From the beginning, the conflict in Syria has been significantly shaped by external actors, particularly the US, Russia, Turkiye, Iran, and the Gulf states. Things became more complicated in 2015 after the US returned to the battlefield as the leader of the coalition to fight Daesh, which also coincided with Russia’s intervention in the war-torn country. Nonstate actors, namely Daesh, were considered the main threats by the two global powers. As a result, the US and Russia intervened to some extent and the conflict turned into a proxy war between the two. Foreign interventions not only complicated the war but also led to an intense competition among global powers on both the international and regional level. The US and Russia became the dominant actors in the conflict, changing the balance on the ground in favor of the regime. This was largely due to the cohesion among the Russian elite. Division among the Washington elite, meanwhile, led to misguided US policies in Syria, fragmentation of the Syrian opposition, and empowerment of the Iranian-Russian axis. However, following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russia began to move some troops and weaponry from Syria to the front lines in Ukraine. These developments sparked initial optimism among Western observers about a potential strengthening of US influence in the region. Many viewed the withdrawal as a positive development, hoping it would at least prevent a new era of regional rivalry among global powers. Following Russia’s move, there were reports that the US might also reduce its presence in Syria. The US and Iraq have recently reached a deal to begin removing American forces stationed there by 2026. If the plan is successful, it will bring an end to the US military presence in a country still facing problems as a result of the invasion in 2003. Officials in Washington have rejected reports of the US withdrawing from Syria completely, saying that troops will remain there in order to prevent the resurgence of Daesh. There are reportedly 900 US troops still in the eastern part of Syria today. The US partnership with the YPG is viewed by Ankara as a national security threat Sinem Cengiz However, US troops in Syria aim not only to prevent the resurgence of Daesh, but also to contain the influence of Iran and Russia, both of which also have a military presence in the country. Washington seeks to counter both by supporting its Kurdish allies, the People’s Defense Units, or YPG, the Syrian branch of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which is designated a terrorist organization by Ankara. The US partnership with the YPG is viewed by Ankara as a national security threat, and remains the most contentious issue in the relationship between the two countries. Due to the rise of YPG in Syria, Turkiye intervened militarily following the Russian and US interventions. At first Turkish operations sought to counter Daesh, but later focused on eliminating the YPG. Within this context, Washington’s potential exit has serious implications for Ankara. Five key dimensions characterize the Syrian conflict: First: a possible resurgence of Daesh requiring a global response. Second: Syria’s integration into the regional system, which would require at least some stability in the country. Third: a possible decline in the global powers’ influence in Syria leading to a rise in Iranian influence. Fourth: Turkish-Syrian normalization tied to Turkiye’s military withdrawal from Syria; and, finally, the Gaza war, which risks further regional instability and could enable terrorist groups to thrive in Syria. Then, the question arises: Why did reports of a potential US withdrawal from Syria come out now? Is it related to the US decision to withdraw from Iraq, or to the upcoming US elections, which many predict will result in victory for former President Donald Trump? In early October 2019, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Trump agreed on a partial US withdrawal. Trump later ordered a full withdrawal, but it was halted at the last minute by a decision to secure oil in Syria. Shortly after, Turkiye launched Operation Peace Spring and entered parts of northern Syria. However, Russia secured most of the territory left by the US following a deal between the YPG and Damascus. Last week, Turkiye’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan held a meeting with John Bass, acting US undersecretary of state for political affairs. This meeting is particularly noteworthy given Bass’ previous role as ambassador to Turkiye during a contentious period in US-Turkish relations due to Washington’s support for the YPG. US involvement in the Syrian war is a complex story, so it is possible any withdrawal will be complex as well. The decision to stay or leave is a strategic one that will reverberate across the region. For Ankara, future US withdrawal from Syria might be a positive development. Yet, even if this happens, Ankara will be cautious regarding its implications. A poorly coordinated withdrawal by the US could pose significant risks for Turkiye, leaving the country alone in the face of multiple threats. So, for Ankara, the crucial question is how and when any departure will take place. Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes in Turkiye’s relations with the Middle East. X: @SinemCngz