……
For a start, it claims that ISIS is near defeat and implies that this objective has always been the sole focus of the Trump administration’s military deployment in Syria. That is simply untrue.
After all, the Trump administration has previously identified four other key conditions that would guide a U.S. withdrawal from Syria, these being: the constraint of Iranian influence, the removal of Bashar al-Assad from power, the disarmament of Syria’s chemical weapons program, and the return of displaced peoples.
Yes, Trump has the authority as commander in chief to order U.S. forces out of Syria as he pleases. But the White House contention that this withdrawal fits with Trump’s existing strategy is patently — by the administration’s previous words and conduct — false. Indeed, it’s at best a massive shift in policy distinct even from the counter-ISIS focus that Trump claims he is so focused on.
Consider that ISIS is reconstituting in eastern Syria in the vacuum left by a redeployment of Kurdish forces to resist a Turkish military incursion in northwestern Syria.
But the real whopper in the White House statement is its assertion that “we expect countries in the region and beyond, plus the United Nations, to work towards peace and ensure that ISIS never re-emerges.” While it’s true that the Sunni monarchies led by Saudi Arabia have increased their functional support for U.S. counter-terrorism efforts in Syria and across the region (and true that Trump deserves credit for earning their increased support), it’s false to assume that they will fill the gap of a U.S. withdrawal. They will not.
These nations rely on the U.S. government for consolidated leadership, and in the absence of that leadership, they will use hardline Salafi-Jihadist groups to act as proxies against Iran. The problem is that these proxies are uncontrollable and elements of groups such as Tahrir al-Sham and Ahrar al-Sham are close to Al Qaeda. That’s not exactly a recipe for counter-terrorism efficacy.
……..
Of course, that speaks to what this statement ultimately is: a very poor rationale for a dangerous shift in U.S. policy. Why has the shift occurred? Perhaps because Trump has simply decided he can’t be bothered with his Syria related briefings, or perhaps because Putin asked Trump to withdraw from Syria during the two leaders’ recent phone call.
……..
- Discussion
-
USG has never had a coherent policy on Syria's fratricide, but Trump's about to make it even worse, per @TomRtweets https://t.co/ziVenitXmB
— John Schindler (@20committee) April 5, 2018
” or perhaps because Putin asked Trump to withdraw from Syria during the two leaders’ recent phone call.”
The most obvious reason is usually the correct one.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.