By keeping US focus on Islamic State, Trump risks wider Syria war

Sunday 25/06/2017

Washington- US President Donald Trump ordered stepped-up military operations against the Islamic State (ISIS) and delegated more authority to his generals but without a comprehensive Syria strategy his approach risks further confrontation with Syria, Iran and even Russia, US officials and ana­lysts said.
While the US military’s shoot-down of a Syrian jet on June 18 was a rarity in modern warfare — the first in 18 years — it was not an iso­lated incident. The United States has taken a series of actions over the past three months demonstrating its willingness to carry out strikes, mostly in self-defence, against Syr­ian government forces and their backers, including Iran.
In April, Trump ordered cruise missile strikes against a Syrian air­field from which Washington said a deadly chemical weapons attack was launched. Since then, the Unit­ed States has repeatedly struck Ira­nian-backed militias and shot down a drone threatening US-led coalition forces.
These incidents, however, are tac­tical, not part of any US strategy in Syria, analysts said.
Both the administration of for­mer US President Barack Obama and Trump have focused exclusive­ly on defeating ISIS but, with the militants’ self-proclaimed caliphate shrinking, US-backed and Syrian-backed forces appear to be compet­ing for territory.
“There isn’t an overarching US strategy driving this,” said Charles Lister of the Middle East Institute. “This is just the result of tactical decisions by a commander on the ground whose only focus is a spe­cific theatre in Syria. He is acting to protect his assets… This is purely a series of tactical decisions that are creating a series of very serious stra­tegic consequences.”
Russia and Iran both support Syr­ian President Bashar Assad in Syria’s civil war.
The larger problem, officials and analysts said, is that Trump and his national security team have not ad­vanced a long-term political strat­egy for Syria’s future.
Like Obama, Trump has focused on ISIS, leaving for later the ques­tion of Assad’s fate and the region’s mangled alliances.
“We have never had a coherent Syrian strategy,” said one US official, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We oppose Assad but our main en­emy is ISIS, which also opposes As­sad. Our most capable allies are the (Kurdish) peshmerga but Turkey, which is a NATO ally and host to an airbase that is central to our efforts, considers the Kurds enemies.”
Jennifer Cafarella, of the Institute for the Study of War, said the US strikes are unlikely to deter Assad and his backers.
“The absence of a civilian-led US strategy in Syria and the narrow US military focus on ISIS will continue to provide an open invite for the pro-Assad regime coalition to ex­tend and escalate,” Cafarella said.
A White House spokesman did not respond to calls and an e-mail seeking comment. A senior White House official said: “The strategy for Syria is to defeat ISIS and first and foremost achievement of a de-escalation of the conflict so we can work towards a political resolution. We’re not close to that but that’s the strategy.”
Russia reacted angrily to the Unit­ed States shooting down the Syrian jet, which the Pentagon said was dropping bombs near the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, a mixed Kurdish-Arab militia fighting ISIS.
Moscow said it would treat US-led coalition aircraft flying west of the Euphrates River in Syria as potential targets and track them with mis­sile systems and military aircraft. It stopped short of saying it would shoot them down.
The White House said that coali­tion forces fighting ISIS militants in Syria would retain the right to self-defence and said the United States would work to keep lines of commu­nication open with Russia.
In another complication, Iran on June 19 launched ballistic mis­sile strikes at ISIS targets in eastern Syria, the first time it has carried out such an action. US intelligence analysts concluded that Iran fired the missiles mostly in retaliation for ISIS attacks earlier in June on Iran’s parliament building and the tomb of the Islamic Republic’s founder.
A second US official said the use of ballistic missiles may have been in­tended as a signal that Iran remains committed to supporting Assad and a reminder that US forces and bases in the region were within reach of Iranian missiles and ground forces.
As it tries to craft a Syria strategy, the Trump administration is divided between those who consider ISIS the primary enemy and some offi­cials who think the war in Syria is part of an existential struggle be­tween the United States and its Gulf allies on the one hand and Iran on the other, said a third US official, who has participated in government deliberations on Syria.

Some Trump appointees saw Iran’s missile strike as an illustra­tion of Tehran’s regional ambitions, which they have argued make it an existential enemy, the three US offi­cials said.

These Iranian hawks, they said, are pushing for a Syria strategy that calls for concentrating first on de­feating ISIS, then turning on Iran and its allies, including Assad, Leba­non’s Hezbollah, Iraq’s Shia militias and Houthi rebels in Yemen.