Editor's note: Freddie Reidy is a freelance writer based in London. He studied history and history of art at the University of Kent, Canterbury, specializing in Russian history and international politics. The article reflects the author's opinion, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

U.S. President Donald Trump is no stranger to courting controversy, the president's decision to withdraw from the Syrian border and leave his former Kurdish allies isolated, however, has raised more than a few eyebrows across military, political and civilian classes at home and abroad.

The president has long faced questions over the sincerity of his values. Is he a true Republican? Does he even have a fixed set of values or ideology? If one thing is constant however, it is that Donald Trump likes to see himself first and foremost as a businessman who has been dragged into politics through necessity. Consistent with this, Trump has seen foreign wars as an undue economic burden. This is the driving force behind a withdrawal from Syria.

In the wake of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, the United States is more than reluctant to drawn into lengthy campaigns with a seemingly remote prospect of a beneficial or acceptable resolution. Syria is a gaping wound that has yet to be healed domestically or by the international community. The reluctance of the West to be drawn in has resulted in other regional powers seizing the opportunity to do so, principal among these is Russia.

The Middle East has long been a hotbed of competing factions, interests and beliefs. The fragmentation of Syria provided the perfect environment from which ISIL flourished and took hold. The U.S. has suffered in the region at the lack of military support from her allies. The scars of the previous conflict still are visible and have deterred the political will of erstwhile allies the United Kingdom and France.

President Trump has long railed against what he sees as "so-called allies" who are "delinquent" in their military spending contribution to NATO – expecting the U.S. to make up the shortfall and this has strengthened a belief in the White House that such engagements should be avoided and it is not in the interest of the U.S. to engage in such foreign campaigns without foreign consensus and support.

ISIL is an organization that has thrived on chaos and capitalized on conflicting motivations. After the military operation by Turkish armed forces into the Kurdish controlled northern region of Syria, serious concerns emerge that the return of the Islamic terrorist group could be at hand.

America has a longstanding history of relying on Kurdish forces to defeat insurgency; this has been true in Afghanistan, Iraq and now in Syria. America's other partner in the region, Turkey, however, has not seen the Kurds as a force for good but instead, a terrorist organization agitating for territory and influence within Turkey and elsewhere.

Without U.S. involvement, northern Syria presents many opportunities for other regional powers. Turkey now has the ability to advance from its own border and reclaim land from Kurdish rule. Russia is likely to assume the role of chief power broker in the region, enjoying strong diplomatic relations with both Bashar al-Assad of Syria and President Erdogan in Turkey.

The alarming situation is that over 12,000 ISIL fighters are currently incarcerated in Kurdish or Syrian Democratic Forces prisons. As a consequence of the Turkish military operation, these prisons have been left with less forces. Many ISIL fighters have gone to ground since the defeat of the "caliphate" in March at the battle of Baghuz and are merely awaiting the opportunity to take advantage of the confusion.

There, therefore, is undoubtedly a significant risk of a resurgence of ISIL in the region. With 12,000 ISIL members at risk of being set free the security implications for the rest of the world are grave. For the U.S., there is also the significant risk that having "stabbed in the back" one of their greatest allies in the fight against terror, and having threatened the Turkish economy with mass reprisal as a consequence of Syrian military actions, that the U.S. has left itself isolated in the region.

Furthermore, since the U.S. withdrawal, Turkey is now operating within a sphere of Russian influence. After the installation of Russian anti-aircraft systems, the U.S. and Turkey relations are at an all-time low. The F35 fighter plane franchise project has also been canceled in the region as a result of the installation of Russian anti-aircraft systems indicating the extent of the dispute.

The Kurdish population has been at the vanguard of the fight against ISIL. The withdrawal of the U.S. consequently results in a massively diminishing influence in the region, without this and without the guaranteed security of the 12,000 incarcerated ISIL members, the prospect of a return to the influence of ISIL could prove too hard to counter. More significantly though, the U.S. withdrawal has severally tarnished the U.S., Kurdish relations making it extremely difficult for the U.S. to effect change in the near future.

Amidst contested elections and a desire to redress decades-old disputes with the Kurds, Turkish relations cannot be relied upon either. The withdrawal of the U.S. has allowed Turkey to assert its regional authority against an old foe, an opportunity which proved too great to resist. Turkish relations with Russia are also greatly enhanced further diminishing U.S. regional influence.

The confusion of the Kurdish-Turkish war provides fertile soil for ISIL to return like a dormant virus capitalizing on a weakened immune system. Confronted with the prospect of thousands of newly released prisoners and a heightened risk of international terror, the U.S. may find itself drawn back into the region. With damaged diplomatic relations though, America may now find itself bound to a level of commitment which it had been President Trump's expressed desire to avoid.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)