Hasty exits and broken alliances litter America’s recent history. Reflecting on the chaotic scenes in Kabul in 2021, it is hard to ignore the growing danger of a repeat in northeastern Syria. Despite calls for withdrawal—some from President-elect Donald Trump’s supporters, and others from voices critical of “endless wars”—abandoning the Syrian Kurds could be Kabul 2.0 and derail Trump’s broader agenda.
What happens in Syria will not stay in Syria. To remove the small force of U.S. advisors embedded with the Syrian Kurds could embolden Turkey to strike Kurdish-held areas. Tens of thousands of Islamic State detainees guarded by Kurdish partners could walk free, risking a fresh wave of terror in the Middle East, Europe, and North America.
Some critics say the Kurds could “ally with Russia” or Iran as a Plan B for their protection. The Kurds understand this would be a fool’s choice given both the Russian and Iranian track records, as well as Iran’s own domestic problem with Kurds seeking autonomy. Nor would Kurds be the only victims: Jihadists backed by Turkey would see the Kurds’ abandonment by Trump as a green light to target other ethnic and religious minorities across the region, from the Druze to the Armenians and myriad Christian groups.
A small U.S. deployment [in Syria] will be an efficient bulwark against extremist resurgence.
Some supporters of withdrawal cite Trump’s “America First” promise. America First need not mean isolationism; rather, it should mean wisdom in assessing which overseas investments benefit America. A small U.S. deployment will be an efficient bulwark against extremist resurgence. If a prison escape allows the Islamic State to go global or if an unchallenged Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham uses Syrian territory to destabilize Egypt and Jordan, Americans will feel the repercussions. A future large-scale intervention—far costlier in lives and funds—could become inevitable.
Concerned voices like Director of National Intelligence-designee Tulsi Gabbard highlight the need for a “responsible” timeline so that an exit will not strengthen jihadists. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) argues that no constitutional mandate exists to stay. But Congress can refine the mission to ensure clarity and legality without dismantling it.
In Iraq, a premature U.S. exit enabled the Islamic State to seize one-third of Iraq within weeks. In Afghanistan, an abrupt departure led to the collapse of the entire state. Why repeat such a pattern in Syria, especially when the cost to maintain stability is so low?
A nimble approach can keep extremist groups from gaining ground. Keeping America’s word to allies is not just about moral obligations; it also protects the credibility necessary for future coalitions.
Allies worldwide watch whether the United States upholds its commitments. Exiting Syria right now would cause them to question American resolve. That invites trouble elsewhere, from renewed aggression by adversaries to diminished leverage in negotiations around the globe.
