By focusing on Islamic State, Trump risks wider war

President Donald Trump has ordered stepped-up military operations against the Islamic State (IS) and delegated more authority to his generals, but without a comprehensive Syria strategy, his approach risks further confrontation with Syria, Iran and even Russia, according to US officials and analysts.

While the US military’s shootdown of a Syrian jet on Sunday was a rarity in modern warfare, the first in 18 years, it was not an isolated incident.

The US has taken a series of actions over the past three months demonstrating its willingness to carry out strikes, mostly in self-defence, against Syrian government forces and their backers, including Iran.

In April, Mr Trump ordered cruise missile strikes against a Syrian airfield from which Washington said a deadly chemical weapons attack was launched. Since then, the United States has repeatedly struck Iranian-backed militia and last week even shot down a drone threatening US-led coalition forces.

But these incidents are tactical; not part of any US strategy in Syria, analysts said.

Both the administration of former President Barack Obama and Mr Trump’s have focused exclusively on defeating the IS, but with the militants’ self-proclaimed caliphate shrinking, US-backed and Syrian-backed forces appear to be competing for territory.

“There isn’t an over-arching US strategy driving this,” said Charles Lister of the Middle East Institute.

“This is just the result of tactical decisions by a commander on the ground whose only focus is a specific theatre in Syria. He is acting to protect his assets ... This is purely a series of tactical decisions that are creating a series of very serious strategic consequences.”

Russia and Iran both support Syrian President Bashar al-Assad i n Syria’s civil war.

The larger problem, the officials and analysts said, is that Mr Trump and his national security team have not advanced a long-term political strategy for Syria.

Like Barack Obama, Mr Trump has focused on the IS, leaving for later the question of Mr Assad’s fate and the region’s mangled alliances.

“We have never had a coherent Syrian strategy,” said one US official, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We oppose Assad, but our main enemy is Isis [another acronym for the IS], which also opposes Assad. Our most capable allies are the [Kurdish] peshmerga, but Turkey, who is a Nato ally and host to an airbase that is central to our efforts, considers the Kurds enemies.”

Jennifer Cafarella, of the Institute for the Study of War, said the US strikes are unlikely to deter Mr Assad and his backers.

“The absence of a civilian-led US strategy in Syria and the narrow US military focus on Isis will continue to provide an open invite for the pro-Assad regime coalition to extend and escalate,” Ms Cafarella said.

A White House spokesman did not respond to calls and an email seeking comment. A senior White House official said: “The strategy for Syria is to defeat Isis and first and foremost achievement of a de-escalation of the conflict so we can work toward a political resolution. We’re not close to that, but that’s the strategy.”

Russia reacted angrily to the US shootdown of the Syrian jet, which the Pentagon said was dropping bombs near the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, a mixed Kurdish-Arab militia fighting the IS.

Moscow said it would treat US-led coalition aircraft flying west of the River Euphrates in Syria as potential targets and track them with missile systems and military aircraft. It stopped short of saying it would shoot them down.

The White House said on Monday coalition forces fighting IS militants in Syria would retain the right to self-defence, and the United States would work to keep the lines of communication open with Russia.

In another complication, Iran on Sunday launched ballistic missile strikes at IS targets in eastern Syria, the first time it has carried out such an action.

US intelligence analysts quickly concluded that Iran fired the missiles mostly in retaliation for a pair of IS attacks earlier this month on Iran’s parliament building and the tomb of the Islamic Republic’s founder.

A second US official said that the use of ballistic missiles may also have been intended to send a signal that Iran remains committed to supporting Mr Assad and as a reminder that US forces and bases in the region are within reach of Iranian missiles and ground forces.

As it tries to craft a Syria strategy, the Trump administration is divided between those who consider the IS the primary enemy and some officials who think the war in Syria is part of an existential struggle between the United States and its Gulf allies on the one hand and Iran on the other, said a third US official, who has participated in government deliberations on Syria.

Some Trump appointees saw Iran’s missile strike as an illustration of Tehran’s regional ambitions, which they have argued make it an existential enemy, according to the three US officials.

These Iran hawks, they said, are pushing for a Syria strategy that calls for concentrating first on defeating the IS, then turning on Iran and its allies, including Mr Assad, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Iraq’s Shia militias, and Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Phil Stewart is Reuters’ Pentagon correspondent and Jonathan Landay is national security reporter.