Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • 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 Syria

In the mediaSyria, Iran, Middle East, US‑Israel‑Iran

America’s Syria withdrawal has a new reckoning: Iran

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic

March 27, 2026

Op-edSyria, Middle East

Trump’s Syria withdrawal makes good strategic sense

By Alexander Langlois

February 25, 2026

Op-edSyria, Middle East

U.S. troops finally leave Syria

By Daniel DePetris

February 13, 2026

Press ReleaseSyria, Middle East

Drawdown from Syria a success worth scaling

By Rosemary Kelanic

February 12, 2026

Op-edSyria, Middle East

What the latest ceasefire and unification deal means for Syria

By Alexander Langlois

February 9, 2026

Op-edSyria, Middle East

The U.S. couldn’t prop up the Kurds forever

By Rosemary Kelanic

February 4, 2026

Events on Syria

See All Events
virtualMiddle East, Basing and force posture, Diplomacy, Houthis, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Israel‑Hamas, Military analysis, Syria

Trump in the Middle East: Impacts, implications, and alternatives

May 16, 2025
virtualSyria, Balance of power, Basing and force posture, Counterterrorism, Middle East, Military analysis

Syria after Assad: Prospects for U.S. withdrawal

February 21, 2025
virtualMiddle East, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Israel‑Iran, Syria, Yemen

Keeping the U.S. out of war in the Middle East

January 16, 2024

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.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.