The U.S. assassination of Qassem Suleimani, the mastermind of Tehran’s foreign military operations, in Baghdad last week, suddenly made Iraq the front line in tensions between the United States and Iran. Barham Salih, a British-educated Kurd who spent years representing his party in Washington, was elected President of Iraq in 2018. Salih has been increasingly concerned about Iraq’s vulnerability since the Trump Administration blamed Iran for an air strike that damaged more than a dozen strategic oil installations in Saudi Arabia, in September. I’ve known Salih for more than a quarter century, including when he was in Washington and later when he became the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq. We began a conversation in September, at the U.N. General Assembly, about the danger that Iraq will become a war zone—again—only this time between the United States and Iran. I checked in with him again on Sunday to update our conversation.

Iraq has struggled to balance ties with both Washington and Tehran since the U.S. invasion, in 2003. “The United States is our ally. Iran is our neighbor,” Salih told me. The U.S. attack on Suleimani—which was carried out without informing the government in Baghdad—challenged Iraqi sovereignty and triggered unprecedented political fury at the United States within the country. On Sunday, the parliament of Iraq voted to require the government to “end any foreign presence on Iraqi soil and prevent the use of Iraqi airspace, soil and water for any reason” by foreign troops. The United States has more than five thousand troops in Iraq; it leads a multinational coalition that is still fighting ISIS and training the Iraqi military. The vote in the parliament, which has three hundred and twenty-eight seats, was 170–0. It was carried largely by Shiite lawmakers; many Sunnis and Kurds did not vote. The measure will not go into force until signed by Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, but Mahdi drafted its language. And, in any case, he has been only a caretaker of the government since he resigned, in November, after weeks of protests.

Over the weekend, Iran vowed major retaliation for Suleimani’s death, which led the United States to suspend diplomatic and military operations in Iraq. On Sunday, the U.S.-led coalition announced that it was at least temporarily halting operations against ISIS. The U.S. Embassy also suspended consular operations. The State Department urged all Americans to leave Iraq. The interview with Salih about current dangers has been edited for length and clarity.

How worried are you about a conflict—openly or covertly—between Iran and the United States after the death of Qassem Suleimani?

The dynamics are dangerous—and I have to be deeply concerned that Iraq will be embroiled in yet another cycle of conflict. Iraq and its hard-won stability in the aftermath of the war on ISIS could unravel. This would have terrible consequences for Iraq and the region at large. We must do all that is possible to assert restraint and walk back from the brink. When we spoke in September, our focus was economic regeneration, job creation, and governance reforms. Then, in October, protests swept the country demanding reforms, justice, and affirming the sovereignty of Iraq. Now we are talking about the challenge of averting war and conflict. In this context, and out of these dangerous dynamics, Iraq’s sovereignty and stability should become the common interest upon which the regional and international actors agree on a way forward.

What lessons did Iraq learn from its own eight-year war with Iran?

War is devastating. There is absolutely no winner in a war. The human cost has been monumental for Iraq. Certainly, for Iran, too. But, also, the lesson is never start a war because you never know how it ends. And one other important lesson: Iraq should never serve as a gate for others. And Iraq should not fight a war, paid for by Iraqi resources and Iraqi lives, for others.

What specific lessons did you learn about fighting Iran particularly? If you were looking back on it now, thinking about the current crisis in the Gulf, what were the lessons?

The last thing the Middle East needs is a terrible war, especially as the last war, against ISIS, is yet to be definitively over. Starting a war may be the easiest of decisions, but the region cannot afford, cannot tolerate, another conflict. Too much is at stake.

You know that eight-year conflict intimately, and you know what fighting Iran is like. They don’t give up easily.

The Middle East has gone through cycles of violence, has literally not known peace and security for a very, very long time. The onset of the Iraq-Iran War was the end of the regional order in the Middle East. For the last forty years, Iraq has been a main domain of conflicts across the Middle East. Everyone had a proxy to fight this war on Iraqi soil, essentially using Iraqi resources and Iraqi lives. I do not want to see my country embroiled in yet another conflict, and I do not want to see another war undermining the hard-won stability that Iraq has achieved. The success in Iraq is real but very fragile. I fear that it cannot survive another conflict in the Middle East.

Barham Salih, the President of Iraq, addressing the United Nations General Assembly, in New York City, in September, 2019. Photograph by Drew Angerer / Getty

Iraq can’t survive? Why?

Iraq will be very badly affected by yet another conflict, which could well undermine the hard-won stability that we have achieved after years of conflict, and certainly after the last war, against ISIS. If we are not careful, we may go beyond the brink, God help us all, in the neighborhood and internationally, as well.

You have a senseless conflict in Yemen, with untold humanitarian suffering. You have an unfinished war and conflict in Syria. You have a stable order in Iraq that is still fragile. And you have the security of the Gulf very much in question. You have remnants of ISIS that must not be underestimated. You have the greatest issue of ISIS families and detainees, and you’re talking about the monumental legal, moral, security problems. And you have Idlib [a province in Syria], with Nusra and Hurras ad-Deen and many other extremist groups.

The military defeat against ISIS was a significant success, no doubt. But terrorism is yet to be defeated definitively, is yet to be eradicated. There are many terrorist and extremist groups spawning across the Middle East. And, again, the last war is yet to be finished, and we’re talking about starting a new war? It’s just madness. We need to be careful. Cool heads to prevail. Restraint. Go back to the negotiating table and get this talked out.

Economically, what would the impact be?

We are now focussing on launching a reconstruction fund for infrastructure and to attract foreign direct investment to Iraq. In a situation of conflict, I cannot imagine foreign investment coming to the Middle East.

We have legions of unemployed youth across the neighborhood, and we need to expand our economies, create job opportunities for our youth. If this is true in the United States, when your leaders talk about jobs, jobs, jobs, it’s definitely far truer across the Middle East—legions of unemployed youth who can fall prey to extremism and destabilize not only our societies but global security. This has to be the challenge.