The United States does NOT have a Principal Agent Problem in Syria
Principal-agent problems occur “when the desires or goals of the principal and agent conflict and it is difficult or expensive for the principal to verify what the agent is doing.”[1] US policy makers and members of the Special Operations community frequently present this problem when evaluating the relationship between the US and partners Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Syria. Principal–A.S. The Special Operations Forces—and agents—the Syrian Democratic Forces—were aligned in their goals during large-scale combat operations to defeat the physical caliphate of Daesh until the group’s collapse in 2019. Today, however, the landscape of the battlefield is stark. different, requires new considerations. This article argues that the principal-agent issue still does not exist between the US and the SDF in Syria. This would demonstrate that the SDF remains a reliable partner in ensuring the lasting defeat of Da’esh, countering the Iranian Threat Network, and avoiding escalation with Turkey. This assertion will be examined through three fundamental transformations in the military environment since the introduction of the Special Operations adviser in 2015: transitioning from combat operations to regional security, confronting the Iran Threat Network, and refraining from escalation with NATO allies.
The First Transformative Challenge: From Combat Operations to Regional Security
From November 2015 to March 2019, USSOF fought alongside SDF partners to liberate cities from Da’esh fighters and destroy Daesh’s remaining physical caliphate. The Battle of Baghuz Fawqani was the latest SDF-led offensive backed by US troops to rid ISIS of its last stronghold in East Syria. [2] After a month-long battle, captured Da’esh fighters were transferred to various detention centers across Northeast Syria, progressively effectively kept the caliphate in custody. The transfer of Daesh fighters to containment facilities led to a watershed moment in the US campaign to defeat Daesh as major combat operations along the Middle Euphrates River Valley died down. The mission then took on a renewed focus on keeping the caliphate in custody and preventing Daesh’s reconstitution. Fortunately, the SDF remains as committed to the new effort as they have been in previous combat operations.
To illustrate their commitment to new challenges, the SDF reorganized by transitioning many combat troops into the Internal Security Forces (InSF). These troops will guard detention facilities, protect critical oil infrastructure, and secure internally displaced persons (IDP) camps[3]. Filling nearly half of the InSF’s ranks with Arabs from neighboring tribes ensured the SDF maintained an ethnic balance as policing efforts began to go beyond military operations.[4] Dedicated InSF units, such as Hêzên Anti-Terror (HAT) troops, are created to provide surgical strike capabilities, such as SWAT teams. These units conduct their operations from intelligence provided by the newly created InSF General Services Bureau (InSF-GS). Under this model, the HAT effectively became the C.T. forces in Northeast Syria, leading to a fairly stable security environment[5].
U.S. Special Operators suggesting a transformation from a combat-oriented force to a regional security apparatus. However, the SDF largely spearheaded the effort itself. The SDF smoothly adapted to the changing military landscape and demonstrated continuity in principal and agent goals during the first transformation. The second transformative challenge, however, will fully test the SDF’s loyalty in a new way.
The Second Transformative Challenge: Confronting the Iranian Threat Network (ITN)
Central to its military strategy, the Government of Iran leverages the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – Qods Force and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security to build surrogate alliances, proxies and partners to counter US regional influence in Syria[6]. Iran’s strategy is backed by a clandestine network that protects the Iranian Government’s regional investments. This network also provides Iran with the most powerful tool to influence its agenda. Across the Middle Euphrates River Valley in Dayr az-Zawr province, ITN uses the Iran Block Militia Group (IAMG) as its preferred proxy network. The unregulated nature of Dayr az-Zawr is a flash point of IAMG activity as it allows freedom of movement and provides a shelter from which to project attacks against U.S. troops. in the region. The increased frequency of IAMG indirect fire attacks on Special Operations Forces is challenging US resolve in the area. A new question emerges from this emerging dilemma: Will the SDF remain an attractive agent in competition with Iran and its proxies? This question is the basis of the second transformative challenge in the US-SDF relationship.
The answer to this question is threefold. First, from a military perspective, the SDF remains committed to helping secure US outposts in the Middle Euphrates River Valley. In particular, the SDF has played a critical role in collective self-defense outside the US by serving as a Rapid Reaction Force and providing Battle Damage Assessment after attacks from the IAMG. Second, from a political point of view, senior SDF leaders condemned Iran for the recent killing of Masha Amini, displaying the same ideology as the West to advance women’s rights globally and advancing rhetoric against the Iranian Regime. Third, the SDF remains committed to US regional goals despite the uncertainty in future US involvement in Syria. The SDF has long been concerned about the withdrawal of US troops from Northeast Syria; fears largely based on previous diplomatic statements from Washington. But despite these fears and knowing the ITN would seek to fill the void following the US withdrawal, the SDF continued to hedge their bets and side with US troops. However, if the ITN threatens the resolve of US forces in the south, the SDF’s resolve will be tested far more than that of its NATO allies in the north.
Third Transformative Challenge: Refrain from Escalating with NATO Allies
Turkish bombardment of SDF positions in Northern Syria poses a third transformative challenge – even though that threat has dogged the SDF for years. These airstrikes raise the danger of escalation between the SDF and longtime NATO allies in the region, giving birth to a dichotomy of regional interests for the US. Turkey claims that many senior SDF leaders are members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which is a designated terrorist organization within Turkey.[7] This designation motivates Turkey to target SDF positions, usually along the northern border near the deconflict zone. The US response was to condemn the Turkish airstrikes and call for de-escalation while simultaneously trying to intercede on behalf of the SDF in a show of solidarity[8].
The risk of escalation with Turkey on the northern border is greater than with the IAMG in the south along the MERV. However, the SDF has refrained from escalating beyond skirmishes. The SDF’s flair for diplomacy and understanding of strategic red lines should not be overlooked; The SDF has honed these skills over the years while surviving Middle East geopolitics. As such, the SDF’s restraint on raising NATO allies was taken into account, and senior leaders fully understood the ramifications within the SDF. Given this context, the actions of the SDF as agents in northeastern Syria must be seen as a non-inflated and rational response, given their circumstances.
In conclusion, after seeing SDF adaptation across three transformative challenges in northeastern Syria, there is no major agency problem. The SDF is aligned with U.S. strategy. and regional interests and remain committed to supporting U.S. goals. over our competitors despite the ambiguity in U.S. policy. SDF senior leaders have also rebuked the Iranian Regime’s recent actions, which ideologically sided with Western values beyond being limited to simple war. The SDF’s understanding of NATO commitments also exhibits an unusual level of professionalism when evaluated against the US’s previous regional partners. US investment in the SDF has so far paid off and will continue to do so through its next transformative challenge.
[1] Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. “Agency Theory: Assessment and Review.” Academy of Management Review 14, no. 1 (1989): 57–74. https://doi.org/10.2307/258191.
[2] Taken from CJTF-OIR Online Factsheet. https://www.inherentresolve.mil/
[3] Rempfer, K. (2020, 10 Aug). This is the current US plan to establish Syrian proxies, including the Oil Field Guard Force. Military Period. Retrieved 25 February 2022, from https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-army/2020/08/10/heres-the-current-us-plan-to-build-up-syrian-proxies-incl. – an-troops-guard of the oil fields/
[4] Tastekin, F. (2017, 1 February). Does Syria really want peace with the Kurds? Al-Monitor. Retrieved 25 February 2022, from https://web.archive.org/web/20171111042050/http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/01/turkey-syria-kurds-are-working – to-build-countries.html
[5] Syrian Democratic Forces and Asayish. European Union Asylum Agency. (2020, September). Retrieved 25 February 2022, from https://euaa.europa.eu/country-guidance-syria/12-syrian-democratic-forces-and-asayish
[6] Tabatabai, A.M., Martini, J., & Wasser, B. (2021, April 14). Understanding the Iranian Threat Network. RAND Company. Retrieved February 26, 2022, from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4231.html
[7] Retribution, Ido. “SDF Stuck Between Turkey and Islamic State Again.” The Washington Institute, October 12, 2022. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/sdf-caught-between-turkey-and-islamic-state-again.
[8] Stewart, Phil, Idrees Ali, Phil Stewart, and Idrees Ali. “Turkish Airstrike in Syria Threatens Safety of US Personnel -Pentagon.” Reuters, November 23, 2022, sec. The middle East. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkish-air-strikes-syria-threatened-safety-us-personnel-pentagon-2022-11-23/.
Common examples of principal-agent relationships include hiring a contractor to complete home repairs, hiring an attorney to do legal work, or asking an investment advisor to diversify a stock portfolio.
What are the 4 types of agents?
The Four Main Types of Agents This may interest you : United States, IOM and Municipality of Nueva Concepción Collaborate to Reduce Irregular Migration and Support Migrant Reintegration.
- Artist agent. An artist’s agent takes care of the business side of an artist’s life. …
- Sales agent. …
- Distributor. …
- Licensing agent.
What are the 5 types of agents? The five types of agents include: general agents, special agents, sub-agents, agents plus interests, and helpers (or employees).
What is an example of an agent?
� Agent: A person who agrees to act on behalf of and not the principal, subject to the control of the principal. A good example is an insurance agent.
What are different type of agents?
In general, there are three types of agents: universal agents, general agents, and special agents. See the article : Bureau Real Estate opens its doors in Utah.
What are five ways by which a principal agent relationship can be terminated?
Below are the general rules for terminating an agency relationship: Withdrawal by a Party, Termination by the Principal, Rejection by the Agent, Death or Incapacity of the Agent, Death or Disability or Bankruptcy of the Principal. See the article : Welcome to Real Estate Friday!.
When has the agency relationship been terminated? Agency relationships can be terminated accidentally by which of the following? When a local, state, or federal government confiscates private property and compensates the owner. The government’s power to do this is called the eminent domain, which in essence means that the government takes private property for the public interest.
What are the 4 ways that an agency relationship can be established?
Agency relationships are established in the following ways: Express Consent, Implied by Situation, Esstoppel, Out of Need, or Ratified by the Principal.
What are the two ways an agency relationship can be terminated?
A party may end the agency relationship with an oral or written communication conveying the withdrawal of consent. Of course, the parties can also mutually agree to terminate the agency at any time. If there is a contract governing the agency relationship, then the agency ends in accordance with the contract.
What are ways in which an agency relationship can be terminated quizlet?
An agency relationship can be terminated at any time due to one of the following reasons: the expiration of the time specified in the agreement, the expiration of a reasonable time if there is no specified time, the completion of the agency’s objectives, mutual annulment, revocation by the principal, rejection of the agent, waiver of …
What is the principal-agent problem in economics?
The principal-agent problem is a conflict in priorities between the owner of the asset and the person to whom control has been delegated. The problem can occur in many situations, from the relationship between client and attorney to the relationship between shareholders and the CEO.
What is principal-agent in economics? The principal-agent problem arises when one person (ie the agent) is able to make decisions on behalf of another person (ie the principal), but the principal cannot adequately supervise the agent. This can result in the agent acting in his own best interest rather than the interests of the principal.
What is the principal-agent problem example?
Examples of principal-agent problems In economics, moral hazard occurs when one person takes more risks because someone else bears the cost of the risk. You take out health insurance, and since someone else is liable if you get hurt, you decide to take up BASE jumping.
What is meant by a principal-agent problem?
Definition: The principal agent problem arises when one party (the agent) agrees to work for another party (the principle) in exchange for some incentive. Such agreements can incur enormous costs for agents, giving rise to moral hazard and conflict of interest problems.
How many ways are there to form an agent principal relationship?
With reference to the 1950 Contract Act, there are 5 ways that an agency can arise, namely by express appointment by the principal, implied appointment by the principal, by endorsement by the principal, out of necessity and the estoppels/survival doctrine.
How is the principal-agent relationship established? Key takeaways. Principals appoint agents to act on their behalf and in their best interest. Examples include investors choosing a fund manager or someone hiring a lawyer for legal work. There should be no conflict of interest between the two, if there is one, this creates a prime agent problem.
What are the four different types of principals?
Principals can be classified as Disclosed, Partially disclosed, or Undisclosed. This categorization of principals is important in determining the rights and obligations of principals, agents and third parties.
