Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Israel-Hamas
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • North Korea
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Syria / Syria is strategically unimportant, and its reconstruction is a burden, not a prize
Syria, Middle East

October 22, 2019

Syria is strategically unimportant, and its reconstruction is a burden, not a prize

By Gil Barndollar

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
October 22, 2019
Contact: press@defensepriorities.org

WASHINGTON, DC—On Tuesday, President Putin of Russia and President Erdogan of Turkey met to discuss the Turkish incursion into Syria and seek a new status quo for the Middle East nation torn from years of civil war. Defense Priorities Senior Fellow Gil Barndollar issued the following statement in response:

“Whatever one thinks of the presidents of Turkey and Russia, their meeting may be a useful step toward negotiating an end to the violence in Syria.

“The defeat of ISIS’s caliphate left the United States in notional control of a large portion of Syria with no vital interests in the country. A methodical, full withdrawal was the best policy, returning Syrian land back to Syria.

“Staying in Syria after the fall of ISIS’s last stronghold in March created an American quasi-protectorate that was never politically or militarily sustainable. Kurdish reconciliation with Assad, however distasteful, was inevitable. The hubris of U.S. officials in Washington—and the administration’s indecision—has now made that outcome as rushed and painful as possible.

“U.S. withdrawal from northern Syria, however, will force local actors to resolve the crisis on their own. The responsibility for Syria’s future and eventual reconstruction is a burden, not a prize.

“The Trump administration’s plan to leave a residual force behind—in the oil fields of the northeast and the al-Tanf base in the southeast—will hinder Syrian reconstruction and encourage further false hopes of a U.S. solution to the conflict.

“The United States has completed its achievable military objectives in Syria and should implement a full withdrawal of all remaining forces.”

Author

Photo of Gil Barndollar

Gil
Barndollar

Non-Resident Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

op-edIran, Middle East, Nuclear weapons

Maximalism will doom diplomacy with Iran

By Rosemary Kelanic

May 8, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, Middle East

As Donald Trump prepares for Middle East visit, his efforts there aren’t inspiring

By Daniel DePetris

May 6, 2025

Press ReleaseHouthis, Air power, Middle East, Military analysis, Yemen

Ending strikes on Yemen: Good news if it sticks

By Rosemary Kelanic

May 6, 2025

op-edIran, Middle East

Trump needs his team on the same Iran page

By Daniel DePetris

May 5, 2025

op-edYemen, Air power, Houthis, Iran, Middle East

In Yemen, Trump risks falling into an ‘airpower trap’ that has drawn past US presidents into costly wars

By William Walldorf

May 5, 2025

ExplainerMiddle East, China, Europe and Eurasia

China can’t dominate the Middle East

By Rosemary Kelanic

May 5, 2025

Events on Syria

See All Events
virtualSyria, Balance of power, Basing and force posture, Counterterrorism, Middle East, Military analysis

Past Virtual Event: Syria after Assad: Prospects for U.S. withdrawal

February 21, 2025
virtualGrand strategy, Iran, Middle East, Syria

Past Virtual Event: Keeping the U.S. out of war in the Middle East

January 16, 2024
in-personCounterterrorism, Afghanistan, Iraq, Middle East, Syria

Past In-Person Event: Ground truth about ground wars

November 5, 2019

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved