US-backed forces in eastern Syria launched a serious attack on three posts manned by pro-government gunmen and killed at the least 18 fighters in a rare provocation near the border with Iraq.
The attack marked the heaviest clashes in eastern Syria in almost a yrBeginning of August Eight US soldiers stationed in Syria were injured in a drone attack suspected of being carried out by Iran-backed militants.
These incidents underscore a undeniable fact that is commonly forgotten: the United States remains to be energetic in Syria. The Deir ez-Zor Military Council, which is behind the August 12 attack, is an element of the Syrian Democratic Forces – a Kurdish-led coalition that could be a key US partner in Syria. The group and its local allies control a big a part of the territory which were once controlled by the terrorist group Islamic State.
And as of early 2024, the US still had nearly 1,000 military personnel stationed in eastern Syria. Recent reports suggest that, given the growing tensions within the region, additional resources and soldiers have made their way into the country torn by civil war.
The US troops in Syria serve several purposes: Help in stopping the resurgence of the terrorist militia “Islamic State”supporting Washington’s Kurdish allies and curbing the influence of Iran and Russia – each also have a military presence in Syria.
But the prices and risks related to this indefinite U.S. deployment could possibly be significant. A continued presence risks keeping America entangled in a protracted and dear conflict for ever and ever, and will alienate NATO ally Turkey, which views Kurdish groups in Syria as a cross-border threat.
As an authority for Security within the Middle EastI deal with the evolving geopolitical landscape and argue that the United States must fastidiously balance its engagement in Syria against the broader goals of regional stability and its relationships with allies and adversaries alike. Ultimately, whether the United States decides to remain or withdrawThe decision may have profound implications for Syria and for regional and global actors involved within the country's ongoing civil war.
Growing US commitment
The US involvement within the Syrian civil war is a fancy matter. Shortly after the outbreak of the civil war in 2011 imposed sanctions against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and supported opposition factions.
However, the administration has been largely undecided about when, how and to what extent to act against the Assad regime, reflecting partially the American public's growing war-weariness after a decade of engagement in Afghanistan and Iraq. Washington initially had difficulties finding reliable partners on site in Syria.
AP Photo/Darko Bandic
When popular protests escalated right into a full-scale military conflict in 2012, President Barack Obama declared that using Chemical weapons can be a “red line” for the USA The following yr The Syrian military has done just that: Chemical weapons were utilized in an attack on the rebel-held region of Ghouta, killing an estimated 1,500 civilians, including over 400 children.
But the Obama administration hesitated to involve the USA militarily into the conflict due to fears of escalation attributable to increasing Russian and Iranian support for the regime.
The US military operation in Syria began in September 2014, when a US-led coalition including Britain, France, Jordan, Turkey, Canada, Australia and others launched an air strike against the terrorist militia “Islamic State” and the equally radical Al-Nusra Front in Syria.
Following the airstrikes, US troops entered northeastern Syria to support a Syrian Kurdish force called the People's Protection Units (YPG) and later the Syrian Democratic Forces, an umbrella organization made up mostly of Kurds and other ethnic and rebel groups.
The United States didn’t take direct military motion against the Assad regime until April 2017, when the Trump administration launched a missile attack at Shayrat Air Base in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack within the town of Khan Shaykhun in Idlib province.
In December 2018, President Donald Trump said ordered the retreat of the two,000 to 2,500 US ground troops in Syria, because he believed that the coalition's operations against the terrorist militia “Islamic State” had been largely successful and that the US presence in eastern Syria was unnecessary.
But as an alternative of an entire withdrawal, the US announced an emergency force would stay indefinitely.
Military presence today
From 2024, around 900 US soldiers and an undisclosed variety of contractors deployed in Syriabased on the Defense Department. Most U.S. forces are stationed in northeastern Syria to support the Syrian Democratic Forces. Some support the Free Syrian Army within the al-Tanf garrison in southeastern Syria, along a transit route between Iraq and Syria utilized by each Islamic State fighters and Iran-backed militias.
Getty Images
But US military support for Kurdish groups in Syria has angered NATO ally Turkey, which views the YPG as an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), which is assessed as a terrorist organization.
The Trump administration prioritizes Turkey’s security concerns ordered all US forces to withdraw from Rojava in early October 2019 against a Turkish invasion of the region. But this step also damaged the US alliance with the Syrian Democratic Forces.
To appease their Kurdish allies, relocated to Eastern Syriaand are increasing their presence within the governorates of al-Hasakah and Deir ez-Zor – two regions of Syria controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces which might be wealthy in oil and gas.
What an American withdrawal could mean
The US military presence currently serves three purposes.
First, their presence in northeastern Syria acts as a deterrent to military incursions by the Syrian regime or Turkey into the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES). Should US troops withdraw, the Syrian Democratic Forces, which act because the AANES's de facto military, would need to negotiate the region's autonomy with Turkey and the Syrian regime, each of which have made their opposition to Kurdish autonomy very clear.
Recent attempts at rapprochement between Turkey and Syria have also fuelled Kurdish fears that an entire US withdrawal would shift the balance of power in divided Syria to their drawback and endanger their survival.
Second, the US presence in southeastern Syria puts pressure on neighboring Iran, whose influence the US desires to limit within the region. The US presence also serves as a counterweight to Russian influence and ambitions in Syria and the Middle East. In particular, Russian air strikes in 2015 The attacks on opposition-controlled areas of Aleppo and the bombing of hospitals were crucial in helping Assad regain territory and stay in power.
Third: The United States and its local partners According to reports, around 5,000 Islamic State fighters and 50,000 indoctrinated members of the family. If these prisoners were released by any authority, the group could possibly be re-established and grow. The US underscores the threat by working with the Syrian Democratic Forces foiled a serious prison break by fighters of the terrorist group Islamic State in early 2022.
Nevertheless, a continued US presence in Syria is just not certain. In 2023, Republicans within the House of Representatives tried to force the Biden administration to withdraw the remaining troops. They failed. But Trump, who’s the Republican presidential candidate again in 2024, has made it clear that he no role for the USA in “endless wars.”
In the meantime, a US troop withdrawal, no matter the results, is a priority. The Biden administration withdrew all American troops from Afghanistan in 2021 and is formally transitioning to an advisory role in Iraq.
But for now, the U.S. military presence in Syria stays, emblematic of the larger challenges facing American foreign policy within the Middle East. The decision to remain or withdraw is a strategic one that can reverberate throughout the region.
image credit : theconversation.com