Following a tentative agreement reached last month between the Damascus-based government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), with the knowledge of the United States and Turkey, US troops are reportedly beginning a gradual withdrawal from Syria. The New York Times reports that the U.S. has started pulling out approximately 600 troops as part of the next phase, with additional reductions anticipated after a 60-day assessment period. This move was foreshadowed by an earlier report by Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, which stated that Washington was planning a gradual, multi-stage withdrawal and had already informed Israel of its intentions.

While these headlines reflect the surface-level developments, three underlying details are particularly significant, offering deeper insight into the future of U.S. forces in northeast Syria.

1. Drawdown Begins in Deir Ezzor: Syria’s Oil Heartland

The New York Times reports that the U.S. is “shuttering three of its eight small operating bases in the country’s northeast… The bases are Mission Support Site Green Village, M.S.S. Euphrates, and a third, much smaller facility.” Although the third site is not named in the report, it is almost certainly the smaller Al-Omar oil field base. This installation is located adjacent to Green Village, which, while technically situated within the broader Al-Omar oil field zone, is significantly larger and often treated as a separate facility. With both Green Village and Euphrates-Conoco being decommissioned, maintaining the small Al-Omar base as a standalone outpost—especially given its location far south of the Hasakah cluster—would be strategically untenable. As the report notes, “for now the reductions… are based on ground commanders’ recommendations to close and consolidate bases.”

This development is particularly significant as it signals that the current phase involves US withdrawal from Deir Ezzor province, Syria’s most oil-rich region and home to the country’s largest oilfield, al-Omar. At its peak in the 1990s, the al-Omar field produced approximately 80,000 barrels per day, though under SDF control, production has declined to about 20,000 barrels daily. Meanwhile, the Conoco Gas field—which the NYT report explicitly mentions is being evacuated—previously produced 13 million cubic meters of natural gas per day before 2011 but is currently non-operational.

This matters because oil revenue has been one of the primary financial pillars of the SDF-led administration in northeast Syria. A portion of the oil has been quietly sold at steeply discounted rates to refineries in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq—particularly the Lanaz refinery, owned by Mansour Barzani, a powerful military figure and the second son of KDP leader Masoud Barzani. Some of the oil is sold domestically within northeast Syria, while another portion is transferred to Damascus as part of informal or negotiated arrangements.

What further makes the withdrawal from Deir Ezzor noteworthy is that it has been the most unstable and problematic area for the SDF, with a population that is predominantly Sunni Arab and tribal in character. The province has witnessed multiple defections from the SDF and tribal insurrections in recent years.

One of the key provisions of the March 10 agreement between the SDF and Damascus concerns the control and management of oil and gas fields in northeast Syria. Just one week after the agreement was signed, Syria’s oil minister reportedly convened internal discussions on mechanisms for assuming operational control over these fields.

This agreement might explain the US withdrawal from the region and could serve as a critical test of whether the accord between the two sides will endure and potentially extend to other areas, ultimately leading to a complete US withdrawal. As the Times report suggests, “After 60 days, the officials said, American commanders will assess whether to make additional cuts.”

2. The Numbers: Deir Ezzor Withdrawal Matters More Than the Headcount

While the reduction of 600 US troops in Syria is substantial, its significance primarily stems from the complete withdrawal from Deir Ezzor province rather than the numerical decrease itself. This reduction will still leave more US troops in Syria than were present before October 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked Israel. At that time, the US maintained approximately 900 troops in Syria, so the current reduction would still leave about 1,400 personnel in the region, though an estimated 200 of these are stationed at the al-Tanf garrison near the tri-border area of Iraq, Syria, and Jordan.

3. Will There Be a Full Withdrawal? A Decision Still in the Balance

More important than the numbers themselves is the question of whether a complete withdrawal will occur. The Times report indicates that ground commanders have recommended maintaining at least 500 troops even if further reductions are implemented later. However, this recommendation may not necessarily prevail, as the final decision rests with President Trump, who has repeatedly “expressed deep skepticism about keeping any U.S. troops in the country.” It remains to be seen whether Israeli pressure, as reported by Yedioth Ahronoth, will persuade Trump to maintain some troop presence. Another crucial factor to consider is the outcome of ongoing US-Iran negotiations. It is worth noting that given the existing large US base in Erbil and the likely retention of the al-Tanf garrison, Trump might prefer to withdraw entirely from northeastern Syria.

Regardless of the eventual outcome, recent developments clearly indicate that beyond the SDF-Damascus talks, there exists a mutual understanding between the US and Turkey regarding the gradual integration of the SDF and a peaceful resolution rather than a military intervention that might complicate Trump’s long-held view that the US should disengage from Syria. However, since the agreement signed in March is ambiguous and contingent on the military balance, the US withdrawal will likely benefit the Syrian government and Turkey, compelling the SDF to make further concessions—though that, perhaps, is a subject best explored in a future report.