Urgent call for Australian Centre for Disease Control…

Public Health Association of Australia Media Release Public health experts are calling for…

The Hero Haunted World

By James Moore I do not understand. Perhaps, I never will. Does anyone? As…

Swiftie Nonsense Down Under

Gaza. Palestinians. Israel. Genocide. Taylor Swift? This odd cobbling of words is…

New research highlights the growing prevalence and economic…

New research by the e61 Institute presents five facts on the use…

Ok, So This Is A Boring Post... Or…

Gloria Sty, bud Iyam riting this coz I wanna mayk sum poynts…

Border Paranoia in Fortress Australia

The imaginative faculties of standard Australian politicians retreat to some strange, deathly…

Where the Palestine laboratory takes us all

By Antony Loewenstein Israel's war on Gaza since 7 October has caused the…

No, no, no, no. Not more ‘illegals’!

By Bert Hetebry A group of South Asian men arrived on our doorstep…

«
»
Facebook

A Flawed and Dangerous Presence: US Troops in Syria

Despite a focus on boxing China in the Indo-Pacific, US involvement in the Middle East continues to be widespread and problematic. While Israel is given its regular steroid diet of murderous arms, US military personnel find themselves scattered throughout a myriad of bases and countries. Recently, Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul decided that Syria should not be one of them.

In his bill to the Senate, Paul called for “the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in Syria that have not been authorized by Congress”, leaving a 30-day timeframe for the measure to take place. It notes, among a number of events, that US armed forces in Syria and Iraq since October 17 “have been attacked at least 52 times, with 28 attacks in Syria and 24 attacks in Iraq. Such attacks resulted in at least 56 members of the United States Armed Forces being injured, of whom at least 25 members have sustained traumatic brain injuries.” Such are the travails of empire.

The concern is valid enough. With the Israel-Hamas war continuing in its heaving murderousness, allies for the Palestinian cause are getting tetchy. From the US perspective, that tetchiness deserves retaliation, notably targeting any forces backed by Iran throughout the Middle East. The soldiers, in other words, are not just in harm’s way, but likely to cause widening harm.

As Paul explained to his fellow senators, “It seems to be, though our 900 troops have no viable mission in Syria, that they’re sitting ducks.” Even more saliently, he insisted that they were “a tripwire to a larger war, and without a clear-cut mission, I don’t think they can adequately defend themselves, yet they remain in Syria.”

The problem here, as with all childish impulses of US power, is the fear that its freedom loving forces might look like insufferable sissies in the face of armed savages who have no innate sense of that same freedom.

The impulse for remaining in Syria is treated by desk spanking wonks in the Pentagon and State Department as one of those good ideas to dampen and snuff out any prospect of renewal on the part of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. But this, as we have known for a while, is merely a case of medium and vehicle. In December 2018, President Donald Trump noted that the caliphate aspirants had lost 99 of their territory. “We have defeated ISIS in Syria, my only reason for being there,” he declared. He subsequently promised a “full” and “rapid” withdrawal of US forces.

Apoplexy, and various sabotaging efforts from those hostile to the suggestion, followed. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis resigned in protest. As Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, who served as special representative for Syria Engagement put it to Defense One, “When the situation in northeast Syria had been fairly stable after we defeated ISIS, [Trump] was inclined to pull out. In each case, we then decided to come up with five better arguments for why we needed to stay. And we succeeded both times. That’s the story.”

The broader reason for maintaining US personnel in the Levant and Iraq is largely based on keeping the theocratic mullahs in Teheran in check. On this point, former US ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, is helpfully candid. “ISIS hasn’t controlled Tanf (near the junction of Syria/Jordan/Iraq) for 7 years. The real (but unstated) reason the US is there is to block Iran from using a road coming from Iraq into Syria.”

Pundits with their stick-figure commentary (it’s all in the form, not substance, see?) continue to scratch for their crust and wisdom on the theme that withdrawing occupation forces from a territory spells doom and disaster for the broader project. Call it civilisation, democracy, or whatever fable might so happen to satisfy the memorandum and itch of the moment. Yes, the US did invade and impose itself with muscular violence, but why leave the violated party even as the effects of molestation continue to be felt? “With a withdrawal of US forces from Syria (as well as Iraq) becoming more likely,” warn the earnest authors of a report for the New Lines Institute, “US policy makers must understand the long-term effects of withdrawal will cause and then adapt accordingly. This is particularly urgent given the possibility of a US withdrawal triggering malign actors in Syria, including Iran, to rush to fill the power vacuum.”

Pentagon advisor Michael Rubin was also one to rush to the podium of common values in justifying what he regarded as a rather modest US investment in Syria for excellent returns. Washington had, for instance, supported the Autonomous Administration in North and East Syria (AANES), and insisted that more funding was needed. The ongoing relationship with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) was also of value.

Paul, at least on this score, was always going to struggle in getting the resolution across the line. Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, may, or may not have been suffering some seizure in observing that passing “such a resolution would be a gift to Iran and its terrorist network.” The removal of US forces from the Middle East was “exactly what they’d like to see.” The resolution was duly defeated, with 13 members favouring it, and 84 opposed.

The more level-headed observers have, like Paul, concluded that Washington’s forces in Syria are merely ripening targets, fodder for deeper and wider conflict. Justin Logan of the CATO Institute has made the self-evident point that US forces in Syria, after the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, “have served as little more than shooting gallery targets for regional militias backed by Iran. Contrary to their ostensible purpose, they are not fighting ISIS.”

Such conservative outlets as the National Review agree. One of its senior writers, Michael Brendan Dougherty, is lacerating about the presence. “Our troops in Syria have no mission, and they have no lawful reason given to them by our Congress to remain there. In the meantime, they serve as convenient targets for Iranian-backed militias who otherwise would have no way of threatening American lives.” For those inclined towards permanent wars, that remains a most desirable state of affairs.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

6 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Phil Pryor

    Intrusive, aggressive, evil, pompous, self righteous, imperious, adolfian and josefian acts by the insufferable USA public figures remain a blot on civilised behaviour. It is effectively far worse than any Russian, Chinese, Iranian, even British or French acts. USA spending on weaponry, USA bases everywhere to intrude and coerce, USA devious policy to cash in, on, up, threatens any position of peace, diplomacy, balance. And the people are such defectives, Trump, McConnell, Abbott of Texas, De Santis, the MAD Santos…, the list is endless with some broom jockeys and brats in media. Could they get out of everywhere??

  2. Douglas Pritchard

    History is dotted with failed armies who believed that long lines of supply was no problem.
    Germany marching into Russia was a classic.
    So USA, which is remote from every other nation ignores the supply line shortcomings into the middle east.
    Its deluded idea that pockets of US troops who are completely ignorant of their surroundings, will make Americans “safe”, and they end up as simply sitting ducks.
    A lot of military resources are currently being expended (and taxpayer $`s), to enable the Israel genocide against Palestinians, and surrounding countries will be watching carefully waiting for their moment to deliver some karma

  3. Clakka

    Like gatecrashers everywhere, if they’re let in they form a grubby enclave in dark corners, gorge on the provisions, invariably overstay, and when they go, leave a complete mess behind that others have to clean up.

  4. Denis Bright

    Binoy-Thanks for your perspective. The US presence has not helped in Syria.

  5. Andrew Smith

    I guess Binoy, like much of the Anglosphere ‘left’ is in or on the periphery of the same geopolitical ecosystem of influence as Tony Abbott et al, citing GOP’s RW libertarian Rand Paul (allegedly corrupted by Putin, according to the late John McCain) & fossil fueled Koch Network’s Cato to indirectly support Putin’s Assad?

    Surely not deflection for the Anglo ‘ultra conservatives’ and their project to break up the EU, keep fossil fuels flowing and hurdles low, shared with Putin (see Brexit)?

    Deflects from the issue at the moment US GOP, RW MSM inc. Murdoch’s FoxNews and Atlas or Koch Network think tanks inc. Abbott’s favourite Heritage Foundation*; doing the bidding of Putin’s Russia, support Assad, by blocking aid to nobble the Biden-Dems then same to the EU and its interests; on behalf of 0.01%.

    *Not reported locally but Heritage is now being called out directly by RW ‘normies’ Bill Kristol, Anne Applebaum et al., for hosting Hungarians around PM ‘mini Putin’ Orban, to lobby GOP (Koch) Freedom Caucus etc. against Ukraine, and ultimately the EU.

    Meanwhile Heritage is also linked to Abbott’s newish workplace in Hungary (as a ‘researcher’?), the Danube Institute led by Quadrant’s European correspondent, former Thatcher aide and alleged former spy, O’Sullivan (as is Abbott’s advisor); whose side are they on?

    Related to ‘peace events’ (with MCC.hu) that platform Sachs (Rockefeller Foundation linked) and multitude of US Koch &/or Christian grifters including not just Abbott, but Mearsheimer** who is also part of Putin’s Valdai Club https://valdaiclub.com/about/experts/4624/

    Other day, Abbott’s favourite Heritage Foundation was called out by Bill Kristol, former GOP now never Trump, for conspiring against Ukraine for Russia:

    ‘Heritage Foundation and Viktor Orbán are not simply against aid for Ukraine. They are against Ukraine. They hate Ukraine, because a) they’re pro-Putin, and b) they hate liberal democracy, especially one fighting to defend itself against a brutal dictator.’

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1733892421895746022?s=20

    ** Now Finnish academic researcher Pekka K. has a profile of ‘realist’ Mearsheimer who has been in clear sight in Europe, astroturfed by the right, but platformed by the Anglo left?

    ‘John Mearsheimer. He’s best-known for his theory of offensive realism, for his pandering to authoritarian regimes, and for ignoring sovereignty of independent countries.’

    https://vatniksoup.com/en/soups/250

    When is local media, including the ideological left, going to start interrogating our RW grifters inc. Abbott, Sheridan, Loughnane, Murdoch et al., Atlas/Koch think tanks etc. vs. going for easy but misguided stories that bypass Anglosphere power and earn no respect from the European left (who are at the coalface and see things clearly)?

  6. New England Cocky

    @ Andrew Smith: More deep background. Thank you. Gary Allen ”None Dare Call it Conspiracy” (1971) was among the first to identify the existence of these people, and their policies have created neo-feudalism to replace democratic societies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page