Elliott Abrams, the former U.S. special representative for Iran during the first Trump administration, said he doesn’t expect much U.S. involvement in Syria following the fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime, but that the newly volatile situation creates both new opportunities and perils in the region.
Abrams said during a Monday webinar with the Jewish Institute for National Security of America that he doesn’t expect the Trump administration to invest much diplomatic energy or capital into the situation in Syria, but argued that it’s “critical from the American national security point of view,” that a post-Assad Syria not become a terrorist state, an Iranian proxy or a conduit for supplies from Iran to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
He said that the fall of the Syrian regime had created new opportunities for Israel to strike Syrian military facilities to destroy Iranian missiles and Syria’s chemical weapons.
“They don’t know … what’s coming next,” Abrams said. “If it’s going to be a somewhat hostile government, then obviously they want it to be as weak as possible militarily. So they’re trying to weaken it.”
He also noted that the nom de guerre of the leader of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) forces that ousted Assad, Abu Mohammed al-Golani, “suggests he might have a particular interest in trying to recover the Golan,” from where his family originates.
Abrams said that Israel’s moves into Syria along the border with the Golan Heights are designed to send a message to Syrian forces not to attempt aggression against Israel.
“It’s also, of course, a gesture of lack of confidence in the U.N. to protect that border, should Syrian forces really try to come at it,” Abrams said. “It’s hard to believe that this rebel army, which now has to worry about governing the whole country, would want to start a fight with Israel — could even do it if they wanted to — but it’s a kind of preemptive move by Israel.”
John Hannah, the former national security advisor to former Vice President Dick Cheney and a senior fellow at JINSA, said it’s also a question whether the new Syrian government accepts the terms of the 1974 disengagement agreement with Israel and the demilitarized zones between southern Syria and Israel.
Abrams said a key next question will be about the integrity of the border between Syria and Lebanon, historically a conduit from Iran to Hezbollah in Lebanon. He said that it remains to be seen whether the Lebanese Armed Forces can or will police that border — something he said should be part of talks with Lebanon, whether there’s a coherent governing entity in Syria capable of policing borders and whether that new Syrian regime will do so.
He described those questions as important in the context of a potential strike on Iran’s nuclear program, which would likely prompt retaliation from Iran’s proxies throughout the region. Abrams said that degrading the Houthis and closing off their supply routes would also be a key next step.
Hannah said that the fall of the Assad regime, coupled with Hezbollah’s failure and the weakening of other Iranian proxies in the region, may embolden anti-Iran factions in Lebanon and Syria.
Hannah said the U.S. should be “looking for ways that are smart to step on that gas pedal with a laser-like ultimate endgame of bringing an early resolution to that Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian problem more broadly,” as well as “smart ways and cost effective ways” to create internal problems for the Iranian regime.
Abrams described Turkey as “one of the big winners here” from the Assad regime’s fall, and said that there are real questions about how much involvement the Turkish government had behind the scenes in encouraging HTS to make its push in recent weeks. He said that Turkey’s goals are a key question as events move forward.
Abrams predicted potential rifts in the reconstruction process in Syria between potential Gulf funders trying to push their governance visions on Syria, with the Saudis and Emiratis on one side and Qatar and other Muslim Brotherhood-aligned nations on the other.
He called the situation complicated for Jordan, given that it had reached a “modus vivendi” with Assad, adding that the rise of a hard-line Muslim Brotherhood-aligned government in Syria could generate concerns for the Jordanian government if the Syrian government won’t commit to not interfering in Jordanian affairs.
Saudi and Emirati money and influence, he explained, could serve as a lever to press the Syrian government not to interfere with Jordan, but “whether the Qataris agree to that is a different question because they’re much closer to the Muslim Brotherhood.”
But Abrams also said it’s difficult to predict how the ultimate governance structure and balance will shake out.
Abrams traced Assad’s fall in part to miscalculations by both Hamas and Hezbollah in attacking Israel, and Israel’s success in decimating those Iranian proxy groups.
The former Trump administration official, who said he is not in touch with the president-elect, also said he’d urge Trump not to withdraw the small U.S. troop presence in Syria, as Trump attempted to do during his first term. Abrams said the primary mission of those troops is to combat ISIS and ensure that imprisoned ISIS terrorists are not released.
“I would say to him, Mr. President, if you leave, if you pull those guys out, and there is a terrorist attack against Americans by one of those guys, you’re going to be blamed,” Abrams said. “It’s not worth it… And I would hope somebody is saying that.”
U.S. forces struck ISIS postings in Syria over the weekend.