Brandon J. Weichert
A recent report from Howard Altman at the defense news site The War Zone indicates that the Trump administration is contemplating returning half of all U.S. troops currently serving in Syria to the United States.
If one listens to conventional commentary and analysis of this proposal, one can expect to be greeted with a sea of emotions and handwringing. The U.S. position in Syria—which has persisted more or less unaltered since the 2016 fight with the Islamic State (ISIS), despite major changes on the ground—has become something of a sacred cow in the halls of the Pentagon and Congress.
Critics have condemned the move, accusing Trump of abandoning America’s erstwhile Kurdish allies in Eastern Syria (where the bulk of American forces have been stationed). Others are quietly lamenting losing access to the oil and gas fields around the eastern city of Deir ez-Zor. Supporters of the move have criticized the U.S. presence in Syria as a “forever war” with no end in sight and no way to disentangle the United States, and lauded Trump’s decision to draw down American forces, however difficult conditions on the ground may be for such a move.
America’s Decision to Pull Out of Syria Is All About Iran
What no one seems to understand is that, regardless of one’s opinion on the U.S. role in Syria—and indeed, there is an abundance of evidence to suggest that the military’s continued presence in Syria is legally dubious—the Trump administration is drawing down U.S. troops from the country in order to reduce the amount of targets for Iran’s ballistic missiles.
No comments:
Post a Comment