More questions raised as US has boots on ground in Syria

By Liu Zhun 

After years of rejecting to put "boots on the ground" to combat the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq and Syria, US President Barack Obama compromised his commitment on Friday. The administration is set to deploy a small team of less than 50 special operations forces to the Kurdish-controlled region in northern Syria. Although White House officials have clarified that these troops are stationed in a "train, advise and assist mission," the presence of US ground forces in Syria is enough to raise many new questions.

Hardly making a real difference to the local quagmire, the deployment is widely believed in the US to be a major escalation of Washington's military strategy against the IS and the ruling Bashar al-Assad regime. Analysts and the public are worried that the small team might lead to a larger presence of US ground troops on the turbulent turf, where the White House hasn't been able to find a way to fix the previous strategy.

As for other stakeholder in the region, Russia soon expressed its discontent over Obama's decision.

The bone of contention rests on whether it will herald a greater involvement by the US in the Syrian crisis, intertwined by major-power rivalry, a civil war and terrorism. Since Moscow's military intervention against the IS in late September, the regional situation has met an obvious transformation, which is heading to a reshuffle of the power structure.

The US has found itself increasingly mired in a dilemma. On the one hand, Washington is relieved that Russia's air raids, accompanied by Syrian ground forces, have hammered the IS, a common enemy that still rose like wildfire when Washington led the campaign to wipe it out. On the other hand, with Russia's support, the Assad regime is gaining the upper hand in the long-standing civil war, and this is the least result the US expects.

Washington seems to be recalibrating its policy to find prospects for interaction with other stakeholders. For example, it finally nodded on Friday at Iran's involvement in the international talks on Syria, despite years of opposing Tehran's role in efforts to bring the Syrian civil war to an end. The small deployment of troops - not in a combat role - might be following the same trend to sound out other stakeholders' reaction.

Given Washington's failed mission previously, the effectiveness of the new military strategy is naturally in doubt, as well as its sincerity in reinstalling stability in Syria. In any event, Syria may continue to be a pit for activists, opportunists and major powers. A long-term feasible solution is still out of sight at the moment.