To: American Foreign Policy Class
From: Group 4
Date: 2/1/2019
RE: Al-Qaeda Advancement in Northern Syria pressuring Threat of Breaking Cease-fire
Executive Summary:
Recent truce between Syria, Russia, and Turkey was brokered, demanding an immediate ceasefire in the province of Idlib, located in Northern Syria bordering Turkey. Within the past week, Al-Qaeda linked terrorist group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) has taken control of two dozen towns and villages in the province; accumulating to 3,475 Square miles or 5% of Syrian territory. HTS now pressures the weak truce between nations, threatens security of Russian air bases, and displaced millions of citizens from their homes, threatening government justification on province.
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham Stresses Weak Truce Between Bordering Nations Sparking Potential Break of Truce:
Turkey, holding nearly a dozen posts along the province of Idlib has since shifted focus of threat along the eastern front, protecting the border from Syrian Kurdish troops; with preparation of an offensive. With threat of breach in the south, it is possible Turkey once again will shift focus of an offense, targeting the Northern Syria border to ensure protection of National Security; threatened by HTS. This act would breach the ceasefire agreement, causing conflict along the Northern territory again. Ankara (Capital of Turkey), senses Hayat Tahrir al-Sham’s seizure of the territory is an act aimed at destabilising the agreement reached in September by both countries. Russia, ally of Syria has urged the Turkish government to act decisively in restricting militant action along their southern border. One may consider, if Turkey chooses resolute action the threat may be peacefully dealt with, de-escalating potential threats and continuing the ceasefire agreement between nations.
Threat on Russian Airbase Security in Case of Breach in Cease-Fire:
Russia, an ally with the Syrian Assad Regime controls the skies which grant many advantages for the country in protection of outside threats. Being located on the neighboring Coastal Province of Latakia, Russian air base, Khmeimim becomes a major concern for security. Prompting Russian Offense on Turkey in addition to Syrian Forces. In the event of Turkey pursing action against HTC, along the southern border Syria would view the acts of aggression as threat against the Nations security. In turn, Russia, considering its interests with Syria and real estate within the country would retaliate against the Turkish government. Escalation on both sides would produce offenses proving to be detrimental, creating stronger tension between countries than prior existing.
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham Seizure of Idlib Territory Displaces Millions of Citizens While Posing Government Threat on Territory:
With seizure of two dozen towns and villages in the province HTC has forced many Syrians from their homes, to avoid threat of danger. With numerous aid agencies instituted in the region there becomes threat of whether these agencies will pull out of the area. In the event of a withdrawal, civilians are left exposed without food and water along with desertion of medical support. Loss of these agencies gives incentives for the Syrian government and Russian forces to justify deadly offenses on the territory, which would lead to thousands of civilian casualties; breaking numerous humanitarian laws. Fawaz Gerges, Professor of Middle Eastern Politics, at the London School of Economics illustrated this potential threat by relating to the “Battle for Aleppo”, leaving thousands of casualties, along with government forces capturing the rebel-held east.
Potential Course of Action to resolve this issue for United States Foreign Policy:
The al-Qaida advancement in Northern Syria is occurring at a time where the United States is both on the cusp of defeating the terrorist group, Islamic State, and preparing to withdraw 2,000 troops from the region. During his presidency, Donald Trump has constantly both vowed to reduce United States presence in the region and complained that U.S allies and partners need to do more in undertaking security in Northern Syria. The decision to lessen their presence in Northern Syria will only lead to difficult times for the United States in preventing themselves from losing all of its leverage in the region. The withdrawal is just leading to the “players” (al-Qaida, Russia, Turkey) in the region to influence the situation in their favor and possibly detrimental to the United States. With the NSA still trying to figure out ways the U.S. can pull out of the region without undermining their interests, the only logical course of action that can resolve this issue in foreign policy is for the United States to reconsider pulling out of Northern Syria.
Bibliography:
Mroue, Bassem. "Al-Qaida's Advance in Northern Syria Threatens Fragile Truce." Concord Monitor. January 30, 2019. Accessed January 31, 2019. https://www.concordmonitor.com/Al-Qaida-s-advance-in-northern-Syria-threatens-fragile-truce-23137950.
Stein, Aaron. “The Scramble for Northeast Syria.” Foreign Affairs, Foreign Affairs Magazine, 22 Jan. 2019, www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/turkey/2019-01-22/scramble-northeast-syria.
good job
ReplyDelete!
ReplyDeleteawesome- JJ
ReplyDeleteI was interested while reading your memo because you focused on a topic I do not know anything about. I think your subtopics were wisely chosen because they are specific enough to inform readers of your chosen topic, but they are not filled with an overwhelming amount of information. My one concern with your memo and something I think you should keep in mind for your next post is to proofread for grammar mistakes before you post. At some points, it was difficult for me to read because of the abundance of grammatical errors in some sections of the memo.
ReplyDeleteOverall I think your group picked a great topic to write about, as successor groups to al-Qaeda have proven to be one of the most pressing concerns facing the region and the rest of the international community. While I found the content of your memo to be informative, in your next post I would try to focus on the flow of your argument by providing clear links between each subtopic. Doing so would strengthen your points and clarify to readers exactly how HTS’s stress on the truce could worsen the humanitarian crisis within Syria. Lastly, I would be mindful to proofread your work before submitting it; using Grammarly (an online proofreading website) might be a helpful tool to try!
ReplyDeleteOverall, you guys did a great job! However, please stick to one acronym for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham either HTS or HTC. Using both throughout made my initial reading confusing. There were many people mentioned without any background on who they are. The missing information made reading difficult since I do not have tons of previous knowledge on the topic. I do think you picked an interesting issue and reading your memo made me want to learn more.
ReplyDelete-Talia
I thought this was a very interesting topic and think that you all covered it well. I think overall you all did a good job with explaining a topic I didn't know much about and made it understandable. After reading I am interested to learn more about these groups and to see whether or not leaving will work out in our favor as well as the surrounding area.
ReplyDelete-Evan
I enjoyed reading your memo. I find it intriguing that if the United States does pull out of the region if it would be similar to what happened to the Kurds of Iraqi Kurdistan in 1991. When writing your blog I would just make you go back and read your work just to make sure there are no grammar mistakes. Overall, I found the topic very interesting and even though I did not know much about this topic, after reading your blog I was able to get a better understanding.
ReplyDelete- Glendy Alvarez
The memo was informative and the different subsections made it easier to read and process the material. I agree with others on the point of grammar, which did make the memo a little difficult to understand. I liked the paragraph about the conflicts' toll on civilians as I believe that civilian lives are critical in foreign policy considerations. I think it would have been good to include another sentence or two about the "Battle of Aleppo" to link this example to the current situation in Northern Syria a little bit more. Overall, good job!
ReplyDelete-Kennedy
I thought this was a pretty good memo, separating the issues was helpful for reading and understanding the articles. As mentioned above, the grammatical errors make the memo somewhat difficult to follow but the information was still good. It’s interesting that the actions of HTS in one country can indirectly influence two others. I didn’t know too much about this topic but now I can understand a little better how the US occupation ceasing in Syria would lead to more bad than good.
ReplyDelete-Kelsea
I really enjoyed your memo. The subsections made the blog more easier to follow, but for next time I would suggest looking more carefully at the grammar. I definitely agree with the last section of the post that the United States does need to reconsider pulling out of Northern Syria as it would cause instability in the region and affect alliances. Overall the post is extremely informative as I did not previously have much knowledge in this topic.
ReplyDelete-Hillary
Overall I think the memo was organized well, as the subsections made the post easier to follow. While the information about the situation was given, the structure of the sentences made it difficult to understand what was being discussed clearly. I found the paragraph on the potential course of action to be informative, and I agree with your point that the U.S. should reconsider pulling out of the region. For future memos, however, I would go more in-depth about your course of action.
ReplyDeleteI think this topic is a very interesting and complex issue. Specifically, your discussion of the conflicting plans proposed by President Trump to stabilize the region-- both reduce United States presence in Northern Syria and increasing security efforts in the region-- reflects the complexity of the issue and a lack of clear policy agenda offered by the United States. I think you could strengthen your memo by adding to the “Potential Course of Action” section and further explain why reducing US presence in Syria might “only lead to difficult times for the United States.” You could also expand on the last sentence of the memo and maybe explain in greater detail why the US should reconsider pulling out of Northern Syria.
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a very solid memo. The organization and headings made it very easy to follow and simplified a complex situation. I thought that was very helpful. In the future, I would be careful to look over grammar mistakes so that it doesn't undermine the information you are providing. Overall, I found it very interesting and informative.
ReplyDeleteWill Moreton
This was a very well organized memo as well as an interesting topic. This is a region as well as a conflict that is central in US foreign policy so writing about how the movement of the HTS is critical for foreign relations is very relevant. Your inclusion of how Trump and his administration have mentioned both maintaining influence in the region as well as pulling troops out is very interesting. It brings up important questions such as: what is more vital to US interests right now, staying in the area to maintain control, or to pull out and watch an unstable cease-fire be breached?
ReplyDeleteDan Curran
Overall, I felt that this was well done in explaining a topic that I previously had little knowledge of. There is clearly a deep of level of analysis and research done in writing the memo. However, I felt that the memo would have benefited from better proofreading and a clearer flow from topic to topic as the memo progressed.
ReplyDeleteThis is a well organized memo and a very intriguing topic. I agree with your conclusion and it is backed up with factual evidence that makes it hard to argue against. One thing that you could improve upon is the flow of your writing. It seemed a bit choppy and smoothing out your writing could improve your work.
ReplyDelete-Jack Herndon
Good choice in topic. I think you are right to voice concerns over the unintended consequences of a rapid withdrawal of American personnel from Syria. However, you might strengthen your position by offering a more concrete alternative to the Administration's current policies. How long should U.S. forces remain in Syria? What goals are we trying to achieve? Should the U.S. seek to remain "in country" as long as Iran is? Until a political settlement regarding the Syrian Civil War can be achieved, ideally guaranteeing the nominal autonomy of America's Kurdish partners? - Ian MacLeod
ReplyDeleteAs someone new to the details of this issue your memo did a fantastic job breaking down the major players within the region in and around Syria. I think your memo`s read on the impact of US withdrawal is accurate; the withdrawal will result in rocking the area with instability. I think if you were to ever add to this memo talking about a feasible exit strategy for the US would be interesting. "What goals should the US set?" and "How long until the US can withdraw?" would add depth to this memo.
ReplyDelete- Daniel Hagan
I really enjoyed your memo! I think it offered a lot of information about a topic I know nothing about. Timing is possibly the most interesting aspect of the article. With the Trump administration trying to withdraw troops, it definitely offers some insight on the "America First" stance on foreign policy. Do you really think getting involved is the best option for America, or is it rather something out of our control? I think with the ties to Al quaeda, we should at least wager our options to show our power as America.
ReplyDeleteI found your memo very interesting because I normally support an independent America stance because I do believe we spend a lot money and other resources aboard. However, I never thought of how Trump pulling the troops out of Northern Syria would allow other influences to thrive. While Independent America wants other countries to have influence and take a more leading role, we have to be careful about this because it could have more consequences than we originally anticipated. These consequences are more long term while removing our soldiers would only solve short term problems.
ReplyDelete-Samantha Landry
This is a very interesting topic, and I believe a very important one that should be more common in current international views and topics. I wish I could be surprised that President Trump's removal of troops and the United States actions hurt the area and left it to be influenced by more illegitimate powers, but I am not. This speaks to a concept of American foreign policy that we should probably start to consider: not sticking our nose in everyone's business when it suits us and then hanging them to dry when it suits us.
ReplyDelete-Shannon