America’s Role in the Syrian Conundrum

What becomes of Syria after the fall of its dictatorial family will depend on what the United States wants to do with it.

If it has been frequently said that the conflict in Ukraine is a proxy war between major powers, the same can be said of the conflict that has ravaged Syria since 2011.

Where this conflict distinguishes itself from the one in Ukraine is by how long it has continued. Syria, with origins going back to the Ottoman Empire and period of European colonization, has been engulfed in a civil war for nearly 15 years. And now, after 15 years, U.S. and Russia, the same two great powers indirectly crossing swords in Ukraine, are also doing so in Syria.

The Syrian dynamic is further complicated by the inextricable interplay of regional alliances. From the first days of the Arab Spring in 2011, American allies in the Arab world including Saudi Arabia and Turkey (both Sunni), sought to overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad, who was counting on the support of Iran, the most important Shiite country … as well as his Russian friend.

Israel had begun to agitate for Assad’s fall well before the popular uprisings of 2011. In his memoirs, former President George W. Bush (2001-2009) confided that he had even considered bombing Syria in the 2000s as the Israeli government had asked.

It should come as no surprise in this context, if, barely a few hours after Assad fled the country, Israel announced it had taken possession of the demilitarized zone of the Golan Heights, decreed by the United Nations in 1974 — a vast region bordering Syria, Lebanon and Israel, illegally annexed by the latter in 1981.

The fact remains that by far the biggest contributor to the destabilization and ultimately the overthrow of the Assad regime has been the American giant.

During the Barack Obama years, the CIA financed a secret war against Assad estimated at more than $1 billion.

In fact, the scope of American intervention in Syria was such that certain rebel groups financed by the CIA fought for control of the country both against Assad and against other groups financed by the Pentagon.

Without ever asking for, or obtaining, a declaration of war, the Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden administrations have, over time, quietly deployed thousands of troops in Syria. It was only when four Americans were killed in an explosion in 2019 that many of their fellow citizens realized, for the first time, what the government had been doing for years.

And in the hours after Assad’s fall, the U.S. bombed several sites in Syria suspected of harboring the Islamic State armed group and its allies.

That, of course, is the conundrum for the U.S.: How to ensure that an enemy dictator is not replaced by someone of the same ilk, or worse?

This has been a real concern since 2011 — involuntarily participating in the takeover of the country by jihadi forces. It has already been the case elsewhere in the Middle East: the arming of the mujahideen in Afghanistan; the anti-Hosni Mubarak protests in Egypt; the fall of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya; and, of course, the invasion of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. The list of lessons to be learned is long. The picture of things to come, however, is much less clear.

In the short term, the U.S., along with its allies, are rid of an enemy regime. And its rivals, Iran in particular, are weakened. But how will the U.S. and Russia react if an Islamist regime takes the reins in Syria? This scenario may not please anyone, either.

After all, if there is one major issue over which Vladimir Putin has reached out to the Americans before the rather pronounced poisoning of relations, it is the common fight against Islamist terrorism.

In addition, there is this: Who, exactly, will establish American policy on Syria? The Biden administration may well be on its way out, but the outgoing president made very clear, after Assad’s flight, his desire to use the current situation to facilitate the emergence of a new allied regime.

With respect to the crisis in Syria, President-elect Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance, for their part, have both unequivocally declared, “This is not our fight.”

As for the CIA and the American military establishment, which have long had a hand in this quagmire, they will not be letting go anytime soon.

What will follow is unforeseeable.