By Denis Korkodinov
The withdrawal of US troops from northeastern Syria, announced by Donald Trump on the eve of the Turkish operation “Source of Peace”, was ambiguously received in the international press. The assessments of the events were contradictory: a number of journalists called it the “US tactical maneuver,” others directly called it the defeat of Donald Trump’s policies.
On October 13, 2019, the head of the White House officially announced that 1,000 US troops would be withdrawn from Syria. At the same time, Donald Trump emphasized that the security of the “SDF” is not a priority of US policy. In this regard, representatives of the American establishment were perplexed, as many US officials were connected with the Syrian Kurds by a number of economic and military contracts. It was difficult for them to explain to their Kurdish partners why Donald Trump actually blocked the agreements between Washington, SDF and YPG.
The withdrawal of American troops quickly took advantage of Russia, which, together with Turkey, hastened to occupy the territories free from the USA in Syria.
About 10 days after this, Donald Trump apparently realized what mistake he had made by actually making the oil-rich Rozhava to Vladimir Putin and Recep Erdogan. For this reason, he again sent American troops to the northeastern part of Syria, but already motivating it with the protection of oil fields. Just a couple of days later, the head of Donald Trump announced the strengthening of the American contingent of troops along the line Deir ez-Zor – Al-Hassak.
Such a contradictory policy of the US president has caused a real cognitive dissonance in the minds of many politicians who no longer know how to interpret the actions of Donald Trump and what should be expected of him in the future. The liquidation of the leader of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, slightly softened the public outcry, creating the illusion that it was the head of the White House who was the winner in the fight against international terrorism.
(The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of World Geostrategic Insights)