Brian M Downing
President Trump enjoys being unpredictable. Consistent with that penchant, he’s ordered a withdrawal of the 2,000 US troops in Syria. They’ve been there several years in support of Kurdish and Sunni forces that pushed ISIL out of most of its holdings.
Reactions have begun. James Mattis is thought to have announced his resignation in part because of the order. Members of congress and foreign policy hands have mostly expressed opposition. Just what will happen if the order to withdraw is carried through?
Retreat from globalism?
The order to leave Syria has stoked concerns that the US is greatly reducing its commitments around the world. Reduction would resonate with some of the president’s statements, before and after election, that questioned ongoing military operations and even long-standing alliances. Concerns were strengthened when a day later he ordered half the US troops to leave Afghanistan.
However, there are no signs of troop reductions or base closings in the Persian Gulf. Deployments in Oman, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Emirates, Qatar, and Bahrain have not been affected. Nor have US troops just east of Syria in Iraq been order to up sticks. In East Asia, the US remains positioned to face down the Chinese military. Exercises along Russia’s western periphery continue. The US still has bases in some 85 countries. Isolationism isn’t looming.
ISIL resurgence
Another concern is that withdrawal will enable ISIL to get back on its feet and retake at least some of the territory it seized in 2013-14. Finish the job, critics say.
But ISIL will never be fully eradicated from Syria or Iraq, at least not in the near future. The group has too many financial supporters and though its prestige has diminished with the losses of Mosul and Reqqa, it still attracts recruits from across the region. Continued US presence in the Middle East will help ISIL recruitment.
Even with every GI out of eastern Syria, the US can continue to surveil the area with satellites and drones. If ISIL troop concentrations are detected, US aircraft stationed in Turkey and the Gulf can respond quickly and forcefully.
The Kurds
Pulling out will, according to some, abandon our Kurdish allies who, after all, were crucial in defeating ISIL. The Kurds and their Sunni allies will be left in the less-than-gentle hands of the Assad regime.
However, the Kurds have skillfully avoided war with Damascus. Early on in the war, Assad offered them autonomy in exchange for their neutrality. The Kurds had no major engagements with government troops and their alliances with rebel forces have been against ISIL.
If Assad were so unwise as to seek to subjugate the Kurds, his gravely depleted army would encounter well-armed, seasoned fighters enjoying the benefits of defensive positions. The same can be said of other invaders. Erdogan threatens to drive into Syria to take on the Kurds but his army would find themselves ensnarled in an endless guerrilla war and the possibility of a clash with Syrian and more importantly, Russian forces.
The view here is that the Syrian Defense Forces (the designation for the Kurdish-Sunni command the US organized) is an unstable coalition of dozens of militias. They have nothing in common save for fighting ISIL and will never find enough common ground to form a viable government.
Protracted support for the Kurdish-Sunni forces, courageous and inspirational though they’ve been, must be considered against the daunting prospect of an endless commitment in a landlocked and unstable part of the Middle East where America’s values are unlikely to take hold and where its people are widely disliked.
© 2018 Brian M Downing
Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who’s written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks as ever to Susan Ganosellis.