In April I wrote a lengthy post about Syria. Syria was in the news at the time because
the United States led coalition forces to bomb runways which intelligence indicated had
been used by Syrian forces to deliver chemical weapons on its own people.
1
According to my research, the US had been involved in Syria's civil war,
supporting forces opposed to President al-Assad — most notably the Kurds which occupied
the northern third of the country at the time, plus Rebel and Turkish forces in pockets
scattered across the lands to the south, under Russia-supported Syrian military control.
ISIS was operating in both major areas, and provided plausible cover for our forces and
others aligned with us to operate in the region.
The Announcement
Much to everyone's surprise, President Trump announced that the US had beaten
ISIS, and so we were withrdawing from Syria immediately.
News reports suggest the decision was the result of a call with Turkish President Recep
Tayyip Erdogan last week. Erdogan had been threatening to launch a military operation
U.S.-backed Kurdish rebels.
2 (Recall that Turkey shares its southern border with Syria, and
that the area the Kurds controlled as of April stretched along almost the entire length of
that border.)
The rationale for the withdrawal appears to simply be that the ISIS threat has declined
significantly — to the point where the terrorists control only 1% of the territory it had
previously. Despite repeated attempts by Secretary of Defense Gen. Mattis, Secretary of
State Mike Pompeo, and national security advisor John Bolton to convince the president to
find some middle ground, the president's position remained fixed. News of the decision
was announced by the White House on Wednesday morning.
Fallout
The Washington Post quoted one military analyst as saying a US withdrawal
will make relations with Iran more difficult, because the US will be viewed as weak.
Indeed, the same articla includes a quote from a top Iranian military official:
"The Americans have come to the conclusion that they can exercise power neither in Iraq
and Syria nor in the entire region," said Brig. Gen. Mohammad Pakpour, the commander of
ground forces of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, at a news conference in Tehran."
3
The same reporting suggests the US' departure presents opportunity for other forces
to wrest control of the northern territory — from Iran to the east or from Turkey to
the North. An Iranian incursion could impact Israel and Iraq — some analysts believe
Iran might pressure the US to leave Iraq for the same reason as it's leaving Syria —
while the threat of Turkish aggression has forced the Syrian Kurds to hope for a deal with
Assad.
Secretary of Defense Resigns
Meanwhile here at home, likely frustrated by the president's unwillingness to discuss
US troop withdrawl from Syria, Secretary of Defense Mattis has tendered his resignation
to the White House. 4
The letter reads in part, "My views on treating allies with respect and also being
clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and
informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. . . . Because you have the
right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these
and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position."
Mattis' resignation alarmed Republicans and Democrats alike on Capitol Hill. "To
[Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.,] the letter 'makes it abundantly clear that we are headed
towards a series of grave policy errors which will endanger our nation, damage our
alliances & empower our adversaries.' He also pressed for more oversight of the
executive branch by Congress."
5
The Washsington Post characterized Congress' response this way:
"[F]or many members of Congress — Republicans and Democrats — and the U.S.-led coalition
against the Islamic State, it was an unmitigated disaster. None was officially informed
in advance of Trump’s announcement, made on Twitter early Wednesday. Most warned that
Turkey, whose troops were poised on the border waiting for U.S. forces to leave, would
slaughter U.S. Kurdish allies. Overall, they said, it was nothing less than a capitulation
to the other two powers on the ground in Syria — Russia and Iran."
6
US Envoy McGurk Resigns
Moments ago, The Washington Post broke the story that US Envoy to the Anti-ISIS
Coalition Brett McGurk has resigned "in protest of President Trump's decision to abruptly
withdraw U.S. troops from Syria." The move was confirmed by a State Department official and
is effective December 31st.
7
Russian Reaction
On news of the US plan to withdraw, President Putin remarked, "Let’s not forget that the
troops' presence has been illegitimate. It hasn’t been vetted by the United Nations Security
Council," Putin said. "A military contingent can only be present on the Security Council's
approval or by the Syrian government's invitation. There was neither, so if the United
States decided to withdraw its contingent they did the right thing."
8
My Conclusion
In my opinion, President Trump's decision to immediately withdraw from Syria is two
things: first, it is consistent with his "America First" platform. Apparently, if the US
is not realizing a direct profit from our presence there, it's time to move on. Second,
it is clearly expected to destabilize what would traditionally have been termed "US
interests" in the region.
Except, we apparently don't care about that anymore. Please pardon my "French" here,
but the Syrian Kurds are going to get completely fucked when we leave. Gen. Mattis
understands this to the point where he even included it in his resignation letter. The
reporting I read suggests they're either going to be killed by invasion from the north
or by invasion from the east. (And by the way, good luck negotiating with al-Assad. He'll
likely shower them with sarin before the others come for them. Or he'll wait until the
others invade, then make them all a Chlorine cocktail.)
What goes around comes around, Mr. President. What your advisors have been trying to
tell you over the past few days is simply that not everything we do in the Middle East
should necessarily be transactional. Allies and treaties aren't necessarily transactional.
And leaving the Kurds hanging is bad business. Or is it that you're sending a message
to the rest of the world that we want our protection money?
Being in Syria — perhaps illegally, as President Putin maintains — seems to have been
good for Iraq and good for Israel (plus it gave us a strategic presence southwest of
Russia.) When it comes time for something we want or need from either, will our abrupt
departure from Syria come back to bite?