WASHINGTON -- The Trump administration's rapidly shifting strategy in northern
Syria has U.S. commanders there scrambling to protect their forces from an expected surge in actions by military units from Turkey, Russia,
Iran and the Syrian government, as well as their proxy forces, according to Defense Department officials. U.S. commanders now see these armed groups as a greater danger than the
Islamic State forces they were sent to fight.Commanders have requested guidance outlining how U.S. forces might deal with an attack from the assortment of armed groups, including Russian-backed Syrian government forces, that have, in the past, tried to seize territory held by the United States. But they have received muddled direction from the
Pentagon, two Defense Department officials said.For now, the U.S. command heavily relies on the instincts of junior commanders on the ground, cautionary phone calls to officials from
Russia and
Turkey and overhead surveillance -- susceptible to failure in poor weather -- to help avoid close encounters with other forces in the Euphrates River Valley, where most U.S. troops are based."These forces are at risk without a clear understanding of what they are expected to achieve, and without the political support of their nation, if or more likely when, one of these
American adversaries decided to attack them," said Jennifer Cafarella, the research director for the Institute for the Study of War in Washington. "These guys are deployed in one of the most risky, complex and rapidly evolving environments on the planet."These concerns are the result of President Donald Trump's order to withdraw 1,000 U.S. troops from the country, amid Turkey's invasion of northern Syria in October. Weeks later, Trump approved the Pentagon's plan to leave roughly 500 troops behind at several outposts around the city Deir el-Zour to go after the Islamic State, often known as ISIS.Though Trump said the U.S. presence there is "to protect the oil," the reality is that the Americans are continuing their earlier mission of pursuing remnants of the Islamic State, military officials say. The Americans continue to operate alongside allies in the Kurdish-led Syrian
Democratic Forces.As U.S. forces pulled back in early October, a U.S. military document circulated to forces in the region, warned of the coming difficulties. "Complexity" surrounding U.S. forces in northern Syria "has only increased in recent weeks as multiple opposing groups and actors have gradually increased their forces in surrounding areas," said the document, a copy of which was obtained by The
New York Times. The warning was part of a flurry of situation reports, maps and communiques outlining the movements of
Russian military forces around the Syrian city of Manbij and the start of Turkey's military operation along the Syria-Turkey border.Before Turkish-backed forces entered the area in northern Syria previously held by U.S. troops, the American and Russian militaries were responsible for coordinating military operations in that part of the country, and had done so for three years. Both militaries had relied on a "deconfliction" phone line and a separate planning group, using a map broken down into lettered and numbered sectors, known as a keypad, for reference. This allowed officials from both countries to determine where troops were operating.But the introduction of hundreds of Turkish-backed forces quickly strained this long-standing system, as shown by the accidental
Turkish shelling close to a U.S. outpost near the Turkey-Syria border in early October. In one of the military documents obtained by The Times, U.S. officials wrote after that attack that they "cannot rule out" that Turkish military forces "will miscalculate U.S. force dispositions again."Speaking to lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper said that the situation in northern Syria has "generally stabilized," although he cautioned that Turkish-backed fighters remained a "wild card."Esper added that there currently are no plans to withdraw U.S. troops from the country."Right now there's no disposition plans that I'm tracking," Esper said.Turkish-backed fighters are often poorly managed by the Turkish military, said several Defense Department officials, who added that the Russian military is far more reliable in navigating the difficulties of such a contested battlefield.To underscore the fact that the battlefield in northern Syria is continuously changing, Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, the head of the military's Central Command, said in a recent interview that protecting the oil fields might ultimately draw a larger challenge from Syrian army troops west of the Euphrates. "I'd expect at some point the regime will come forward to that ground," McKenzie said.But for now, McKenzie said, the remaining U.S. forces in northern Syria, working alongside several thousand allied militia members from the Syrian Democratic Forces, will be able to carry out "effective" counterterrorism missions against the Islamic State in that part of the country. Last month, the forces restarted operations against the terrorist group, after groups of Islamic State fighters began operating again in the chaos created by the Turkish incursion and U.S. retreat."We have enough to very capably, with our SDF partners, pursue a counterterrorism platform against
ISIS," McKenzie said.He noted that the
United States maintains a strong capability for reconnaissance and combat air power to protect U.S. forces and to carry out strike missions when necessary."We have everything we need," McKenzie said in the interview.The idea that Syrian troops could move to retake ground from the Americans is nothing new.In February 2018, about 500 Syrian troops and dozens of vehicles, backed by Russian contractors, attacked the Conoco gas plant near Deir el-Zour. U.S. commandos there, alongside Kurdish forces and backed by waves of U.S. aircraft, fought back, killing hundreds of the fighters.The hourslong battle was a clear message to other fighters in the region that the U.S. would protect their partner forces.But after months of political tumult in
Washington and Trump's assent to the Turkish invasion in October, it remains unclear if U.S. forces, even with an addition of Bradley armored fighting vehicles, would stand and fight as they have in the past, the officials said.The Bradleys, the officials added, were sent only as a signal of resolve, not necessarily to fight the Syrian government's military.This article originally appeared in The New York Times.(C) 2019 The New York Times Company