I'm well aware of previous calls for retreat, even Rand Paul had floated the idea a few times a
few years back. But back then, everyone was fresh with adrenaline after years of combating ISIS on conventional terms, no one for example has any incentive to retreat right after they had just finished their original goal. And generally speaking, the situation is unique back then for the U.S. to continue operating in Syria
Now the situation the different, I think even after the loss of the physical caliphate, the Americans sooner or later (if not already), figured out that there's really no way to 100% curb ISIS militancy, just November last month ISIS scored the single deadliest months for SAA/allies troops in 2023 around the Badia desert. Which meant that their presence in NES in nothing more than as guardsmen for the Kurdish nation building project project with no real impact against D-ISIS on the ground. But this time the calculations for the cost-benefit ratio of staying has shifted.
The geopolitical situation has shifted a lot since then (pre-2020s), back then the U.S. doesn't have to worry about daily attacks by Iran-led militias on its base. The war in Gaza and the involvement of Iran's proxy militia has significantly raised the price of continuing U.S. presence. Again Rand Paul correctly described it as a "tripwire", where it could led the U.S. to an unwanted war, which the U.S is getting dangerously close now. It could be just that the cost of staying is now a lot more expensive than the benefit in Syria and that cost is steadily rising each day with the proxy of Iran escalating attacks against U.S bases in the light of the war in Gaza.
A wider war with Iran and its proxies is not on the list of U.S. agenda right now, they simply don't have the stomach, as has been demonstrated by their limited action against the Houthis in Yemen or the PMF in Iraq because at the same time they're trying to pivot to the Pacific which is already severely compromised by their aid to Israel.
To be blunt the U.S. is now severely overstretched with commitments in Asia, in Europe, in the Middle East (which bthey had tried so hard to abandon) and now even in Latin America as Venezuela is poised to invade Guayana. Another major political crisis and there's every reason to believe that the Rojava agenda will slip even further down the list of Washington's foreign policy agenda.
There will be time where U.S. policy makers are confronted by the stark choice of continuing their presence with rising costs and reduced benefits, and most likely chooses the easy path of abandoning when the cost is >> benefit, this has been proven again and again in Viet Nam and Afghanistan. No one early in Viet Nam or Afghanistan would have predicted that the U.S will abandon its allies to the dog after years of propping them up and hailing them as their ultimate allies.
But in Viet Nam and Afghanistan, war fatigue eventually consumes them, the earlier justifications for war such as the prevention of the spread of Communism (Viet Nam) and the defeat of Islamic militancy (Afghanistan) gave way to other priorities at home and politicians own agenda.
I'm willing to bet that Mazloum Abadi of SDF will spend his time like this man below in a decade or two.
============
Talking about Lindsey Graham, I'm well aware of his effort to limit the scope of Turkish army during the 2019 Peace Spring operations, but I'm also aware that Lindsey Graham, like all politicians, is keen to switch stance accordingly as they see fit. Just 6 months ago, Lindsey Graham is the top Ukrainian supporter on the House, yet in a twist of fate it is also Lindsey Graham who rose up to torpedo the supplemental aid to Ukraine in 2023
Lindsey just 6 months ago
"(Ukraine) is the best money we've ever spent" (0:28)
Lindsey at the end of the year LMAO
www.al-monitor.com
www.cnnindonesia.com
www.youtube.com
