The Illusion of Fixing Syria: For over a decade, the United States has poured energy, resources, and diplomatic capital into Syria, chasing an elusive goal: fixing a country shattered by civil war, authoritarian brutality, and proxy conflicts. But it’s time to face reality. We cannot solve Syria’s problems — at least not right now — and continuing to try only distracts us from what really matters: protecting core U.S. interests and preventing threats to our security and that of our allies.
Since President Obama’s first fumbling attempts at Syria policy, America has been caught in a strategic trap of its own making. Humanitarian disaster, regime change hopes, defeating ISIS, countering Iran, pushing back Russia — all of these priorities were pursued at once. The result? As the saying goes: when everything is a priority, nothing is a priority.
That’s why the approach during the first Trump administration was notable. It didn’t attempt to “solve” Syria’s political future. Instead, it focused ruthlessly on two clear objectives: destroying the ISIS caliphate and reducing Iran’s military footprint. This wasn’t a perfect solution — but it was a smart one. It put America in the strongest possible position given the circumstances.
Today, Syria’s landscape has shifted dramatically once again — but the lesson remains the same: America should stay focused on its strategic priorities, not on the impossible task of engineering Syrian politics.
In December, the long-standing Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad was abruptly forced out of power. The man who has taken his place is Ahmad al-Sharaa — better known to the world as Abu Muhammad al-Jawlani, the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), formerly the al-Qaeda-linked Nusra Front.
For years, Jawlani was known as a hardened jihadist. But in a remarkable turn of events, he has rebranded himself. The black robes are gone, replaced by tailored suits. He meets with diplomats. He speaks of rights for women and minorities. His message to the world: Syria has changed — and so has he.
But few are buying it.
In March, a brutal clash between forces loyal to Jawlani and remnants of Assad’s army left over 1,000 people dead — most of them civilians. Israel’s foreign minister dismissed Jawlani’s moderate makeover as a facade, calling it a “true reflection of his jihadist intentions.”
Despite these warnings, there is growing pressure in Washington and European capitals to engage with Syria’s new strongman. The argument is simple: The enemy we know is better than the one we don’t.
Jawlani is in power. Assad is gone. Better to build ties now, the thinking goes, than risk Syria falling into the orbit of Iran, Russia, or extremist factions beyond Jawlani’s control.
But this line of thinking repeats the same mistake America has made too many times in the Middle East: backing strongmen in the hope that they’ll deliver stability — only to find out later that they’ve become liabilities or outright threats.
Three months of charm offensives from a former al-Qaeda leader do not erase a lifetime of extremist ideology. Any U.S. engagement with Jawlani, without clear and enforceable conditions, risks locking us into a relationship with a man whose ultimate goals may directly undermine our security.
Rather than chasing political influence in Damascus — or being seduced by Jawlani’s PR makeover — America should focus on the areas where it can make a real difference: preventing Syria’s ungoverned spaces from becoming terrorist havens and limiting Iran’s ability to project power in the region.
Israel has already taken the lead in securing southwestern Syria. It has bolstered ties with minority groups like the Druze and expanded its military footprint near the Syrian border. Jordan, too, has been actively countering Iranian-linked drug trafficking and smuggling networks emanating from Syria — even carrying out airstrikes when necessary.
The United States should support these efforts. Intelligence sharing, logistical backing, and diplomatic cover can help ensure that southern Syria does not descend into chaos or become a corridor for Iranian operations.
This is smart, targeted engagement — protecting U.S. allies while denying space to our enemies.
The roughly 2,000 U.S. troops stationed in eastern Syria have been primarily focused on countering ISIS remnants. That mission remains vital. But it’s time to widen the scope.
Eastern Syria is increasingly vulnerable to Iranian influence. Tehran wants to establish a land corridor stretching from Iran through Iraq and Syria to Lebanon — allowing it to move weapons, fighters, and resources to Hezbollah and other proxies.
Alongside Israel, the U.S. should refocus its eastern Syria mission on preventing any Iranian military buildup. This doesn’t mean massive new deployments. It means leveraging existing assets more effectively — integrating counter-ISIS operations with counter-Iranian measures.
Iran’s ability to project power in Syria relies heavily on Hezbollah, the Lebanese terrorist organization and Iranian proxy. Weakening Hezbollah’s financial networks, political influence, and military capabilities should be a central pillar of U.S. strategy.
Sanctions, intelligence operations, and working closely with Lebanon’s military and civil society can help erode Hezbollah’s grip. Without Hezbollah, Iran’s plans for Syria become far harder to execute.
For all the talk of Syria’s politics — who rules Damascus, what flag flies over government buildings, what kind of constitution is written — the brutal truth is that these are not America’s fights. Not now.
President Trump captured this reality succinctly after Assad’s fall, saying: “This is not our fight.”
That doesn’t mean America should abandon Syria entirely. It means we should be clear-eyed about what matters to us — and what doesn’t.
Trying to shape Syria’s internal political future is a losing game. What we can do is ensure that Syria doesn’t once again become a launchpad for threats against America and its allies.
A Smarter, Sharper Syria Strategy
By focusing on what matters most — preventing jihadist havens, countering Iranian expansion, and protecting our partners — America can avoid the mistakes of the past.
This strategy also creates space for a possible political transition in the future. If Syria’s internal dynamics shift in ways that open genuine opportunities for peace, stability, and reform, the U.S. can and should be ready to engage.
But that moment is not now.
For too long, U.S. policy in Syria has been driven by illusion — the illusion that America could remake Syria in its image, or that a little pressure could force a brutal dictator like Assad to step aside in favor of liberal democracy.
Those illusions are dead.
Syria today is a fractured, fragile country with competing warlords, jihadist factions, foreign proxies, and humanitarian crises on every side.
America cannot fix Syria. But it can protect its interests.
That means standing with Israel and Jordan as they secure their borders. It means keeping pressure on ISIS and Iran. It means weakening Hezbollah’s reach. And above all, it means refusing to be drawn into the fantasy that the U.S. can choose or control Syria’s next ruler.
