The researcher and political analyst in the Iraqi Center for Strategic Studies, Yahya al-Kubaisi, revealed that US President Trump does not have a clear strategy for working in Iraq, indicating that his attitude toward Iran is related to the Iranian nuclear dossier more than its influence in the region.

Al-Kubaisi added, in an interview with Arabs Today, that the features of Trump's strategy in Iraq heading towards an attempt to join Iraq to US's new alliance and linking Iranian influence in the region's with its nuclear file.

He sees that America realized that the Iranian role rises in the region with the transformation of their militias in Iraq to a real power, after the formation of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), which used al-Sistani's fatwa to legitimize the activity on the ground.

He pointed out that America began a new polarization in the region to curtail the role of Iran, noting that the United States was involved in the occupation of Iraq, and that Iran has imposed itself strongly in Iraq after the United States wanted to get out of it.

Concerning the possibility of removing the current Islamic political class (Shiite) from power in Iraq and the rise of secular liberalism as an alternative, Kubaisi said that the presence of the liberal forces is limited between the political forces in Iraq.

The political analyst added that the US's new vision sees an organic link between the Iranian policies in the region and the Sunni terrorism, represented in its most violent forms in ISIS, pointing out that it is not easy to deal with the Iranian encroachment in Iraq.

Kubaisi stressed that Iran managed to build its popular bases between the Shiites of Iraq, stressing that the dangerous thing is that these bases have become armed and stronger than the Iraqi army, in reference to PMF.

President Donald Trump's administration is weighing a deployment of up to 1,000 American soldiers to Kuwait to serve as a reserve force in the fight against Islamic State as U.S.-backed fighters accelerate the offensive in Syria and Iraq.

Proponents of the option, which has not been previously reported, said it would provide U.S. commanders on the ground greater flexibility to quickly respond to unforeseen opportunities and challenges on the battlefield.