Running Head: PULLOUT OF US FORCES FROM SYRIA 1
PULLOUT OF US FORCES FROM SYRIA 9
Pullout of US Forces form Syria
The announcement by the President of America Donald Trump of withdrawing from Syria has proven to be more beneficial than most people thought. A large section of the American people believed that the move would have caused a massive polarization as far as diplomacy issues were concerned not only from the Syrian government, but also from the international scale and most importantly other economic giants such as China, Russia, Japan and the others (Dalton, 2017). In the literature review, we will focus on the various positives that have been associated with the move as we also highlight a number of negatives that came with it.
Blanchard & Humud (2017) believe that one major advantage that is associated with the move is the fact that America will deprive itself of the redundant work that is not benefiting them but instead causing trouble to the American citizens. This is as far as the security matters are concerned. Again, the president is also targeting economic growth of America and hence any move to cut on unnecessary expenditure will be very essential for the government to take. On the negative side, the move could potentially result in more causalities among the Syrian people as death trolls will definitely escalate as a result of uncontrolled and unceremonious activities of the IS militants. As a result of the much-anticipated rogue activities of the militants after the U.S departure, the numbers of Syrian immigrants into the U.S as well as other countries will highly escalate as the locals will be forced to flee in fear of persecutions from the rebellious militants. The above pros and cons will be elaborated well in the literature review part of the research paper with finer details incorporated into it.
President Trump shocked many people after deciding that US security forces in Syria will be pulled out of country. Nonetheless, the decision is based on the main elements of the president’s military and International policy. Initially, the president made a press statement that 2000 US Special Forces were to be removed form Syria. After the announcement, he was opposed strongly by the Pentagon and other players in the military sector. The decision has both negative and positive effects.
For his decision, only time will tell whether the benefits of the decision will be more than the consequences. It is therefore important for all stakeholders to consider all the reasons that led to the formulation of the decision. This is because considering the reason for the formulation of the decision will help people in understanding the impact of the impact of withdrawing US Special Forces from Syria. The national security officials have raised concerns that withdrawal of the U.S forces from Syria can cost the American credibility in that specific region. It also causes significant escalation to an already devastating conflict in that region.
Looking at the negative side of the decision is that it will cause casualties. The main casualties will be the Kurdish people who have been put in protection zones by the US Special Forces. Through the year, America has partnered with YPG to help in fighting terror in the region. This partnership has not made everyone happy. For instance, the partnership has led to enmity between Turkey and the US. This enmity may have led to declaration of war between Turkey and the United States. Recip Erdogan, the Turkish Dictator was planing on attacking the YPG forces. This was followed by the American President announcing the withdrawal U.S Forces from Syria (Black, 2018).
It is important to note that the pullout of the US Forces from Syria will leave a huge power vacuum. Currently the US has provided stability to some parts of the country. Leaving the country play that Kurds will be alone in maintaining peace in the stable areas. The vacuum will attract other governments to take over Syria and, in the process, conflicts may arise. Governments that have interest in Syria include Turkey, Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Turkey is interested in launching attacks on the Kurds. Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran want to take control of the stable areas in the country (Brands & Feaver, 2017).
After the pullout, Syria and other surrounding areas may experience a series of conflicts. Turkey’s interest in attacking the Kurds will force nations such as Russia and Iran to offer military support. This will lead to conflicts among the three nations. The effects of the war will be adverse as the countries have strong military forces. Also, the fact that many nations have interest in Syria’s natural resources implies that the country’s wealth may be lost after the pullout by American forces. Turkey will be targeting Kurds who protect the natural resources. In the process, some of the resources will be destroyed and other will be grabbed.
Therefore, the removal of the American forces from Syria will have a significant impact on Syria’s economy. Even after Syria is stabilized, it will take a considerably long time to reconstruct the damaged parts of the country. Also, the departure of the American forces may force Kurds to flee from the area. This will lead to instability in the area and therefore expose the natural resources terrorists.
Through the announcement by the president, it essentially meant Kurds were on their own America agreed to provide arms and supplies to the YPG forces. To deter Turkey from attacking them, the YPG will be forced to seek help form other nations. The YPG forces may decide to ask for from Russia or Syria to receive protection from Turkey.
Although the US forces are relatively small numbers in Syria, their presence in the country brings balance of power. The forces operate along the border which joins Syria, Iraq and Jordan. At the border, they block Iran from occupying the Iraqi-Syria border. The border is land bridge which forms an Interconnection between Iran and the Mediterranean Sea, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. At the same time, the American forces have also been able to prevent Iran forces from attacking Jordan. Therefore, the decision to remove the forces will increase the chances of wars in the region. Iran may start a war to take over the Syria Iraqi border while Iran may attack Jordan, an attack that may have been prevented by the US Special Forces. In the midst of these attacks, Israel may also be attacked resulting into another war.
The forces had been stationed in Syria to assist the Syrian Forces in fighting rebel enclaves in the desert east of the River Euphrates. Despite the claims which have been made by the president, the American forces and their allies were in a successful process of wiping out the enemy, until now. This means that the American presence in Syria is very essential, even though they are small in numbers. The US forces with Kurdish allies, hold all territories to the east of River Euphrates, which about a quarter of the entire of the entire territory of Syria. When the forces return home, America will lose an important asset which would grain its influence over whatever surface in Syria after the civil war is over.
Another important asset in the region is a Special Forces base in Al-Tanf, which is near the triangle border. From this base, US air and the intelligence forces are able to operate against IS enclaves in Deir Ez-Zour area. Therefore, the American departure from Syria does not bode well, from an Israeli as well as Jordanian perspective. It is the American presence which is able to block the establishments of the Quds Forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Shiite militias which are brought into Syria near its own borders with Jordan and Israel.
One of the major benefits of withdrawing American troops is that the country will be able to stop chasing tails of a region in which there is no particular interest. Most regions can apparently be blamed for what is happening in Syria. Recently, Bush’s illegitimate war in Iraq made contributions in a major way to de-stabilize more a region which never knew stability. What followed after this was disastrous. This followed president Obama inheriting a situation which was very horrible and that which was handled poorly.
Most of the American people do not have an interest in seeing their country in danger and in a war that they do not understand or even care about. In this sense, Trump is doing what I believe most of the American would want. Surprisingly far more liberals than conservatives are agreeing to the troops leaving Syria. One of the main reasons why Trump wants American troops out of Syria is due to economic reasons. It is the same reason he declared victory over the IS. The US departure does not signal America is leaving the coalition which is against IS but rather, know that the IS has lost its strongholds, the country is transitioning to the next phase of the campaign (Hassn, 2017).
The announcement implies that America is letting Russia and Iran shape their own interest and a new type of order which will form in Syria at the end of the civil war. As a result of these, Iran will be able to ground its foothold in Syria through an easy way and Russia will be able to influence the Middle East which includes Iraq, and it will grow. The Kurds losing the support of a protector and adviser will have to try and seek shelter in Assad’s arms while the American forces leave the areas, the turkey will start to free to attack them whenever they want.
Another benefit that could arise as a result of the American pullout will be the delegation of a chance to the Syrian government (the Assad Regime) to reassert control that it has lost for a long time now. The Syrian government has for a long time been consolidated over the western “spine” alone leaving out the vast eastern spine that is rich in resource endowment especially in fertile agricultural land and minerals such as hydrocarbons and also water catchment areas. The move will definitely have positive impacts to the Syrian economy who will take full control over the entire natural endowment and use them to develop their economy (Jones, 2018). The move will also be a sigh for the Kurdish people who will then get back home (Damascus) as they had fled the region during the heated militant’s actions in the region. For instance, when the Trump Administration announced that it is withdrawing from Syria, there were immediate talks initiated by the Kurds with Damascus. The U.S renewed its assurances to the Kurds and this together with the differences between the aspirations of the Kurds and the goals of the Syrian government led to the talks to falter short before they actually started. The U.S withdrawal will have positive effect on the Kurds through their aspirations were threatened by Turkish, Russian, Iranian and Assad governments. The Kurds will only need to negotiate terms with the Syrian government though they are not in good terms as they used to be prior to that.
According to Barnes & Barron (2017), the withdrawal of the U.S from Syria will also imply that Russia and Iran will have an easy path to enter Syria and deploy their agendas to the Syrian government. Initially, the U.S presence made it difficult for such countries to chip in and hence their withdrawal will let them sell their agendas to President Assad’s regime. For instance, the success of the America in defeating ISIS as President Trump recently announced was a major boost that curtailed the possible expansion of the Iranian government from the eastern part of Syria. This therefore means that if the withdrawal statement made my Trump will actually be implemented Iran and Russia will chip in to cover the vacuum that will have been left behind by American troops. The move will be advantageous not only for Iran and Russia but also for the Assad’s regime as the new visitors will work to see development in the region as far security and economic growth are concerned.
In conclusion, while the pullout of America from Syria may have been thought to have more negative implications to the U.S and other countries in the middle-east, the contrary has however emerged (Chong, 2013). This is because the number of positive influences the move is believed to have is huge and it outweighs the negatives to a large extent. The targeted economic development by the U.S will be their first agenda after the withdrawal which is actually a positive implication.
Barnes, J., & Barron, R. (2018). Trump Policy in the Middle East: ISIS. Issue Brief, 1.
Black, I. (2018). Donald Trump and the Middle East. Political Insight, 9(1), 22-25.
Chong, D. (2013). Degrees of rationality in politics. In The Oxford handbook of political psychology.
Gentile, E. (2006). Politics as religion. Princeton University Press.
Hassan, O. (2017). Trump, Islamophobia and US–Middle East relations. Critical Studies on Security, 5(2), 187-191.
Smeltz, D., Kafura, C., & Martin, K. (2016). Americans Support Limited Military Action in Syria against ISIS. Chicago: Chicago Council on Global Affairs, 15.
Brands, H., & Feaver, P. (2017). Trump and Terrorism: US Strategy after ISIS. Foreign Aff., 96, 28.
Ibish, H. (2017). In search of a Trump administration Middle East policy. Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington.
Lynch, M. (2016). Belligerent minimalism: The trump administration and the Middle East. The Washington Quarterly, 39(4), 127-144.
Jones, S. G. (2018). Developing a Containment Strategy in Syria. Center for Strategic & International Studies.
Souleimanov, E. A., & Dzutsati, V. (2018). Russia’s Syria War: A strategic Trap? Middle East Policy, 25(2), 42-50.
Dalton, M. (2017). Defeating terrorism in Syria: A new way forward. Hampton Roadds International Security Quarterly, 16.
Blanchard, C. M., & Humud, C. E. (2017). The Islamic State and the U.S Poicy. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS WASHINGTON DC United States.