logo
US pulls out of two more bases in Syria, worrying Kurdish forces

US pulls out of two more bases in Syria, worrying Kurdish forces

News244 days ago

US forces have exited multiple northeastern Syria bases, leading to gaps in combating Islamic State threats.
Syria sees an increasing ISIS presence, with activities near closed US bases and attacks on SDF forces.
SDF expresses insufficient troop presence to contain ISIS, emphasising efforts to maintain pressure on the group.
US forces have pulled out of two more bases in northeastern Syria, visiting Reuters reporters found, accelerating a troop drawdown that the commander of US-backed Syrian Kurdish forces said was allowing a resurgence of Islamic State.
Reuters reporters who visited the two bases in the past week found them mostly deserted, both guarded by small contingents of the Syrian Democratic Forces - the Kurdish-led military group that Washington has backed in the fight against Islamic State for a decade.
Cameras used on bases occupied by the US-led military coalition had been taken down, and razor wire on the outer perimeters had begun to sag.
A Kurdish politician who lives on one base said there were no longer US troops there. SDF guards at the second base said troops had left recently but declined to say when. The Pentagon declined to comment.
It is the first confirmation by reporters on the ground that the US has withdrawn from Al-Wazir and Tel Baydar bases in Hasaka province. This brings the number of bases in Syria US troops have left to at least four since President Donald Trump took office.
Trump's administration said this month it will scale down its military presence in Syria to one base from eight in parts of northeastern Syria that the SDF controls. The New York Times reported in April that troops might be reduced from 2 000 to 500 in the drawdown.
The SDF did not respond to questions about the current number of troops and open US bases in northeastern Syria.
But SDF commander Mazloum Abdi, who spoke to Reuters at another US base, Al Shadadi, said the presence of a few hundred troops on one base would be "not enough" to contain the threat of Islamic State.
He said:
The threat of Islamic State has significantly increased recently. But this is the US military's plan. We've known about it for a long time ... and we're working with them to make sure there are no gaps, and we can maintain pressure on Islamic State.
Abdi spoke to Reuters on Friday, hours after Israel launched its air war on Iran. He declined to comment on how the new Israel-Iran war would affect Syria, saying simply that he hoped it would not spill over there and that he felt safe on a US base.
Hours after the interview, three Iranian-made missiles targeted the Al Shadadi base and were shot down by US defence systems, two SDF security sources said.
ISIS active in Syrian cities
Islamic State, also known as ISIS and Daesh, ruled vast swathes of Iraq and Syria from 2014 to 2017 during Syria's civil war, imposing a vision of Islamic rule under which it beheaded locals in city squares, sex-trafficked members of the Yazidi minority and executed foreign journalists and aid workers.
The group, from its strongholds in Raqqa in Syria and Mosul in Iraq, also launched deadly attacks in European and Middle Eastern countries.
A US-led military Coalition of more than 80 countries waged a yearslong campaign to defeat the group and end its territorial control, supporting Iraqi forces and the SDF.
READ | Syria investigates 'extremely disturbing instances' of minority revenge killings
But Islamic State has been reinvigorated since the ouster of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in December at the hands of separate Islamist rebels.
Abdi said ISIS cells had become active in several Syrian cities, including Damascus, and that a group of foreign jihadists who once battled the Syrian regime had joined its ranks. He did not elaborate.
He said ISIS had seized weapons and ammunition from Syrian regime depots in the chaos after Assad's fall.
Several Kurdish officials told Reuters that Islamic State had already begun moving more openly around US bases which had recently been shuttered, including near the cities of Deir Ezzor and Raqqa, once strongholds for the extremist group.
In areas the SDF controls east of the Euphrates River, ISIS has waged a series of attacks and killed at least 10 SDF fighters and security forces, Abdi said. Attacks included a roadside bomb targeting a convoy of oil tankers on a road near the US base where he gave the interview.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Always a peacemaker': How Trump decided to hold off on striking Iran
‘Always a peacemaker': How Trump decided to hold off on striking Iran

CNN

time28 minutes ago

  • CNN

‘Always a peacemaker': How Trump decided to hold off on striking Iran

By most accounts, President Donald Trump's attention for the past week has been consumed by the spiraling crisis playing out between Israel and Iran. In between meetings in Canada on Monday, he peppered aides for constant updates. He has spent more time in the basement Situation Room this week than at any point so far in his new presidency. So it was somewhat jarring Wednesday when the president emerged from the South Portico — not to provide an update on his crisis consultations, but to oversee the installation of two nearly 100-foot flagpoles. 'These are the best poles anywhere in the country, or in the world, actually. They're tapered. They have the nice top,' the president told a clutch of reporters and workmen. 'It's a very exciting project to me.' The break from his Iran meetings lasted about an hour, a moment for the president to literally touch grass on the South Lawn amid the most consequential period of decision-making of his term so far. A day later, the president decided not to decide. He dictated a statement to his press secretary Karoline Leavitt announcing he would hold off ordering a strike on Iran for up to two weeks to see if a diplomatic resolution was possible. The decision was revealed after another meeting in the Situation Room, where the president has spent much of this week reviewing attack plans and quizzing officials about the potential consequences of each. After steadily ratcheting up his martial rhetoric – including issuing an urgent warning to evacuate the 10 million residents of Iran's capital – Trump's deferment provides the president some breathing room as he continues to work through options presented by his military officials over the past several days. It also allows more time for the divergent factions of his own party to make their case directly to the president for and against a strike, as they have been urgently doing since it became clear Trump was seriously considering dropping bombs on Iran's nuclear facilities. The president has refused to pick a side in public and spent the last week alternating between militaristic threats issued on social media and private concerns that a military strike he orders could drag the US into prolonged war. Around the Situation Room table, he has relied principally on his CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine to discuss his options, according to people familiar with the matter. His foreign envoy Steve Witkoff has been corresponding with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to determine if room exists to restart the diplomacy that had been deadlocked before Israel began its campaign last week. Other officials have been publicly sidelined. Twice this week, Trump has dismissed assessments previously offered by his Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard about the state of Iran's program to develop a nuclear weapon. Gabbard testified in March that the US intelligence community had assessed Iran was not building such a weapon; Trump flatly and publicly disputed that Friday. 'Well then, my intelligence community is wrong,' Trump told reporters in New Jersey, asking the reporter who in the intelligence community had said that. Told that it was Gabbard, Trump responded, 'She's wrong.' Yet as he weighs taking action that could have consequences for years to come, Trump appears to be relying mostly on his own instincts, which this week told him to hit pause on ordering a strike that could alter global geopolitics for years to come. When top national security officials told Trump during a meeting at Camp David earlier this month that Israel was prepared to imminently strike inside Iran, it wasn't necessarily a surprise. Trump's advisers had been preparing for months for the possibility Israel could seize upon a moment of Iranian weakness — its regional proxies have been decimated over the past year — to launch a direct assault. Trump's team arrived at Camp David having already drawn up options for potential US involvement. According to people familiar with the matter, his advisers resolved differences between themselves in advance before presenting possible plans to the president. From the mountainside presidential retreat, Trump also spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who told the president he intended to begin a campaign in Iran imminently. Ten days later, with the Israeli campaign now in full swing, Trump was meeting in Canada with top American allies from the Group of 7, who hoped to decipher from him what the American plan was going forward. In closed-door meetings, leaders from Europe tried to ascertain whether Trump was inclined to order up a US strike on Fordow, the underground nuclear facility that has been the focus of attention for American war planners, western officials said. They also tried to convince a begrudging Trump to sign on to a joint statement, which urged that 'the resolution of the Iranian crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East.' Trump did not reveal his hand, either in private sessions with individual leaders or over dinner at the Kananaskis Country Golf Course, the western officials said. Instead, he left the summit early, leaving his counterparts in the Canadian Rockies and returning to Washington to deal with the matter himself. By midweek, with only vague signs from Iran that it was willing to restart talks, Trump's patience appeared to wearing thin for finding a diplomatic solution. And many of his allies believed he was on the verge of ordering a strike on Iran. 'It's very late, you know?' he said at Wednesday's flagpole event, the heat causing his forehead to glisten. 'It's very late to be talking.' In private meetings that day, Trump appeared convinced of the necessity of taking out the Fordow facility, according to people familiar with the conversations. And he said in public only the United States has the firepower to do it. 'We are the only ones who have the capability to do it, but that doesn't mean I am going to do it,' Trump said after coming back inside from his flag raising. 'I have been asked about it by everybody but I haven't made a decision.' He was speaking from the Oval Office, where he'd gathered players from the Italian soccer club Juventus to stand behind him. They mostly acted as a fidgeting backdrop to Trump's question-and-answer session on his Iran decision-making. At one point, Trump turned to the players amid a discussion of the B-2 stealth bomber — the only jet that could carry a bunker-busting bomb to destroy Iran's underground enrichment facility. 'You can be stealthy — you'll never lose, right?' he asked the team members, none of whom responded. 'It was a bit weird. When he started talking about the politics with Iran and everything, it's kind of, like… I just want to play football, man,' one of the players, Timothy Weah, said afterward. Amid the string of events, Trump continued to weigh the choices in front of him, and remained worried about a longer-term war. And he continued to receive messages from all sides of his political coalition, which has been divided over the wisdom of launching a strike that could embroil the US in a war for years to come. He's taken repeated calls from GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, a prominent voice in support of striking Iran who described the president as 'very focused, very calm' after a Tuesday night phone call. 'I feel like when he says no nukes for Iran, he means it,' Graham said the next day. 'He gave them a chance for diplomacy. I think they made a miscalculation when it comes to President Trump.' One of the most prominent voices opposing a strike, his onetime top strategist Steve Bannon, was at the White House midday Thursday for a lunch with the president that had been rescheduled from several weeks ago. He revealed nothing of his conversation with Trump on his 'War Room' show later Thursday. But a day earlier, he told a roundtable that getting involved in a drawn-out conflict with Iran would amount to repeating a historic mistake. 'My mantra right now: The Israelis have to finish what they started,' he said at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. 'We can't do this again. We'll tear the country apart. We can't have another Iraq.' For Trump, the swirl of options, opinions and advice is nothing new. He has faced the Iran decision much as he has most every other major choice of his presidency, by soliciting advice and trying to arrive at a solution that will please the widest swath of his supporters. The answer this time may not be as simple, nor does Trump hold all the cards in a conflict that is playing out across the world. Israel's decision to launch strikes a week ago — while not a surprise to the president — still came against his public entreaties to hold off. And in Iran, he is confronting an adversary with a long history of hardening its positions under pressure from the United States. As he was arriving Friday at his home in New Jersey, Trump said it would be hard to ask Netanyahu to ease up on strikes on Iran in order to pursue diplomacy, given Israel's success in the conflict so far. And he said the two-week window he set a day earlier was the maximum period of time he would allow for diplomacy to work, reserving the option of ordering a strike before that time is up. The president couldn't say whether the decision now in front of him is the biggest he'd face as president. But as he tries to find the balance between ending Iran's nuclear ambitions and keeping the US from war, he did offer an evaluation of what he wanted his legacy to be on the other side. 'Always a peacemaker,' he said. 'That doesn't mean — sometimes, you need some toughness to make peace. But always a peacemaker.'

As Iran and Israel Battle, the Rest of the Mideast Fears What's Next
As Iran and Israel Battle, the Rest of the Mideast Fears What's Next

New York Times

time29 minutes ago

  • New York Times

As Iran and Israel Battle, the Rest of the Mideast Fears What's Next

Across a swath of the Middle East, fighter jets and missiles regularly streak across the sky. The newest war in the region, this time between Israel and Iran, has once again put millions of people in the crossfire of a conflict that they want nothing to do with. The war has embroiled two well-armed, longtime enemies who are ethnic and political outliers in the region, but whose fight, many of their neighbors worry, could swiftly spill beyond their borders. 'We are constantly afraid, and the psychological toll has been heavy,' said Rawan Muhaidat, 28, a mother of two in the town of Kafr Asad in northern Jordan. The sight of Iranian missiles overhead, and the booms of air defenses shooting them down before they reach Israel, have terrified her children, who cower between her and her husband as they worry that their home could be struck. 'Every time a rocket passes and explodes, we think, 'This is the one,'' Ms. Muhaidat said. Adding to many people's fears is the possibility that President Trump will grant Israel's request that the United States intervene by dropping 30,000-pound bombs on an Iranian nuclear enrichment facility buried deep underground. Such a move, experts say, could push Iran to retaliate against American military bases or allies across the Middle East, or to activate proxy forces, like the Houthis in Yemen, to snarl trade routes or damage oil infrastructure, harming the global economy. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Sheltering in a Bunker, Iran's Supreme Leader Names Potential Successors
Sheltering in a Bunker, Iran's Supreme Leader Names Potential Successors

New York Times

time29 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Sheltering in a Bunker, Iran's Supreme Leader Names Potential Successors

Wary of assassination, Iran's supreme leader mostly speaks with his commanders through a trusted aide now, suspending electronic communications to make it harder to find him, three Iranian officials familiar with his emergency war plans say. Ensconced in a bunker, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has picked an array of replacements down his chain of miliary command in case more of his valued lieutenants are killed. And in a remarkable move, the officials add, Ayatollah Khamenei has even named three senior clerics as candidates to succeed him should he be killed, as well — perhaps the most telling illustration of the precarious moment he and his three-decade rule are facing. Ayatollah Khamenei has taken an extraordinary series of steps to preserve the Islamic Republic ever since Israel launched a series of surprise attacks last Friday. Though only a week old, the Israeli strikes are the biggest military assault on Iran since its war with Iraq in the 1980s, and the effect on the nation's capital, Tehran, has been particularly fierce. In only a few days, the Israeli attacks have been more intense and have caused more damage in Tehran than Saddam Hussein did in his entire eight-year war against Iran. Iran appears to have overcome its initial shock, reorganizing enough to launch daily counterstrikes of its own on Israel, hitting a hospital, the Haifa oil refinery, religious buildings and homes. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store