Rumored for months, President Donald Trump finally received a resignation from 68-year-old Defense Secretary James Mattis, who’s been at odds with Trump since sworn in Jan. 10, 2017. Whether admitted to or not, Trump holds strong opinions about the Pentagon, especially with regard to the Iraq War where he faulted the Bush-43 administration for making the biggest mistake in U.S. history. Trump made his feelings known in nationally televised debate only days before the South Carolina primary. Trump told the audience with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush on stage with his family, including former President George W. Bush, in the audience, that the Iraq War was a huge blunder. Mattis wholeheartedly backed the Iraq War along with the late Sen. John McCain (R-Az.), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and many other Republicans, vehemently disagreeing with Trump.
Trump handily won the South Carolina primary, knocking Jeb Bush out of the race, creating enemies of the Bush family for his criticism of the Iraq War. Resigning yesterday, Mattis said Trump has a right to a defense secretary that agrees with his position on U.S. foreign policy, especially where to deploy U.S. troops. Trump campaigned to destroy the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria [ISIS] that once held 30% of Iraq and Syria’s territory in 2014. Having 2,000 U.S. advisors in Syria, primarily assisting the Kurd’s YPG militia, the U.S. proxy force battling ISIS on the ground, provides no direct combat role. Unlike Iraq, where the U.S. deployed over 20,000 troops close to the time when former President Barack Obama decided to pull out Dec. 15, 2011, pulling out U.S. advisers from Iraq won’t have much impact on whether or not ISIS reconstitutes itself.
Whether admitted to or not, Mattis agrees with Graham that the U.S. should continue to back Syrian Democratic Forces [SDF], a hodgepodge of Kurds, Arabs and mercenaries that continue to battle Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. With the help of Russia and Iran, al-Assad has beat back a seven-year-old Saudi-backed proxy war seeking regime change in Damascus. Mattis backed Obama’s six-year-old effort to supply arms-and-cash to Syrian rebels to topple al-Assad’s Shiite government. With al-Assad getting the upper hand in Syria, Trump reasoned that continuing to seek regime change in Damascus was a loser for the U.S. government. Mattis and Graham pretend 2,000 U.S. advisers have any effect on shaping the Kremlin’s or Tehran’s policy in Syria. Trump had enough of U.S. senators and Pentagon brass continuing to fund a proxy war to oust al-Assad in Damascus.
Today’s media over-simplifies the problem in Syria, where the U.S. advisers have no clear mission now that ISIS has been driven out of major Iraq and Syria’s cities. Worrying about what happens to remaining ISIS fighters no longer holding much territory in Syria and Iraq should not, according to Trump, be the role of the U.S. military. Graham wants to debate Trump’s plan to pull 2,000 U.S. advisers out of Syria. Graham himself hasn’t hidden his loyalty not primarily to the Kurds but to the SDF or Free Syrian Army [FSA], still trying to topple al-Assad. When Trump ran for president he made clear that he wanted to avoid more military escalation in Syria. If Graham or Mattis had their way, they’d be committing ground troops to a mission of toppling al-Assad, despite pitting the U.S. directly against Russia and Iran. Trump’s now accused of placating Russia because he wants U.S. troops out of Syria.
U.S. officials can never expect to purge Iraq and Syria of all ISIS fighters, nor should that be a reasonable mission. Getting ISIS out of Iraq and Syria’s major cities was a major accomplishment by a combination of Russian, Syrian, Iraqi, Iranian and U.S.-backed Kurdish forces. If anyone played a bigger role, it was Iraqi and Syrian forces, battling to reclaim lost territory of Abu Bakr al-Baghadi’s failed Caliphate. Graham and Mattis insist that without the 2,000 U.S. advisers in Syria, ISIS would reconstitute itself, something highly speculative. As far a Graham and Mattis insisting that the Kurd’s deserve better treatment, neither Mattis nor Graham lifted one finger Oct. 17, 2017 to help the Kurds when the Iraq expelled them from Mosul and Kirkuk. Using the Kurds as an excuse now gives cover to Graham and Mattis but doesn’t reflect the real U.S. policy when it comes to the Kurds.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told Trump Dec. 14 that Turkey was going to clear out terrorist and rebel nests along the Turkey-Syria border. He asked Trump what the purpose was continuing U.S. troop presence in Syria, especially when the Damascus considered the U.S. trespassing. “Time to focus on our Country & bring our youth back home where they belong,” said Trump, showing uncanny consistency with his campaign promises. Graham, Mattis and other backers of U.S. advisers in Syria have competing agendas, some worried about an ISIS revival, other concerned about the plight of the Kurds. Kurd’s Peshmerga know how to deal with Turkey, Syria, Iran, Iraq and other hostile regimes. For Graham to talk about our loyalty to the Kurds, where was the U.S. when the Kurds wanted independence last year? No one in the Pentagon was willing to spill blood for Kurdish independence.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
