbar desert, I think it was last month, against senior ISIS positions, senior ISIS figures. How do you assess the readiness of the Iraqi Security Forces? Are they able to keep up that sort of up tempo against ISIS in the rural stretches, and would combined operations like that continue bilaterally with the United States after the coalition has transitioned? Thanks.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Thanks for the question. So through the advise and assist mission of the coalition during these past years, we've seen very significant improvement in the Iraqi Security Forces' capability. You've mentioned some recent counter-ISIS activity that the coalition and partnership with the ISF has conducted. We've had several successful operations during this period and believe that it demonstrates that improved capability by the ISF. We have since 2012, with the support of U.S. Congress, provided more than 300 - $3.5 billion to build, sustain, train, equip, and professionalize Iraq Security Forces. We intend to stay connected in an advise-and-assist capacity with the counterterrorism services, the joint operations command, the air force, and the Kurdish Peshmerga, all of whom play a very important role in conducting counter-ISIS missions.
During the next year, while the coalition - until the coalition military mission in Iraq concludes, those types of partnered activities can certainly continue with the coalition. Beyond that, we will continue to discuss with Iraq in the bilateral context how we can continue to advise and assist and enable them in conducting necessary counter-ISIS operations beyond that period. Over.
MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Our next question goes to Jeff Schogol from Task and Purpose. Jeff, you now have the floor.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. I'm hoping either official can say how many U.S. troops are leaving. Right now there are approximately 2,500 in Iraq. How many will leave as part of phase one? How many will leave as part of phase two? If you can't give an exact number, can you say most U.S. troops are leaving and that a small contingent will remain? Thank you.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Hi, this is [Senior Defense Official]. So we're not going to speak to our plans concerning specific base locations or troop numbers. We have been and will continue to be in active dialogue with the Government of Iraq about how our bilateral relationship will evolve, which will certainly include changes to our force posture and troop numbers. For now, that remains in a planning process and under review. And until we are able to make those - until those are decisions that are reached, we won't be providing specific information on numbers and locations regarding something that hasn't been decided. Beyond U.S. forces, we'd refer you to our coalition partners for information about their defense personnel presence in Iraq and their bilateral security relations with Iraq going forward. Over.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question goes to Natasha Bertrand from CNN. Natasha, you now have the floor.
QUESTION: Hi, thank you so much. So my question was along the lines of what Jeff had asked, but I'm just wondering if you can more clearly state what the transition actually is, especially because it seems like the troop numbers, as you just said, still haven't actually been decided; the changes to the force posture are still under discussion. You said that you're ending the presence of coalition forces in certain locations in Iraq. So, I mean, it sounds a lot like this is kind of a transition in name only, if you're kind of a layman's and not tracking this in as much detail as, for example, you folks are. So can you explain more clearly kind of what the transition actually is, particularly because you're saying that the coalition is going to support counter-ISIS ops, is going to continue to advise and assist the Iraqi Security Forces? So what actually is concretely changing? Thanks.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, again, a lot of those details are still in a planning process, under review internally, and in discussions with Iraq. But I think the context I want to offer to - as a way to think about this is that we're transitioning OIR because the mission environment has changed. We talked about the vast territorial sweep of ISIS and the large population that lived under its brutal rule. ISIS no longer controls that kind of territory. It no longer has that kind of population under its command. It has fighters, it has cells, it has a presence and that needs continued effort to ensure its enduring defeat, but that mission - that evolution of the threat means it's time to evolve this mission.
And so after this 10-year period of the advise, assist, and enable mission, we've made the determination that it's time to do that transition. But that doesn't mean every detail has been - has been worked out. The fact that we have agreed on the timetables and the phases that [Senior Administration Official] outlined tells us very clearly that we have a good partner in the Government of Iraq in determining how that transition will unfold.
Regarding the details, we'll have more to say on that as those decisions are ready to be announced.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question is for Courtney Kube from NBC News. Courtney, please unmute yourself. You have the floor.
QUESTION: Hi, thanks. Just following on Jeff and Natasha - so, I mean, [Senior Defense Official], you said yourself that this was the decision that was agreed to by President Biden and Prime Minister Sudani in April, so six months ago. And yet there's still no clarity on exactly what this will look like practically for the U.S. military there. So is it possible - would the Status of Forces Agreement change here, or will the total number of troops in the country allowable - or whatever it is, permitted there under Status of Forces, is that going to stay the same? We're just trying to get a sense if this is going to be a transition where, yes, the coalition presence decreases but it's possible in - that the bilateral mission ends with the U.S. still maintaining potentially the same number of troops there.
I mean - and also for Defense official - the senior Defense official, I'm a little unclear because the train, advise, and enable mission, yes, I that for the coalition is ending, as you said, but then you also said as part of a bilateral there still could be a train and advise mission. So I think this is something - this is a plan that we've been hearing about for months now and, again, as you said, President Biden has talked about publicly for month now. So help us understand exactly what this means practically on the ground for the - the U.S. military presence and mission, how it will change, if at all. Thanks.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So let me go back to what my colleague said, that at the moment this is a transition and that's what a transition means. We're going from a transition - we're going from a state where we have an understanding of - transitioning from the military mission of the coalition in Iraq to bilateral relationships where we will be able to define in greater detail and build on what we already have. At the moment this is a - continued discussions that we've been having for the past year that range anywhere from what is the - as I said, what is the - what's the situation with ISIS, what is the environment we're working in, and what are the capabilities?
But this is an ongoing conversation which we have agreed with the Government of Iraq to continue, and I go back to what my colleague said. We're not in a position right now to begin to either speculate or discuss exactly where we're going to end up on all of it. It is an ongoing conversation, it's a transition, and again, I just want to foot-stomp the fact that is not a withdrawal. This is a transition. It's a transition from a coalition military mission to an expanded U.S.-Iraqi bilateral security relationship. Those members of the coalition that are going - that want to remain or continue to talk security relationship, that is entirely up to them, and I would encourage you to go ahead and speak with them. Thank you.
MODERATOR: Thank you. We have time for two last questions. I'll call on Dan Lamothe from The Washington Post. Dan, you have the floor.
QUESTION: Thanks very much. And - in the past year we've seen continued attacks on U.S. troops, including three soldiers that were killed just over the border in Jordan. We've also seen continued strikes on occasion in Iraq that have caused outcry there. In light of that, as you are continuing this conversation, did you make or get any kind of assurances in conversations with the Iraqi Government in order to continue? Thanks.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, I'll just indicate that the Government of Iraq has international and bilateral obligations to protect foreign military and diplomatic personnel who are present in Iraq. And of course, both the coalition and then in our bilateral context we are there by the invitation of the Iraqi Government. We, of course, at the same time reserve our inherent right of self-defense when our troops have come under attack. We have demonstrated, including after the attack you referenced at Tower 22 in Jordan, that we will not hesitate to take all appropriate action to protect our personnel. We have done so. If required, we will do so.
And we - but we did definitely count on our Iraqi colleagues to fulfill their responsibilities. Prime Minister Sudani has on a number of occasions condemned attacks on foreign forces in Iraq at Iraq's invitation, recognizing that that's not only an attack on those forces but an attack on Iraqi sovereignty as well. So those principles all continue to apply as we go through this transition. Over.
MODERATOR: Thank you. And to our last question, I'd like to hand the floor over to Phil Stewart from Reuters. Phil, you have the floor.
QUESTION: Hey, there. Yeah, just to - it's the last question but I just need to clarify here. [Senior Administration Official], you've said twice now that the U.S. is not withdrawing from Iraq, and so I just want to clarify there's - no troops are withdrawing. Is that correct?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: What I said that we're not withdrawing - what my colleague said and what I'll repeat again is that as we go through this transition into a bilateral relationship, there could very well be changes in the numbers, changes in the activities that we do, align ourselves better with the bilateral interest that we have supporting the capabilities of the Iraqi Security Forces. A lot of that is going to be an ongoing discussion, and we will see where that takes us.
And - but this is a conversation, this is a discussion that both sides have agreed to and are committed to doing for the sake of strengthening and deepening the bilateral relationship. And that is going to be going on also in the context of the time period that we laid out and certainly continue given that we have had a longstanding bilateral relationship with the Iraqis now for quite a while. Thank you.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Seeing as how we have a little bit of time left on the clock, I'm going to ask for one more question. This is our last question. It's from Tom Bowman from NPR. Tom, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor.
Tom Bowman, you can unmute yourself and you have the floor for your question.
QUESTION: Again, I guess we're all asking the same question: number of troops. Can we assume that the - you can't talk about the locations in Iraq. Can we assume the troops will continue - U.S. troops will continue to be up in Erbil to - for the anti-ISIS mission in Syria? I know you don't talk about location, but would that be one of the locations in the future U.S. would - troops will remain?
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Again, we aren't going to speak to specific locations. I think you can assume that the - there will be some changes to our footprint, but decisions have not been finalized. Just to speak about Erbil, we do of course have a significant presence there and a strong partnership with the Kurdish Regional Government that is the host under the Iraqi federal government as well, and so that's been a very productive location from which to do our counter-ISIS operations. But again, we're - we'll hold on describing future deployments until those decisions have been made.
MODERATOR: Thank you, everyone. On behalf of the U.S. Department of State, I'd like to express our gratitude to both of our ambassadors for giving their time today and to the members of the press for joining us. As a reminder, the call is on background, and information be attributed to senior administration official or a senior Defense official. We ask the contents of the call be embargoed until 3:15 Eastern time today. This concludes our background call. Thank you again for joining us.
