When President Trump announced that U.S. forces would be leaving Syria, the fate of our Kurdish allies was thrown into doubt. On Sunday, Trump offered his latest plan to protect the Kurds after U.S. troops depart: economic threats against Turkey.
Sadly, that is unlikely to dissuade Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan from following through with attacking the Kurds.
Starting the long overdue pullout from Syria while hitting the little remaining ISIS territorial caliphate hard, and from many directions. Will attack again from existing nearby base if it reforms. Will devastate Turkey economically if they hit Kurds. Create 20 mile safe zone….
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 13, 2019
The president’s threat is only the latest chapter in the still unfolding saga of the U.S. troop withdrawal which seems to have begun with a call between Trump and Erdogan. Trump at first seemed to oblige Erdogan’s request that the U.S. leave Syria so that Turkish forces could attack U.S.-allied Kurdish forces who would be left undefended in their ongoing fight against the Islamic State.
Facing widespread backlash, including the resignation of his them Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and criticism from prominent Republicans including Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Trump offered a slower timeline for departure that keeps troops on the ground while also protecting the Kurds and defeating the remnants of ISIS.
If anybody but Donald Trump did what I did in Syria, which was an ISIS loaded mess when I became President, they would be a national hero. ISIS is mostly gone, we’re slowly sending our troops back home to be with their families, while at the same time fighting ISIS remnants……
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 31, 2018
Meanwhile, both national security adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo traveled to the region to seemingly reassure allies that the U.S. was not, in fact, going to quickly abandon its allies and work in the Middle East.
Speaking on Thursday in Cairo, for example, Pompeo explained:
When asked about Trump’s suggested economic treat, Pompeo responded, “We apply sanctions in many places around the world. I assume he’s speaking about those kinds of things but you would have to ask him,” as he had not yet spoken with the president.
Despite reassurances, U.S. troops have already begun to prepare to leave Syria exacerbating the seeming disconnect between the president, his advisers and what the military has been ordered to do. That confusion, combined with Erdogan’s own phone call with a wild suggestion that prompted the whole string of events, highlights a key reason why Trump’s threat will hold little water in Turkey: the White House is fickle, lacks follow through, and doesn’t seem to have yet settled on a strategy.
That reality was again reinforced in December when, within a day of each other, Trump offered different solutions and justifications for bringing U.S. troops home.
President @RT_Erdogan of Turkey has very strongly informed me that he will eradicate whatever is left of ISIS in Syria….and he is a man who can do it plus, Turkey is right “next door.” Our troops are coming home!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018
Saudi Arabia has now agreed to spend the necessary money needed to help rebuild Syria, instead of the United States. See? Isn’t it nice when immensely wealthy countries help rebuild their neighbors rather than a Great Country, the U.S., that is 5000 miles away. Thanks to Saudi A!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018
For Erdogan this ever-shifting flood of plans and proposals means that, although U.S. sanctions could inflict serious economic damage, the latest threat has as much credibility as any of Trump’s other tweets: not much. For U.S. threats to be effective, they must be taken seriously and for that Washington needs a clear, consistent, and well throughout out policy.
Economic sanctions might sound like a good way to ensure U.S. interests and protect the Kurds, but on presidential Twitter, they’re just latest example of a half-baked threat in lieu of foreign policy.
