You should welcome the Trump administration's appointment of James "Jim" Jeffrey as U.S. special representative to Syria. A former U.S. ambassador to Albania, Turkey, and Iraq, Jeffrey has the experience to push the Syrian civil war towards a best-case conclusion.

Equally important is Jeffrey's service as deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush administration. That time in Washington gives the former ambassador the bureaucratic skills to move the policy needle from words into action. Still, it is Jeffrey's experience in Iraq between 2010 and 2012 that best suits him for this important new job. Because that tenure in Iraq saw Jeffrey having to build personal trust and rapport with various Iraqi factions in order to achieve U.S. interests.

And that experience matters in the context of Syria's immensely complex political situation. Want to understand just how complex Syria currently is? Well then, consider that the Syrian peace process is split between divided forums, the Sunni rebellion is divided between more-moderate and Salafi-Jihadist groups, the Turks are jockeying against Kurdish tensions in northern Syria (both of which are U.S. allies), Turkey is both cooperating with and frustrated at Russia, and Vladimir Putin is using Syria to advance his regional agenda. Oh, and then there's the question of the moderate Sunni tribes in eastern Syria, the influence of Iran via its militias and revolutionary guards operatives, and the interests of neighboring Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq.

Jeffrey's Iraq tenure will be priceless in his new job.

Because just as Syrian politics are incredibly complicated, Iraqi politics are far more complex than the homogeneous "Sunni versus Shia" narrative that we sometimes think about. Following this summer's parliamentary elections, for example, we've seen a former Iranian puppet-turned-Iraqi-nationalist Muqtada al-Sadr become the surprising power broker. Sadr is now negotiating with four other separate Shia political alliances, two separate Kurdish political alliances, and two de facto Sunni alliances. Oh, and the communists are also winners alongside al-Sadr!

Jeffrey gets all this. Indeed, two of those aforementioned Shia alliances were formed from the previously unified Dawa party that Jeffrey dealt with in Baghdad. More importantly, Jeffrey was instrumental in balancing these competing interests in Iraq's favor and against the sectarian agendas of Iran, the separatist Kurdish sentiments. He was also an important voice for Iraqi Sunni interests.

In short, he has the record to get the Syria job done.

That said, the true measure of Jeffrey's suitability for Syria is not what he accomplished in Iraq but rather what happened when he left his ambassadorial office in Baghdad. Because Jeffrey left shortly after former President Barack Obama and Ben Rhodes made the catastrophic decision to pull U.S. military forces out of Iraq in late 2011 (those forces were taking very few casualties by that point so Obama's excuse of ending a war is illegitmate). Jeffrey rightly opposed that withdrawal, as it was conducted and recognized that without a tangible physical footprint, America's influence would subside in favor of Iran. And he was right. In the absence of American influencing (often behind the scenes) of Iraqi politicians towards greater multi-sectarian compromise, Maliki went mental and started smashing Iraqi-Sunni empowerment and human rights.

Guess what predictably followed? The Islamic State.

In that sense, Jeffrey's latest appointment now brings him full-circle. Vested with the power to run U.S. negotiations over Syria's future with other regional actors, Jeffrey has the potential to forge a more durable peace, a peace that serves U.S. and regional security, provides some measure of salvation to Syria's abused population, and mitigates the pernicious influence of Iran and Russia. His work will be very tough and will face relentless Russian obstruction. Yet the former ambassador and army officer has what it takes to move the needle.