A panel of former national security officials and other experts is calling for the White House and lawmakers to “halt the U.S. military withdrawal” from Syria or face potentially dire consequences.The conclusion, at odds with plans announced late last year by U.S. President Donald Trump, is part of the final consensus Umm Joumaa, a Syrian displaced from Hama, sits with her family in an abandoned bus in the village of Birat Armanaz in Idlib, Sept. 4, 2019.”It could yet grow worse,” he warned, pointing to a possible new exodus of refugees from Idlib — the last stronghold for some terrorist groups as well as Syrian rebels — and a flashpoint between Russia, Turkey and forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.In addition, there are concerns about continued escalation in the conflict between Iran and Israel, as well as about simmering tensions between Turkey and Kurdish forces in northeastern Syria, many of which fought against Islamic State as part of the U.S.-led coalition.IS, despite having lost control of all its territory, also poses an ongoing threat, the group warned.”The ISIS detainee population is a few prison breaks away from reconstituting the next caliphate,” said Dana Stroul, co-chair of the Syria Study Group.Stroul, a former staff member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who previously worked at the Pentagon, warned there are other consequences for a U.S. withdrawal, including an evermore defiant Syrian regime, backed by a further emboldened Russia and Iran.In this photo taken on Tuesday, Oct. 20, 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Syria President Bashar Assad arrive for their meeting in the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia.”Assad, Iran and Russia have faced no meaningful consequences for the use of chemical weapons and barrel bombs, torture, starvation and intentional targeting of civilian infrastructure,” she said.”Iranian boots are not leaving Syria despite U.S. sanctions and Israeli strikes,” she added. “Iran is entrenching itself in Syria’s economic and social fabric for long-term influence.”Both Singh and Stroul said the U.S. needed to use the tools it already has in place, including a limited number of troops, allied forces on the ground and aid programs, to prevent a further deterioration of the conflict.”The tools for this strategy are already on the table,” she said. “But effective and appropriate resourcing of these tools are needed to give them teeth.”Some lawmakers remained skeptical.FILE – Democratic Senator Chris Murphy questions a witness during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, July 25, 2018.”My worry is that the recommendations you are making to us are just an invitation for the status quo to persist,” Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy said.Stroul insisted, at least for now, the small U.S. military presence in Syria and the persistence of allies on the ground give Washington “a decisive form of leverage, if not right this minute, down the line.””The only party in this conflict who has a clear vision for how they see it end is Bashar al-Assad,” Singh said, noting the only realistic near-term hope for Syria is for Assad to modify his behavior.”As long as there’s a question, for example, as to whether we’re really committed to doing this … that may give him the belief that he can wait us out,” Singh added.
…