Maj. Gen. Eric Hill, addressing the arrival of more armored vehicles at
the US positions in eastern Syria, says it is part of the “resetting” of
the US position further east, and required the US to have more “combat power here to sustain ourselves.”
Maj. Gen. Hill says that the goal is not simply to have power to match
ISIS but “the militaries of the Syrian regime, the Russians, or even
militias backed by fellow NATO partner Turkey.” The focus is on how
everyone is carving up territory in eastern Syria, which was once
controlled by the US and its Kurdish allies.
The US clearly has problems with the territory being carved up, at the
least to the extent that they’re not getting as much territory as they’d
figured on. President Trump’s talk of taking the oil, and
re-positioning the US troops at the oilfields show that if Syria is to
be carved up, the US intends to take some key pieces.
Putting aside long-term US territorial ambitions in Syria, the
indications are that the US intends to maintain a presence of less than
1,000 troops in Syria, and even with some tanks and an irresponsibly
large number of Bradley Fighting Vehicles, it’s hard to imagine that the
US really believes that, and air support, would truly match the
militaries of Syria or Russia.
Though the Pentagon likes to brag about its ability to project power
across the world, in Syria its ability to accomplish anything has
historically hinged on getting the Kurds to do it for them. Though the
deployment at the oilfields is no doubt capable of inflicting some
casualties if control of the fields is challenged, it’s hard to imagine
that the US believes it would truly hold this ground with a few hundred
troops.
US Ramping Up Firepower in Syria to Match Syria, Russia
US general says redeployment to east Syria required more power
Jason Ditz is Senior Editor for Antiwar.com. He has 20 years of experience in foreign policy research and his work has appeared in The American Conservative, Responsible Statecraft, Forbes, Toronto Star, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Providence Journal, Washington Times, and the Detroit Free Press.
Join the Discussion!
We welcome thoughtful and respectful comments. Hateful language, illegal content, or attacks against Antiwar.com will be removed.
For more details, please see our Comment Policy.
×