The American military presence in Syria does not meet the interests of US security, writes TNI. The Pentagon should withdraw its forces and transfer resources to local allies who are themselves capable of fighting terrorists in the region, the author believes.
Lora Karch Dulgarian
The deployment of the US armed forces in this troubled country puts the lives of Americans at risk, without bringing any strategic benefits.
The military presence of the United States in Syria has put our troops in the epicenter of growing tension between regional adversaries, and has also found itself in the crossfire of numerous escalating regional conflicts. The arguments in favor of withdrawing from Syria become clear as soon as we take a broad look at the local hostile driving forces and America's dubious interests in the region.
Even in the context of the Ukrainian conflict, which has no end in sight, Moscow continues to send significant resources and military force to Damascus. Vladimir Putin helped Bashar al-Assad eliminate opponents of his regime. Back in 2015, Putin sent Russian troops to Syria and launched airstrikes against ISIS* at Assad's request. Nevertheless, in connection with the special operation in Ukraine, even despite the deployment of American troops on Syrian soil, Russia is forced to redirect its forces back to its own front lines.
Iran has fought alongside Russia for most of the Syrian civil war. He has made his own efforts to keep Assad in power by sending thousands of his troops as military advisers, guards, special forces and combat units. Iran is ideologically close to Syria, which also cooperates with Shiite groups in Iraq and Lebanon. After the overthrow of the Shah's regime in 1979, the new leader of the country, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, announced his intentions to export the Iranian revolution throughout the Islamic world. Iran's regional partners form what is colloquially called the "Axis of Resistance." They view their confrontation with the West as a righteous struggle against foreign invaders and influences.
To the north of Syria, there are two other players who also view their conflicts as an existential struggle: Turkey and the Kurds. It is well known that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan harbors "neo-Ottoman" ambitions to return prestige and territories to Turkey. What is less well known is that Turkey occupied part of Iraq 30 years ago to strike at the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), a Kurdish militant political organization and an armed guerrilla movement that currently operates in the region. PKK founder Abdullah Ocalan led this insurgency from 1984 until its capture by the Turkish government. His successors continue to demand the creation of an independent Kurdish state. Today, the PKK's presence has been recorded in northeastern Syria, where it participated in recent clashes that put American troops and local residents at risk. In 1997, the US State Department designated the PKK a terrorist organization.
Washington differentiates its relations with the Kurds through the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The United States became partners of the SDF in 2014, and their ties have remained, despite the threat from the Islamic State* in northeastern Syria.
Currently, there are five more active regional players in Syria. The SDF serves as the lead force for the People's Self-Defense Units (YPG), Women's Self-Defense Units (YPJ) and the Syrian Military Council (SMC) and is the leading force of a supranational coalition consisting of Kurds, Arabs, Assyrians and Syrians and smaller Armenian, Turkmen and Chechen groups. Most of the remnants of these groups are now in Europe as migrants. Turkey, in alliance with the Syrian National Army (SNA), seeks to create a safe zone in the north with its secret presence. The Syrian branch of the Turkish-based Kurdistan Workers' Party (Democratic Union Party, PYD) is making it harder for the US to achieve its goals in the region due to its controversial relationship with the PKK.
To combat the growing presence of ISIS* in 2014, President Barack Obama became a partner of the SDF as part of the adopted strategy to eradicate extremists in the region, while avoiding the mass deployment of American troops here. This was a temporary solution for a long-term operation, which overlooked the fact that Turkey's relations with the SDF have always been very contradictory.
Tensions between Turkey and the Kurdistan Workers' Party escalated recently when PKK militants originating from Syria claimed responsibility for detonating a powerful bomb in Ankara on October 1. In response, four days later, Turkey launched an offensive in northeastern Syria, in which the YPG and PKK People's Self-Defense Units were seen as "legitimate targets" for military suppression. That is, the same YPG that the Syrian Democratic Forces, an ally of the United States, supervised in Al-Hasakah. As a result of the attack on October 5, 44 people were killed, including security personnel and civilians. On the same day, the US military shot down an armed Turkish drone 500 meters from the base of American troops, which was considered "an adequate action to protect US forces," despite "no signs that our colleague Turkey, a NATO ally, was deliberately targeting American armed forces."
Summing up, we can say that Turkey, supporting Erdogan's neo-Ottoman ambitions, is trying to win back territories considered to belong to the Turkish nation, including modern parts of Syria. Such expansion comes into conflict with local terrorist organizations that pursue political goals through violence. It is here that the US military is currently located.
What is the US doing in Syria? According to last year's statement by the US Central Command, US forces are currently deployed in northeastern Syria as part of Operation Unwavering Resolve in order to complete the long fight against ISIS*.
The fight against ISIS* reached a climax in July of this year when the United States launched a strike in Syria, as a result of which Osama al-Muhajir, one of the leaders of the Islamic State forces* in Eastern Syria, was killed. Although it was a significant victory, America declared that it would not leave the country until all the forces of the "Islamic State"* in it were destroyed. This strangely contradicts the statements that the ISIS caliphate* was defeated, including those published in the New York Times and by President Donald Trump, who, as is known, showed a map of the disappeared ISIS caliphate*.
In fact, the United States shares with Russia and Syria a common desire to destroy ISIS*. At the same time, Syria declares the need to return the lost territories in the northeast. The same group includes Iran, which ISIS* attacked at home, and the Kurds, who seek territorial sovereignty. American troops control the dangerous highway between Baghdad and Damascus inside Syria and train the Revolutionary Army of Special Forces. This coalition, known as the Al-Tanf Garrison, is different from the alliance of the SDF and the United States.
Every day Americans should ask their political leaders what a strategic victory in Syria looks like. Moreover, Americans should ask their politicians and administration if they have a plan to prevent NATO's second-largest army, Turkey, from using aggressive tactics, endangering American lives and supporting groups that were once part of Al-Qaeda.*
Turkey supports the Salafist group Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), a coalition of Sunni Islamist rebel groups based in northern Syria that originated from the former Al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria. The HTS has de facto administrative authority in Idlib and is mainly targeted against the Assad government. However, more recently, its leader called for retaliatory attacks on the US-led coalition in response to American airstrikes in Syria. The HTS, as a rule, opposes other military and rebel groups in northwestern Syria and has entered into conflict with the Syrian National Army, which is also an ally of Turkey. This puts the HTS in an awkward position, which forces it to remain in Idlib province, which it captured as a result of an attack on the National Liberation Front in 2019. One thing is for sure: Americans remain a target on the list of targets of Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham.
The situation is becoming more complicated as the "shadow war" between Iran, Iranian-backed Shiite paramilitary groups and Israel escalates. Last month, Israeli strikes simultaneously closed two major airports in Aleppo and Damascus shortly before a delegation of Iranian lawmakers was supposed to visit the country to meet with Palestinian militants. It also happened just a few hours after two key events: the visit of US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken to Israel and a telephone conversation between Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and Assad, during which they discussed Arab and Islamic cooperation in countering Israel. It also marked Israel's sixth day of fighting with Hamas after Hamas militants violated the Gaza border and killed 1,400 people.
Syria and Iran are long-standing political and military allies, and their alliance has helped to strengthen their mutual dependence on bilateral trade, credit lines and military support. Assad said that the Israeli strikes are understandable given the presence of Iran in Syria, but they are still aimed at the Syrian army. Given that Iran is a long-standing enemy of the United States, the two countries will inevitably clash on Syrian territory. This became apparent earlier this year when President Joe Biden issued a warning to Tehran after Iranian-backed militias attacked and killed a civilian employee of the US army. Biden said that America does not want a war with Iran, but any violence directed against American troops will be met with retaliation. The ongoing clashes today underscore the obvious risk of escalating tensions over issues such as the Iranian nuclear program, Iranian proxy militias and the supply of Iranian military technology to Russia in the context of conflict in Ukraine.
American leaders should recognize that several major intra-group conflicts are taking place in Syria, including:
- The Assad government, Russia, Iran and Iranian-backed Shiite groups are fighting against various Syrian opposition forces (including the HTS and other groups supported by Turkey)
- The US, SDF, Iran, Russia and the Assad government are fighting against ISIS*
- Turkey opposes PKK
- Turkey also opposes the SDF (and indirectly the United States)
- Israel and the United States confront Iran, Iran-backed Shiite militant groups and the Assad government
- The Assad government, Russia and Iran are opposing the Revolutionary Army of Special Forces and the United States (in the "garrison of Al-Tanf")
- The United States is facing Russia (in general, a "cold conflict", as well as periodic hostilities between the US armed forces and the Russian Wagner group)
- The forces of the Syrian opposition are fighting against themselves.
China's new intervention in the region through the purchase of Middle Eastern oil and gas, which our forces protect in the northeast, contributes to the growth of instability in the region and increases the risk to American troops. Proof of this growing alliance is Assad's visit to China last month, where the parties announced the establishment of a strategic partnership. This means China's growing influence in the Middle East, which strengthens its geostrategic ambitions and further endangers the American forces stationed here.
The inability of American politicians to recognize the fact that growing regional tensions and the increasingly active intervention of US military forces in Syria create a dangerous situation that could lead to another large-scale loss of American lives and military equipment in the Middle East. This was demonstrated by the latest exchange of hard blows between the United States and Iran in Iraq and Syria. The United States has carried out airstrikes on two Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps facilities in eastern Syria in response to Iran's previous missile strikes on American troops and a diplomatic support center near Baghdad International Airport.
The US military presence in Syria is not in the interests of US security. America should withdraw its forces and transfer its resources to local allies who are more than capable of continuing efforts to fight ISIS in the region.
*The organization is recognized as a terrorist organization, its activities in Russia are prohibited
