The Washington PostDemocracy Dies in Darkness

Opinion How to stanch Syria’s bloody final showdown

Syrian fighters attend a mock battle in anticipation of an attack by the regime on Idlib province and the surrounding countryside, at a camp in the northern Idlib province on Aug. 14. (Omar Haj kadour/AFP/Getty Images)

As the Syrian tragedy lurches toward a bloody final showdown in Idlib province, the Trump administration is struggling to check Russia and the Assad regime from an assault there that U.N. Secretary General António Guterres warns would be a “humanitarian catastrophe.”

The administration’s efforts are so late in coming, and so limited, it’s hard to muster much hope they can reverse seven years of American failure. But at least the administration has stopped the dithering and indecision of the past 18 months and signaled that the United States has enduring interests in Syria, beyond killing Islamic State terrorists — and that it isn’t planning to withdraw its Special Operations forces from northeastern Syria anytime soon.

“Right now, our job is to help create quagmires [for Russia and the Syrian regime] until we get what we want,” says one administration official, explaining the effort to resist an Idlib onslaught. This approach involves reassuring the three key U.S. allies on Syria’s border — Israel, Turkey and Jordan — of continued American involvement.

President Trump’s personal commitment to Syria is unclear, given his frequent past comments that America’s role there should be limited to fighting terrorists. But the revamped policy appears to have the backing of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who recently appointed Jim Jeffrey, a respected former ambassador to Iraq and Turkey, to coordinate Syria engagement.

This 11th-hour rediscovery of Syria is poignant, because it comes as America is mourning the death of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who anguished in his final years about the United States’ inability to check the slaughter there. McCain believed that because of feckless policy, the United States was complicit in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Syrian civilians.

Follow David Ignatius's opinionsFollow

The administration has signaled a stiffer stance by warning Russia against its planned escalation in Idlib, which Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described Wednesday as “a festering abscess” that must be “liquidated.” Russia has mobilized about 15 ships near Syria as a prelude to a final assault. National security adviser John Bolton warned publicly last week that the United States would respond “very strongly” if President Bashar al-Assad’s regime used chemical weapons.

Idlib, located in the northwest corner of Syria, has become a haven for terrorists, anti-regime fighters and desperate civilians who fled there after the fall of Aleppo and Daraa. The province’s population is now about 3 million, swollen by perhaps 1 million refugees. In the Idlib cauldron are about 10,000 hardcore al-Qaeda fighters, along with foreign jihadists who joined the Islamic State caliphate.

Turkey fears that a massive assault on Idlib could drive as many as 2.5 million refugees north toward the Turkish border. From there, some (including terrorists) would try to make their way to Europe, creating a new security nightmare for countries already panicked by refugees. Staffan de Mistura, the United Nations’ envoy for Syria, this week described Idlib as a “perfect storm.” In this case, that overused metaphor seems apt.

U.S. goals in Syria have been sketched publicly by Pompeo and Mattis: withdrawal of all Iranian-commanded forces from the country, rather than just from a 50-mile buffer zone along the Israel border, as in the deal Russia arranged; and a political transition that can prevent Syria from becoming a terrorist base again and stabilize it enough that refugees can return to their homes. Pompeo and Mattis want more U.S. involvement in the Geneva deliberations on a political transition, too.

The challenge is convincing Syria’s neighbors that America’s influence still matters, particularly when Russia and the Assad regime seem poised for victory. Israel has worked closely with Moscow this year as it struck Iranian targets in Syria. But Israeli officials say they’ve concluded that only the United States can drive Iranian commanders from the field. Jordan, too, has welcomed Russian help in reopening its border crossing with Syria, but Amman’s survival depends on U.S. aid.

Turkey poses the trickiest problem. Its relations with the United States are poisonous these days because of the botched deal to free American pastor Andrew Brunson. But on the ground in Syria, cooperation is far better than it was six months ago, thanks to a face-saving accord between Turkish forces and U.S.-backed Syrian Kurdish fighters. Russia doesn’t have all the answers, in other words.

The paradox of Syria is that the stablest area now is probably the northeast, where U.S. forces operate alongside Kurdish-led militias, Sunni opposition groups, Turkish-backed fighters and elements friendly to the regime. If the United States really means to be back in the Syria game, it must prevent the Idlib bloodbath — and then encourage this same process of coexistence across the country.

Twitter: @IgnatiusPost

Read more from David Ignatius’s archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.

Read more:

Josh Rogin: Trump is setting his new Syria team up for failure

The Post’s View: Trump is getting in his team’s way on Syria

Dennis Ross: We already gave Syria to Putin, so what’s left for Trump to say?

Max Boot: To save Syrians, let Assad win

Jamal Khashoggi: It’s time to divide Syria