Trump tells advisers he wants U.S. out of Syria - senior officials

[rooster59]

Trump tells advisers he wants U.S. out of Syria - senior officials

By Steve Holland

 

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks on the Infrastructure Initiative at the Local 18 Richfield Training Site in Richfield, Ohio, U.S., March 29, 2018. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

 

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (Reuters) - President Donald Trump has told advisers he wants an early exit of U.S. troops from Syria, two senior administration officials said on Friday, a stance that may put him at odds with U.S. military officials who see the fight against Islamic State as nowhere near complete.

 

A National Security Council meeting is set for early next week to discuss the U.S.-led campaign against Islamic State in Syria, according to U.S. officials familiar with the plan.

 

Two other administration officials confirmed a Wall Street Journal report on Friday that said Trump had ordered the State Department to freeze more than $200 million in funds for recovery efforts in Syria while his administration reassesses Washington's role in the conflict there.

 

Trump called for the freeze after reading a news report that the U.S. had recently committed an additional $200 million to stabilize areas recaptured from Islamic State, the paper said.

 

The funding was announced by departing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in February at a meeting in Kuwait of the global coalition against Islamic State.

 

The decision to freeze the funds was in line with Trump's declaration during a speech in Richfield, Ohio, on Thursday, where he said it was time for America to exit Syria.

 

A spokesperson for the White House's National Security Council said that "in line with the President's guidance, the Department of State continually re-evaluates appropriate assistance levels and how best they might be utilized, which they do on an ongoing basis."

 

Trump is spending Easter weekend at his Palm Beach, Florida, estate.

 

"We'll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon," Trump said on Thursday, based on allied victories against Islamic State militants.

 

"Let the other people take care of it now. Very soon, very soon, we're coming out," Trump said. "We're going to get back to our country, where we belong, where we want to be."

 

Trump's comments came as France said on Friday it could increase its military presence in Syria to bolster the U.S.-led campaign.

 

While the Pentagon has estimated that Islamic State has lost about 98 percent of the territory it once held in Iraq and Syria, U.S. military officials have warned that the militants could regain the freed areas quickly unless they are stabilized.

 

Trump still needs to be convinced of that, said the U.S. officials with knowledge of the NSC meeting.

 

U.S. DELIBERATIONS

 

The two administration officials who confirmed the Wall Street Journal report and spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity said Trump's comments on Thursday reflected internal deliberations with advisers in which he has wondered aloud why U.S. forces should remain with the militants on their heels.

 

Trump has made clear that "once ISIS and its remnants are destroyed that the United States would be looking toward having countries in the region playing a larger role in ensuring security and leaving it at that," one official said.

 

Such a policy is nowhere near complete, however, the official added.

 

The second official said Trump's national security advisers have told him U.S. forces should stay in small numbers for at least a couple of years to make sure gains against the militants are held and ensure Syria does not essentially become a permanent Iranian base.

 

Top national security aides discussed Syria in a White House meeting recently but have yet to settle on a strategy for U.S. forces in Syria to recommend to Trump going forward, the official said.

 

"So far he has not given an order to just get out," the official said. About 2,000 U.S. troops are deployed in Syria.

 

Trump last year went through a similar wrenching debate over whether to withdraw U.S. forces from Afghanistan, ultimately agreeing to keep them there but only after repeatedly raising questions of why they should stay.

 

Trump's view on Syria may put him at odds with those of former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, named by Trump a week ago to replace H.R. McMaster as White House national security adviser.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-31

 

[attrayant]

This can't possibly be the same Trump who said he'd NEVER telegraph our troop movements to the enemy.

Could it?

[Emster23]

Tossing our only consistent friends, the Kurds, into the mouths of Syria Turkey et al. Shameful

[Srikcir]

11 hours ago, rooster59 said:

the United States would be looking toward having countries in the region playing a larger role in ensuring security and leaving it at that,"

Putin thanks Trump for his support.

[BuaBS]

6 hours ago, Emster23 said:

Tossing our only consistent friends, the Kurds, into the mouths of Syria Turkey et al. Shameful

They're not there to help/defend the Kurds. Only for the Syrian oil fields and their proxy fight with Russia/Iran. Kurds are all alone .

[milwaukeeboy]

In this matter, I am 100% in favor of US troop withdrawal from Syria and everywhere else as well.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, attrayant said:

This can't possibly be the same Trump who said he'd NEVER telegraph our troop movements to the enemy.

Could it?

 

Well, he sometimes practices deception, like that time he talked about the armada heading toward NK...

[Morch]

So Trump favors withdraw - Mattis and Bolton (probably) see it otherwise, for different reasons. State - the remnants of professionals probably in the "remain" camp, Pompeo (if and when he assumes office) will try to keep up with Trump's lead. Interesting times.

 

Got to wonder how this effects troops on the ground, especially those cooperating on a daily basis with the Kurds.

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Putin thanks Trump for his support.

Indeed.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/31/politics/us-withdraw-syria-trump/index.html

 

 

Quote

 

Who stands to gain if Trump pulls the US out of Syria?

...

A US withdrawal would create a vacuum in the area, similar to what happened after soldiers left Iraq, and most foreign policy experts agree that void would likely be filled by Russia.

 

Angela Stent, director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies at Georgetown University, told CNN on Friday that "if the US were to withdraw, it seems to me the Russians would have a free hand" in Syria and the forces "fighting Assad would be weakened."

 

 

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Indeed.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/31/politics/us-withdraw-syria-trump/index.html

 

 

 

 

Yes, but...

 

On the other hand, the US pulling out of Syria would mean sorting things there will be Russia's show. May be a "gain" provided Putin can deliver, without getting too entangled with conflicting interests of involved parties, and keeping on good terms with all. Easier said than done. So long as the US is around, it serves to take the heat off Russia on some fronts, and can be conveniently outmaneuvered diplomatically.

 

I don't think Trump had that in mind, but Russia getting further stuck in the Syrian quagmire is a possible side effect.

 

The article lists several parties as possibly standing to benefit from a US withdrawal, but hard to see how all of them could do that, considering they are opposed or competing with regard to some issues.

[Jingthing]

Maybe he just wants a clean talking point for the midterms. We beat ISIS! (Never mind the complications.)

[cabinfever]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Yes, but...

 

On the other hand, the US pulling out of Syria would mean sorting things there will be Russia's show. May be a "gain" provided Putin can deliver, without getting too entangled with conflicting interests of involved parties, and keeping on good terms with all. Easier said than done. So long as the US is around, it serves to take the heat off Russia on some fronts, and can be conveniently outmaneuvered diplomatically.

 

I don't think Trump had that in mind, but Russia getting further stuck in the Syrian quagmire is a possible side effect.

 

The article lists several parties as possibly standing to benefit from a US withdrawal, but hard to see how all of them could do that, considering they are opposed or competing with regard to some issues.

The Iranians and the Assad regime will be overjoyed. And given the ambiguous stance of the Turks vis-a-vis, Isis, it's got to be encouraging news for Islamist militias as well.

[Aj Mick]

What's with this telling advisors.....? How about taking advice for a change, rather than just going with the latest whim?

 

Is it wilful ignorance being bliss? Or just plain blissfully painful ignorance?

 

Edited April 1, 2018 by Aj Mick

[Morch]

1 hour ago, cabinfever said:

The Iranians and the Assad regime will be overjoyed. And given the ambiguous stance of the Turks vis-a-vis, Isis, it's got to be encouraging news for Islamist militias as well.

 

ISIS, even according to the US sources, is pretty much beat. Assertions that it could swiftly regain territorial losses are at odds with comments by the same sources but a month ago. The assessment was more about ISIS "resurgence" being more of the "usual" terrorist campaign (bombing etc) rather than propping up the "caliphate" again. Granted the US pulling out would make life easier for them, but by and large, they are less of a determining  factor nowadays.

 

Other Islamic terrorist outfits are mostly faced by non-US troops, but rather Assad's, Iran's and Russia's. US pulling out would have little effect as far as they are concerned.

 

One main issue  be dealing with the Kurds - their prospects without US defense umbrella seem problematic. Rock and a hard place sort of thing. At best, they could opt for striking a deal with Assad's regime, but without the leverage previously held.

 

Then there are conflicting interests of Assad and his allies - Turkey wishes for a bit of a foothold, and a lot of say in northern Syria (plus crushing the Kurds some). This goes against both Assad (and Russia's) goals of reasserting full sovereignty and stabilizing the regime. It also plays against Iran's interests, which doesn't want Turkey overreaching, as a competing regional power. Iran also wants to increase it's pull and role in Syria's future - which goes against Turkey's regional interests and Russia's as well (a good Assad being one dependent on them, rather than having another powerful sponsor).

[Expatthailover]

Putin has told Don to get out and it is clear to the whole world that DT is intimidated by Vlad.

[cabinfever]

56 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

ISIS, even according to the US sources, is pretty much beat. Assertions that it could swiftly regain territorial losses are at odds with comments by the same sources but a month ago. The assessment was more about ISIS "resurgence" being more of the "usual" terrorist campaign (bombing etc) rather than propping up the "caliphate" again. Granted the US pulling out would make life easier for them, but by and large, they are less of a determining  factor nowadays.

 

Other Islamic terrorist outfits are mostly faced by non-US troops, but rather Assad's, Iran's and Russia's. US pulling out would have little effect as far as they are concerned.

 

One main issue  be dealing with the Kurds - their prospects without US defense umbrella seem problematic. Rock and a hard place sort of thing. At best, they could opt for striking a deal with Assad's regime, but without the leverage previously held.

 

Then there are conflicting interests of Assad and his allies - Turkey wishes for a bit of a foothold, and a lot of say in northern Syria (plus crushing the Kurds some). This goes against both Assad (and Russia's) goals of reasserting full sovereignty and stabilizing the regime. It also plays against Iran's interests, which doesn't want Turkey overreaching, as a competing regional power. Iran also wants to increase it's pull and role in Syria's future - which goes against Turkey's regional interests and Russia's as well (a good Assad being one dependent on them, rather than having another powerful sponsor).

This doesn't change the fact that the Iranians and Syrians will be overjoyed should the American withdrawal actually occur.

And not everyone is counting the Islamists out quite yet:

A rather interesting report from Richard Engel (and Kennett Werner) rhere:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/white-house-chaos-jeopardizes-war-isis-u-s-commanders-warn-n859966

[cabinfever]

4 hours ago, Jingthing said:

"trump" big rally/tweet mouth and actual U.S. policy not necessarily the same thing. What kind of insanity is that? I reckon "trump" supporters will say that's the secret of his brilliance. Makes me want to vomit.

 

http://www.paywallnews.com/life/Opinion-|-Trump-says-we’re-leaving-Syria-‘like--very-soon-’-Bad-idea-.Bk389o65z.html

That's a Washington Post editorial composed of pretty much the same crew who enthusiastically supported the Iraq War. The main contention seems to be that without the USA involved Isis will make a comeback. At this point there are plenty of other players in Syria who will have no problem suppressing Isis and its allies. The Syrian army is now a very professional and formidable force, and the Iranians and Hezbollah are no slouches either. And Russia is there for air support.  The US govt. has openly stated that defeating Isis is only one of its goals. The others are seeing to it that the Assad regime is replaced and that Iran is kept in check. In other words, years more of American involvement.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, cabinfever said:

This doesn't change the fact that the Iranians and Syrians will be overjoyed should the American withdrawal actually occur.

And not everyone is counting the Islamists out quite yet:

A rather interesting report from Richard Engel (and Kennett Werner) rhere:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/white-house-chaos-jeopardizes-war-isis-u-s-commanders-warn-n859966

 

The Iranians And Assad's regime, sure. Point made was that not every party involved can benefit to the same degree from a US withdrawal, as their own interests and goals run different (and sometime opposed) courses.

 

As for not "counting the Islamist out quite yet" - first, thanks for the article. Second, if ISIS is indeed something like two heartbeats from being defeated, then no - I don't think a massive territorial resurgence is a correct assessment (and there are, I think, echos for this point of view in the article itself). It could resume operations on a smaller scale and on a more "routine" pattern (which isn't good, but not as bad). Kinda find it hard to believe ISIS could get up on the count of 9 and win by a knockout.

 

 

[bendejo]

DT sold out the Syrian resistance to the Russians at the beginning of his term.  This was barely reported in the US media.  Perhaps they were too busy reacting to the outrageous tweet of the day, the latest WH hiring/firing, etc.

 

A more accurate headline for this thread would be

Putin tells Trump he wants U.S. out of Syria

 

I have impression DT's soft-on-Assad policy is at odds with the US military, and have been wondering if this could be the makings of some sort of gov't vs military schism.  (I'm avoiding the word coup)

 

 

Edited April 1, 2018 by bendejo

[mbamber]

Well a we the British have lost a man from out SAS with a US forces man in a so called safe area I fully Agree with him on this get our forces out it is an internal fight not for any other country to get involved.

[cabinfever]

12 hours ago, bendejo said:

DT sold out the Syrian resistance to the Russians at the beginning of his term.  This was barely reported in the US media.  Perhaps they were too busy reacting to the outrageous tweet of the day, the latest WH hiring/firing, etc.

 

A more accurate headline for this thread would be

Putin tells Trump he wants U.S. out of Syria I have impression DT's soft-on-Assad policy is at odds with the US military, and have been wondering if this could be the makings of some sort of gov't vs military schism.  (I'm avoiding the word coup)

 

 

If anything, the opposite is the case. The Trump administration ignored the forcefully stated concerns of the Turksabout the PKK  and  backed the SFA way too strongly by announcing that the the coalition was going to create a force of 30000 SFA troops to patrol the border region between Turkey and NE Syria. Also, that the USA planned to stay there for years until Assad was ousted and the Iranians were foiled for good.. That was too much of a provocation for the Turks who overran Afrin and now are making seriously threatening noises about Manbij. Apparently Tillerson was already making concessions to the Turks about Manbij when he was dismissed. Which of course resulted in a certain coldness arising between the Kurds and the US forces. Of course this has turned out well for the Russians but I somehow doubt that this was Trump's plan all along.

[mbamber]

British SAS man killed has been confirmed he was a Sniper assisting US Seal Team 6 and he was from Manchester had served 8 years with the SAS RIP to Both men killed & condolences to their families.

[gogetem]

On 4/2/2018 at 3:27 PM, cabinfever said:

If anything, the opposite is the case. The Trump administration ignored the forcefully stated concerns of the Turksabout the PKK  and  backed the SFA way too strongly by announcing that the the coalition was going to create a force of 30000 SFA troops to patrol the border region between Turkey and NE Syria. Also, that the USA planned to stay there for years until Assad was ousted and the Iranians were foiled for good.. That was too much of a provocation for the Turks who overran Afrin and now are making seriously threatening noises about Manbij. Apparently Tillerson was already making concessions to the Turks about Manbij when he was dismissed. Which of course resulted in a certain coldness arising between the Kurds and the US forces. Of course this has turned out well for the Russians but I somehow doubt that this was Trump's plan all along.

President Trump is doing what he promised to do when he ran for office. Get America out of the mideast. Another promise kept! MAGA!

[Morch]

2 hours ago, gogetem said:

President Trump is doing what he promised to do when he ran for office. Get America out of the mideast. Another promise kept! MAGA!

 

US troops still in Syria, Iraq, Qatar. Further afield, Afghanistan. Kept how?

[attrayant]

3 hours ago, gogetem said:

President Trump is doing what he promised to do when he ran for office. Get America out of the mideast. Another promise kept!

 

Prior to Trump taking office, less than three hundred in Syria.  Now, more than 1700.  How is that keeping a promise?

 

 

Under Trump, U.S. Troops In War Zones Are On The Rise

 

Quote

Since President Trump came into office, U.S. troop numbers have been edging up in the three countries where the U.S. is most deeply involved in fighting — Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

 

 

 

[watcharacters]

On 3/31/2018 at 11:14 PM, Morch said:

 

Well, he sometimes practices deception, like that time he talked about the armada heading toward NK...

 

 

Any link to that claim or are you just joking?

 

 

[attrayant]

‘Armada’ Trump claimed was deployed to North Korea actually heading to Australia

 

Quote

Four warships Donald Trump claimed were being sent to North Korea last week, were in fact steaming in the opposite direction to take part in military exercises with the Australian Navy over 3,500 miles away.

 

[watcharacters]

3 minutes ago, attrayant said:

‘Armada’ Trump claimed was deployed to North Korea actually heading to Australia

 

 

 

 

Thank you..

 

Sorry to both.    I totally missed it.

 

No challenge issued from me.

 

I was wrong.

 

I stand corrected.

Edited April 3, 2018 by watcharacters

[gogetem]

43 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

US troops still in Syria, Iraq, Qatar. Further afield, Afghanistan. Kept how?

He's getting them out of Syria and Afghanistan will be next.

[Morch]

25 minutes ago, gogetem said:

He's getting them out of Syria and Afghanistan will be next.

 

If you say so. How about waiting until it actually happens before announcing "Mission Accomplished"?