US to scale down its military bases in Syria
ANKARA, Turkey (Reuters) -- The US will scale down its military presence in Syria to one base from eight and US policies will shift in the country "because none of them worked" over the last century, the new US special envoy has said.
Thomas Barrack, who President Donald Trump named special envoy last month shortly after he unexpectedly lifted US sanctions on Syria, made the comments in an interview with Turkish broadcaster NTV late on Monday.
The US military has about 2,000 US troops in Syria, mostly in the northeast. They are working with local forces to prevent a resurgence of Islamic State, which in 2014 seized large swaths of Iraq and Syria but was later pushed back.
Since rebels ousted Syria's former President Bashar Assad in December, the US and other countries are re-engaging with Damascus under new leader Ahmed al-Sharaa.
Barrack, also US ambassador to Turkey, raised the American flag over the ambassador's residence in Damascus last week for the first time since 2012.
When asked how the Trump administration will shape its Syria policy and whether the US is considering troop withdrawal from Syria, Barrack said, "What I can assure you is that our current Syria policy will not be close to the Syria policy of the last 100 years, because none of these have worked." Reducing the number of bases to one from eight was an important part of that shift, he said, according to an interview transcript.
Two security sources in bases where US troops are deployed told Reuters in April that military equipment and vehicles had already moved out of eastern Deir el-Zor and were being consolidated in the province of Hasakah.
One of the sources said the consolidation plan involved pulling all US troops out of Deir el-Zor province.
A US State Department official said separately that the military presence would be reduced "if and when appropriate" based on conditions, adding troops are routinely calibrated based on operational needs and contingencies.
Barrack said that the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces were a US ally and a "very important factor" for the US Congress, and that directing them to integrate into a new Syrian government was also very important.
"Everyone needs to be reasonable in their expectations," he said.
The SDF is the main ally in a US coalition against Islamic State militants in Syria. It is spearheaded by the YPG militia, which Ankara sees as an extension of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party. The PKK decided to disband last month after a 40-year conflict with the Turkish state.
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said last week that the SDF was using "stalling tactics," despite a deal with the Syrian government to integrate into Syria's armed forces.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Korea Herald
14 hours ago
- Korea Herald
Senate clears Trump's sweeping tax-cut and spending bill
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The Republican-controlled US Senate advanced President Donald Trump's sweeping tax-cut and spending bill in a key procedural vote late on Saturday, raising the odds that lawmakers will be able to pass his "big, beautiful bill" in the coming days. The measure, Trump's top legislative goal, passed its first procedural hurdle in a 51 to 49 vote, with two Republican senators voting against it. The result came after several hours of negotiation as Republican leaders and Vice President JD Vance sought to persuade last-minute holdouts in a series of closed-door negotiations. The procedural vote, which would start debate on the 940-page megabill to fund Trump's top immigration, border, tax-cut and military priorities, began after hours of delay. It then remained open for more than three hours of standstill as three Republican senators -- Thom Tillis, Ron Johnson and Rand Paul -- joined Democrats to oppose the legislation. Three others -- Senators Rick Scott, Mike Lee and Cynthia Lummis -- negotiated with Republican leaders into the night in hopes of securing bigger spending cuts. In the end, Wisconsin Senator Johnson flipped his no vote to yes, leaving only Paul and Tillis opposed among Republicans. Trump was monitoring the vote from the Oval Office late into the night, a senior White House official said. The megabill would extend the 2017 tax cuts that were Trump's main legislative achievement during his first term as president, cut other taxes and boost spending on the military and border security. Nonpartisan analysts estimate that a version of Trump's tax-cut and spending bill would add trillions to the $36.2 trillion US government debt. Democrats fiercely opposed the bill, saying its tax-cut elements would disproportionately benefit the wealthy at the expense of social programs that lower-income Americans rely upon. Chuck Schumer, the Senate's top Democrat, demanded that the bill be read aloud before debate could begin, saying the Senate Republicans were scrambling to pass a "radical bill." "If Senate Republicans won't tell the American people what's in this bill, then Democrats are going to force this chamber to read it from start to finish," the New York Democrat said.
![[Wang Son-taek] Is the specter of 9/11 rising again?](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwimg.heraldcorp.com%2Fnews%2Fcms%2F2025%2F06%2F25%2Fnews-p.v1.20250625.7141a28f39e94496b68ea14a1dea6b85_T1.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Korea Herald
4 days ago
- Korea Herald
[Wang Son-taek] Is the specter of 9/11 rising again?
US President Donald Trump has once again shaken the global order — this time through a direct military strike on some targets in Iran: nuclear facilities that produce enriched uranium. The bunker-buster assault, launched under Trump's direction, marked a rare instance of a direct US attack on Iranian soil. Although the immediate result was a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, the strategic and ethical implications of the strike are far more disturbing than they first appeared. Following the US strike, Iran launched only minimal retaliatory attacks before agreeing to what amounts to a ceasefire of near surrender. Israel, too, accepted this halt in hostilities. On the surface, it might appear that American power forced a pause in the conflict. But beneath that silence lies a storm: in Iran, anger and humiliation are growing — particularly among the youth — who might view this sequence of events not as fair but as public submission to Western aggression. That sentiment raises a chilling historical parallel: the 9/11 attacks in 2001. At the time, many Americans saw the attacks as inexplicable acts of evil. However, later analyses revealed that the roots of such extremism lay in decades of unilateral, arrogant and often violent US interventions in the Middle East. The young people in the Arab world or Islamic nations radicalized during those years saw the United States not as a beacon of freedom but as a hubristic superpower trampling their sovereignty. The fear now is that Trump's latest strike may sow the seeds of yet another 9/11-style backlash — this time from another generation filled with rage and defiance. The UN Security Council did not approve the military strike, nor was there any consensus among US allies. There is no clear evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat requiring a preemptive US strike. In short, the action violated fundamental principles of international law — specifically, the prohibition against unilateral use of force without Security Council authorization or a clear case of self-defense. The alarming point is that the US is responsible for protecting the rule of no unilateral use of force. Even more concerning is the fact that Trump's strike appeared to align with Israel's aggressive posture toward Iran. In recent months, Israel has conducted multiple attacks on Iranian targets, citing concerns over Iran's nuclear program. There are indeed reasons to be concerned about the programs from an Israeli perspective. However, such doubt can not justify the preventive strike in any form. Now, by acting in concert with — or perhaps on behalf of — Israel, the United States has compromised its traditional image as an objective mediator in the region. Instead, it has cast itself as a direct participant in the conflict, blurring the line between diplomacy and warfare. This is not an isolated event. During his presidency, Trump withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran nuclear deal. He undermined multilateral diplomacy, weakened US commitments to the United Nations, and championed the doctrine of 'America First,' even at the cost of global stability. This bunker-buster strike is a continuation of that same unilateralist worldview — one that sees military power as the only real instrument of diplomacy. But history tells us otherwise. Using overwhelming force does not end the conflict; it often fuels a long-term quagmire. In Iran, Trump's strike will likely embolden hard-liners, marginalize moderates and further incentivize the pursuit of nuclear weapons as a deterrent against future attacks. Ironically, the outcome the United States seeks to prevent may be accelerated by its actions. The political timing of this strike also raises serious concerns. With US domestic politics, which are notably confused by tariff wars and immigration stuffiness, it is complicated to ignore the possibility that Trump's military gambit is aimed less at global security and more at domestic political gain. By projecting strength, he may hope to consolidate his base and reframe the domestic political landscape around national security and leadership. If so, this would be a dangerous instance of military populism, where foreign policy is used not to protect peace but to win votes. Meanwhile, the global consequences are unfolding rapidly. In the Islamic world, the United States is once again being cast as a violent and unjust superpower. Online platforms, community forums and underground networks are buzzing with imagery and rhetoric framing the US as a tyranny. For young people in the region, especially those with few economic or political prospects, such narratives become fertile ground for radicalization. The risk is real. Another 9/11 may not look like the last. It may take new forms — cyberattacks, sabotage, lone-wolf incidents — but the emotional logic will be the same: retaliation against perceived injustice. And once again, it will be ordinary civilians — American, Iranian, Israeli and others — who will bear the cost. What, then, must be done? The international community cannot remain silent. The United Nations should clarify the strike's illegality and reaffirm the UN Charter's principles. Members of the powerful and advanced nations in Europe, Asia and other areas must reclaim diplomatic space and call for a return to multilateral dialogue. Silence now may be interpreted as complicity later. The United States must also reflect on its role as a normative global governance hegemon. Power without restraint is tyranny, not leadership. Finally, we must remember the human cost of these actions. Behind every military strike is a grieving family, a ruined home, a lost child. Trump's strike may have ended one conflict phase, but has likely opened a longer, darker chapter in the Middle East. One that may take years, even decades, to close. In the end, history is rarely kind to those who confuse strength with wisdom. Trump's reckless militarism and hopeless hubris may be remembered not for bringing victory but for calling fiasco — and for pulling the world one step closer to the very tragedies it seeks to prevent. Wang Son-taek is an adjunct professor at Sogang University. He is a former diplomatic correspondent at YTN and a former research associate at Yeosijae. The views expressed here are the writer's own. — Ed.
Korea Herald
4 days ago
- Korea Herald
Son-in-law of SK Group chief participated in US strikes on Iran
Kevin Liu Huang, the son-in-law of SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won, participated in the recent US and Israeli airstrike operations targeting Iran, according to his own social media post. Huang, who is married to Chey's second daughter, Chey Min-jung, currently serves in the US Combined Special Operations Joint Task Force -- Central (CSOJTF-C), based in the Middle East. On Tuesday, local time, he shared insights into his deployment via LinkedIn. "I thought deploying to the Middle East with a joint task force headquarters would be 'sleepy' vs. working in Ukraine or INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Command),' he wrote. He went on to say he 'couldn't have imagined that within six short months: the Assad regime would fall, the Houthis would capitulate to our bombing attacks and we'd join the Israelis in bombing Iran directly." Huang tied the knot with the Korean tycoon's daughter in Seoul in October last year. A Chinese-American, Huang graduated from Harvard University and earned an MBA from Stanford University. After college, he joined the US Marine Corps. Since 2021, he has served as a reservist while also running a startup, continuing his affiliation with the Marine Corps. Chey Min-jung also has a military background, an uncommon path for a member of a chaebol family. In 2014, she enlisted as a naval officer candidate and was deployed to the Gulf of Aden in 2015 with the Cheonghae Unit. In 2016, she served in the Korean Navy's Second Fleet Command, which defends the Northern Limit Line, the de facto maritime border with North Korea.
