The article by Leo Hohmann examines the ongoing conflict in Syria, positing that the Biden administration has ignited a proxy war that will burden Donald Trump upon entering the presidency. Hohmann claims that the conflict is a deliberate effort by the U.S. “deep state” to sow further instability in the Middle East, potentially escalating towards a larger global conflict. He paints a stark picture of the Syrian landscape, noting that it is increasingly being dominated by Al Nusra—a coalition of Al-Qaida and ISIS affiliates—with backing from Turkey, a NATO ally. This faction’s control has expanded significantly, notably with the capture of Aleppo and surrounding areas.
The article also highlights the troubling dynamics of U.S. foreign policy, particularly through the lens of Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, who allegedly acknowledges a moral alignment with Al-Qaida in the Syrian struggle. Hohmann points to the history of the Syrian civil war, tracing its roots back to the 2011 uprising against President Bashar Assad. He underscores the involvement of various international military forces, including the U.S., Russia, Israel, and Iran, and notes that the situation is increasingly fractious with opposing sides vying for control. Hohmann argues that American narratives framing local rebels as freedom fighters are misleading, as they fail to capture the ideological and strategic complexities of a landscape characterized by jihadist factions on both sides.
Central to Hohmann’s critique is the assertion that the U.S. military involvement exacerbates violence rather than ameliorating it. He stresses that U.S.-backed Sunni jihadists are engaging in ruthless behaviors, such as assaults on Christian populations, akin to actions witnessed during the Iraq War post-Saddam Hussein. He identifies key figures in Congress, like Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain, as proponents of prolonged American intervention, effectively perpetuating what he terms “endless cycles of violence.” This perspective aligns with former military personnel’s sentiments, who see the U.S. approach as a misguided “regime-change war.”
Hohmann contends that the global political landscape is increasingly fraught, and that the current regime in Washington is exacerbating tensions worldwide. He warns that in this volatile environment, responsibility for the impending chaos will fall to Trump as the new president. The piece draws a closing remark, emphasizing the need for the U.S. to withdraw from Syria and similar conflicts that serve no direct American interests, arguing that continued engagement only fuels global instability.
In addition to Syria, Hohmann points to U.S. involvement in Eastern Europe, particularly in Georgia, and the significant loss of life in Ukraine, suggesting that American foreign policies have tragic human consequences. He advocates for a reevaluation of U.S. military commitments abroad, proposing a return to a defensive posture that focuses solely on protecting American interests rather than engaging in military adventurism. This sentiment is tied to a broader appeal for reshaping the CIA’s role, limiting it to intelligence operations while ceasing involvement in foreign revolutions and interventions.
As the article closes, Hohmann makes an appeal to readers for support to maintain his independent news and commentary platform, emphasizing the importance of self-funded journalism free from external influences. He encourages contributions to sustain his work, while also wishing his audience a joyful holiday season. Overall, the editorials align with a skeptical view of U.S. foreign policy, calling for withdrawal from active military conflict and a reassessment of America’s role in international affairs.
