Democrats and Neocons Are the Biggest Losers of Trump's Syria Withdrawal
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
When power is balanced as delicately as it is in the Middle East, minor
changes can have major consequences. So while 2,000 troops may not sound
like much, Donald Trumps decision to withdraw them from eastern Syria has
generated a rich list of winners and losers. Heres a rundown:
Winners
Russia: Nancy Pelosis Dec. 20 description of the pullout as a Christmas
present to Vladimir Putin is not off the mark. Not only has the Russian
president gained leverage in Syria, hes now the chief arbiter across the
entire Mashriq, the area from the Nile to the Tigris. But the pullout alters
the balance of power in another arena as well: the Black Sea. The Nov. 26
fracas in the Kerch Strait, in which Russia captured three Ukrainian navy
boats attempting to force their way through what Moscow regards as its
territorial waters, ended in a clear Russian victory, because it showed that
it could limit access to the Sea of Azov (and therefore to the Ukrainian
ports of Mariupol and Berdyansk) without NATO able to do much in response.
Its a far cry from the heady days of February 2014, when the U.S. thought
it could use the AutoMaidan protests in Kiev to force Russia out of its
historic naval base at Sevastopol in the southern Crimea, a move that, if
successful, would have virtually closed off Russian access to the Black Sea.
But now the shoe is on the other foot. If the Syria pullout is a sign that
the American appetite for foreign adventures is on the wane, Russia will
gain even more room to maneuvernot only in Syria but in the Black Sea as
well.
Iran: The last time Iran opened a corridor from the Persian Gulf to the
Mediterranean was in the early seventh century, when it overran Syria and
captured Jerusalem. Then the Byzantines counterattacked in 628, and the Arab
conquests began in 632. With the U.S. out of Syria, the path is once again
open from Iraq to Lebanon. Its a victory of historic proportions.
Turkey: Reportedly, Trumps decision to withdraw from Syria was born of a
Dec. 14 phone call with Recep Tayyip Erdogan. OK, its all yours, the
American president said. We are done.
While the Turkish president cant be very happy to see his old enemy, Bashar
Assad, return to power in Syria, an end to U.S. support for Kurdish
separatists is a Christmas present in its own right.
Syria: In August 2011, Barack Obama called on Assad to step aside while
Secretary of State Clinton entered into talks with Saudi Arabia and other
friends of Syria about launching an armed Sunni invasion. But with Obama
writing his memoirs and Clinton still nursing her wounds from 2016, the
British-trained ophthalmologist can finally set about reunifying his
country.
As heir to a 30-year family dictatorship, Assad was arguably little more
than a Levantine Michael Corleone when he took office in July 2000. After
withstanding a brutal seven-year assault by U.S.- and Saudi-backed
mujahedeen, however, hes emerged as a hero of the Third World masses.
Losers
Democrats and neoconservatives: Rarely has a strategy backfired as roundly
as the Dem-neocon approach has since 2011. In Libya, Clinton spent weeks
persuading Qatar to join the anti-Gadhafi coalition, only to stand by and
watch as the gas-rich sheikdom massively funded Islamist militias spreading
anarchy from one end of the country to the other. Decades of social progress
were erased, slavery was restored and Libya turned into a happy hunting
ground for Islamic State and al-Qaida.
In Syria, the U.S. gave Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other oil monarchies the
green light to flood the country with thousands of Wahhabi head-choppers,
unleashing a sectarian war that may have cost upward of half a million
lives. In the Ukraine, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, a
Clinton protégée, encouraged an uprising spearheaded by the ultraright that
sent a legally elected president packing and ushered in a regime heavily
dependent on neo-Nazi militias. In Yemen, the Obama administration couldnt
say no to a Saudi-United Arab Emirates war of aggression that, after nearly
four years, has killed as many as 80,000 people and brought up to 14 million
more to the brink of starvation
The results have been every bit as destructive as the shock and awe that
George W. Bush unleashed on Iraq in 2003. White House Chief of Staff Mick
Mulvaney may have exaggerated when he said that Syrian withdrawal is very
popular with ordinary American people, but not by much. Certainly, no one
is taking to the streets to keep the troops in place. Democrats have
suffered a major rebuff, deservedly so.
Israel: The Jewish state had counted on U.S.- and Saudi-backed rebels to
bring down Assad, even providing medical treatment to wounded al-Qaida
fighters and all but formally backing an Islamic State. If we have to
choose between [Islamic State] and Assad, well take [Islamic State],
former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren explained. Israeli
Minister of Defense Moshe Yaalon echoed the sentiment, claiming: [I]f the
choice is between Iran and the Islamic State, I choose the Islamic State.
The result, to quote Talleyrand, is worse than a crimeits a blunder.
U.S.-backed jihadis were always fighting an uphill battle. The more they
tried to thrust Syria back into the Middle Ages, the more Christians,
Shiites, Druze and women united behind the Assad government, which, despite
its sins, is at least pluralist and secular. But now that Damascus has
emerged victorious, the upshot is that Israel faces a battle-hardened Syrian
army across its northern frontier, along with Hezbollah, Irans Islamic
Revolutionary Guard and a sophisticated Russian air-defense system.
As for Israels two main allies, both are in disarray: Saudi Arabia remains
on the ropes following the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal
Khashoggi and plunging oil prices (off 45 percent since early October),
while the U.S. grapples with market instability and a wildly unpopular
president. Israel is in its worst strategic position since the eve of the
Six-Day War in 1967.
Saudi Arabia: The kingdom cant be very happy now that archenemy Irans
influence is expanding, while Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is persona
non grata across the globe, thanks to his role in the Khashoggi killing.
Collapsing oil prices, along with capital flight and deepening budget woes,
have only added to its misery. Trumps decision to abort Saudi-backed
efforts to overthrow Assad shows just how alone and friendless the kingdom
has become.
Islamic State and al-Qaida: The war against both groups was a farce under
Obama and no less fraudulent under Trump. In Syria, the U.S. allowed Islamic
State to fester and grow in the hope of using it as leverage against Assad.
As John Kerry, Clintons successor as secretary of state, put it in
September 2016: We saw that Daesh [i.e., Islamic State] was growing in
strength, and we thought Assad was threatened. We thought, however, we could
probably manage, that Assad might then negotiate. Instead of negotiating, he
got
Putin in to support him. According to a December 2017 study by
Conflict Armament Research, a London research group funded by Switzerland
and the European Union, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia provided Islamic State
with much of its arms and material support. Obama refused to bomb Islamic
State oil fields in eastern Syria, a major revenue source, until Russias
entry into the war finally forced his hand.
Trump, for his part, allowed a column of heavily armed Islamic State
fighters, some 4,000 in all, including family members, to flee the
pulverized city of Raqqa in October 2017 under circumstances that still
havent been fully explained. Although U.S. warplanes supposedly monitor the
area around its military outpost at al-Tanf in southern Syria, they did
nothing to stop hundreds of Islamic State fighters from crossing in July on
their way to the Druze province of Sweida some 70 miles to the west, where
they killed at least 256 people and kidnapped dozens more. The U.S. says it
has been unable to dismantle an Islamic State stronghold in the eastern
province of Deir al-Zour because Islamic State has taken advantage of at
least two sandstorms to launch major counterattacks. Sandstorms in the
Syrian Desert? How could the military have known?
Now that such nonsense is drawing to a close, the one force with a clear and
unambiguous reason to battle Islamic State and al-Qaidai.e., the Syrian
army, backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollahis finally taking the field
without U.S. obstruction.
The Kurds: These are the most tragic losers of all, because they had counted
on the U.S. to help carve out a homeland in northeastern Syria. While U.S.
critic Noam Chomsky has called for their military protection to continue,
arguing that they shouldnt be subjected to an attack by their bitter
enemies the Turks, or by the murderous Assad regime, such action would only
further place the Kurds at the mercy of an erratic Trump administration.
Their only hope is to reach an accord with Assad, and the sooner the better.
If hes smart, hell meet them at least halfway. (Editors note: The Kurds
reached out to the Syrian government on Friday for protection from a
possible Turkish attack.)
Wild Cards
Russian-Israeli rapprochement: Now that the U.S. is pulling out, Israel may
have no choice but to attempt to reach an accord with Putin, the Middle
Easts new kingmaker. Its not so far-fetched. One Israeli in seven is of
Russian extraction, and perhaps the only monument to the Red Armys victory
in World War II outside the old Soviet bloc lies in the Israeli seaside town
of Netanya. Soviet-born Avigdor Lieberman, until recently Israels minister
of defense, seems especially pro-Moscow.
As tough ethnarchs, Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu have much in common.
Russia, meanwhile, would like access to Israeli technology, while Israel
would like Russia to restrain Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. Hence, a
Nixon-to-China moment is not out of the question.
An al-Qaida resurgence: This is not the first time al-Qaida has been down
and out. During the Anbar Awakening of 2008, a U.S.-backed upsurge by Sunni
tribal leaders drove it out of Iraq. While in Afghanistan, Taliban and
al-Qaida leaders both lived in constant dread of Predator missiles. But then
conditions shifted, and the group emerged stronger than ever.
The question now is whether another resurgence is in the works in
Afghanistan, where the Taliban continue to advance; in northern Iraq, where
Islamic State appears to be regrouping; and even in Saudi Arabia, where the
country continues to destabilize under a vicious and isolated crown prince.
War with Iran: Open hostilities with the Islamic republic are the ultimate
wild card. It may seem unlikely, given how much all sides stand to losenot
only Iran, but the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Israel, too. But its irrationality
probably makes it a more rather than a less likely scenario.
Daniel Lazare
Daniel Lazare is the author of three books on U.S. politics, among them "The
Frozen Republic: How the Constitution is Paralyzing Democracy" (Harcourt
Brace, 1996). He has written for a wide variety of
Daniel Lazare