President Donald Trump’s order to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria makes no sense from a geopolitical perspective. First, the president’s ostensible rationale — the Islamic State group has been defeated — is patently untrue. The Islamic State remains active, mounting an average of 75 attacks per month in 2018 and has switched tactics after losing its last urban stronghold of Hajin. France, Great Britain and Australia all reject Trump’s claim that the group has been wiped out and pledge to continue fighting the extremists despite the U.S. pull out.
Removing 1,500 U.S. troops in northeastern Syria, no matter the timetable, threatens the fragile stability that has been achieved by the U.S. and allied Syrian Defense Forces (SDF). It will undermine morale within the SDF as well as local confidence in the ability of the SDF to maintain control, emboldening the Islamic State. And it betrays the one reliable American ally — the Kurdish People’s Protection Units — that has borne the brunt of the fighting against the Islamic State.
Second, it creates a vacuum into which the Syrian regime, Russia and Iran will move. Meeting in mid-December in Geneva, the Russian, Turkish and Iranian foreign ministers announced a plan for drawing up a new constitution in Syria. This process reflects the new powerbrokers in Syria. The U.S. was notably absent. By withdrawing military forces, we relinquish our role and diminish future American influence.
Rival powers will move quickly in pursuit of their ambitions once the U.S. withdraws. Turkey has threatened to step up its offensive against the Kurds even before we evacuate our forces. And Russia will be free to establish additional military outposts in Syria with an eye toward solidifying a permanently enhanced regional role.
Third, the withdrawal of troops strengthens the influence of Iran. The Trump administration’s ostensible No. 1 foreign policy goal in the region is Iran containment. The withdrawal of U.S. troops undermines this policy and will ease the movement of Iranian military support into Syria and facilitate Iran’s expansionist aims. It makes no sense to jeopardize the larger goal for the sake of a small public relations victory in proclaiming the Islamic State defeated.
Fourth, the withdrawal of U.S. forces hurts Israel by removing a barrier to the supply by Iran of Hezbollah forces in Syria. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in response to Trump’s decision, announced that Israel will escalate its fight in Syria against Iranian-backed forces and immediately followed up that threat with airstrikes against an ammunition depot outside Damascus, bringing Russian condemnation. While Russia and Israel have engaged in diplomatic discussions about the threat of Hezbollah to Israeli security, the withdrawal of U.S. forces clearly heightens the risks confronting Israel.
In agreeing during a phone conversation with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to pull U.S. troops out of Syria, Trump rejected the advice of American military leaders. In response Secretary of Defense James Mattis resigned in protest, followed by Brett McGurk, the president’s special envoy for the global coalition to counter the Islamic State. The Defense Department, State Department and National Security Council were all united in pressing for a continued U.S. military presence in Syria.
So what’s really behind the move? What does Trump gain by rebuffing allies and advisers alike?
The gains seem personal, petty and illusory. Trump may get Erdogan to back off the Jamal Khashoggi story and stop further leaks about Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, easing White House embarrassment. The president may also have successfully signaled to Russia that he supports their Middle East policy, despite Congress’ continued hostility. And Trump may enjoy the psychic satisfaction of acting in defiance of Mattis, John Bolton and other senior advisers. He may, of course, have other hidden motives for the withdrawal, but from every strategic point of view it certainly seems ill-advised and undermines our long-standing foreign policy interests.
David Bragdon of Portland is a graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and the London School of Economics. He served as a policy adviser to U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon and as press secretary to former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell.