Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • 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 / Middle East / U.S. military forces in the Middle East should decrease, not increase by 10,000
Middle East, Counterterrorism, Iraq, Syria

May 23, 2019

U.S. military forces in the Middle East should decrease, not increase by 10,000

By Benjamin Friedman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
May 23, 2019
Contact: press@defensepriorities.org

WASHINGTON, DC—In response to reports the Pentagon would present plans to the White House to send up to 10,000 additional U.S. troops to the Middle East amid escalating tensions with Iran, Defense Priorities Policy Director Benjamin H. Friedman issued the following statement:

“The United States already has more than 20,000 troops in the Middle East and more nearby. That’s already too many.

“Instead of sending 10,000 additional troops to the Middle East, the U.S. should be removing forces from the region, especially from Syria and Iraq. Those troops left behind have no coherent mission now that ISIS’s caliphate has been destroyed. U.S. forces are vulnerable to attack, which could lead to a crisis or war with Iran.

“U.S. interests in the Middle East are limited to avoiding a major disruption to global oil markets, primarily by preventing a regional hegemon, and combatting anti-American terrorists. Neither interest justifies a permanent troop presence, let alone a larger one, or war with Iran.

“As a middling power surrounded by rivals, Iran is not capable of dominating the region. And U.S. counterterrorism aims are best accomplished by cooperation with local partners and strikes from offshore, when necessary.

“The Middle East is of diminishing strategic importance to the U.S., and the threat from Iran is limited. Its malign activities, like funding extremists, are undesirable, but they show Iran’s weakness, not its strength. The Iranians are contained, and then some. We should be doing less in the region, not more.

“The ’maximum pressure’ campaign is not likely to lead Iran back to the negotiating table, the president’s stated objective—it’s most likely to result in Iran restarting its nuclear weapons program or launching direct or proxy attacks.”

Author

Photo of Benjamin Friedman

Benjamin
Friedman

Policy Director

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

What lessons are foreign leaders taking from Donald Trump’s Iran bombing?

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, China, Iran, North Korea, Russia

There is no ‘axis of autocracy’

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Basing and force posture, Middle East

The Iran strike shows we don’t need bases in the Middle East

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Dan Caldwell

June 28, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, Americas, China, Iran, Middle East, Russia

How not to do multipolarity

By Anthony Constantini

June 28, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

The real obstacle to peace with Iran

By Rosemary Kelanic and Jennifer Kavanagh

June 25, 2025

In the mediaIsrael‑Iran, Middle East

Is Iran really a threat to the United States? A debate

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic

June 25, 2025

Events on Middle East

See All Events
virtualGreat power competition, Balance of power, China, Grand strategy, Middle East

Past Virtual Event: U.S.-China competition and the value of Middle East influence

June 10, 2025
virtualMiddle East, Basing and force posture, Diplomacy, Houthis, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Israel‑Hamas, Military analysis, Syria

Past Virtual Event: 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

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

February 21, 2025

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