Washington is facing a moment of rare strategic clarity in Syria, a country long synonymous with unending war and geopolitical entanglement. A fragile interim government in Syria is struggling for stabilization. The dilemma for the U.S. is how to choose its level of engagement there without engaging in new conflicts or letting adversarial forces gain ground.

This becomes particularly important for the Trump administration, as Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa announced a transitional government on March 30, appointing a diverse 23-member Cabinet — an illustration of his growing grip on power. Although past policy has oscillated between intervention and disengagement, the current situation requires a balanced approach between pragmatic diplomacy and enforcing critical red lines. The decisions Washington makes during this period will shape whether Syria develops into a functional state or backslides into instability.

Strategically, the U.S. has achieved major successes in the region. The military presence of Iran has been substantially debilitated. Hezbollah's weapon supply chains have been interrupted and Russia's control over Syrian politics has diminished. The longstanding “ring of fire” which threatened Israel due to Iranian-backed militias no longer presents an urgent danger.

These successes, however, do not translate to an automatic U.S. exit from Syria’s affairs. A hasty U.S. withdrawal, combined with rigid policy approaches, would create fertile........

© The Hill