"Iraq is not occupied, but there are foreign forces on its soil, which is different"
About this Quote
The subtext is sovereignty management. In the mid-2000s, Talabani had to hold together an impossible coalition: Iraqi factions suspicious of American power, an electorate humiliated by invasion, and an international security architecture that still depended on U.S.-led troops. Calling it an “occupation” would hand insurgents a rallying cry and paint the government as illegitimate. Denying foreign troops would insult the public and invite ridicule. So he splits the difference with semantics: occupation implies coercion and domination; “forces on its soil” implies permission, temporariness, a relationship framed as assistance rather than rule.
Why it works, rhetorically, is also why it feels brittle. The sentence is a tightrope between legalism and humiliation, between what a state needs to say to survive and what people know in their bones. It’s diplomacy as damage control, insisting on dignity in a landscape that keeps disproving it.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
| Cite |
Citation Formats
APA Style (7th ed.)
Talabani, Jalal. (2026, January 16). Iraq is not occupied, but there are foreign forces on its soil, which is different. FixQuotes. https://fixquotes.com/quotes/iraq-is-not-occupied-but-there-are-foreign-forces-112123/
Chicago Style
Talabani, Jalal. "Iraq is not occupied, but there are foreign forces on its soil, which is different." FixQuotes. January 16, 2026. https://fixquotes.com/quotes/iraq-is-not-occupied-but-there-are-foreign-forces-112123/.
MLA Style (9th ed.)
"Iraq is not occupied, but there are foreign forces on its soil, which is different." FixQuotes, 16 Jan. 2026, https://fixquotes.com/quotes/iraq-is-not-occupied-but-there-are-foreign-forces-112123/. Accessed 21 Feb. 2026.



