A senior American official in the Trump administration has mentioned the demands made by Washington for the new political authority in Syria, which included the internal and external issues. So why should it leave the areas east of the Euphrates before obtaining sufficient guarantees regarding the demands? Washington wants to move the issue of sanctions on Syria, to withdraw the condition of Syrian-Israeli normalisation. Why does it leave Tel Aviv in the middle of the road and withdraw its forces?
It is unlikely that America will support the extension of Turkish influence in Syria without arrangements with Israel. Washington may withdraw part of its forces in Syria, but it will not proceed before the completion of the opening of the backdoor channels between Ankara and Tel Aviv on a higher level.
Washington is talking about withdrawal before actually pulling out. It is a strategic weapon to push allies and partners towards the table of understandings and mandatory coordination away from conflicts that threaten their interests in Syria.
Even if Washington was one of the partners in the plan to topple Bashar al-Assad’s regime against Tel Aviv, it would not take the step of jeopardizing the interests of its ally Israel at the expense of increasing Turkish influence in Syria. If Trump wanted to pacify the line between Ankara and Tel Aviv, why would he decide to withdraw American forces from northeastern Syria at this time? Would it not be a step to increase tension in relations and escalation between the parties and the most likely scenario of direct military confrontation?
The problem does not lie in Trump’s support for Ankara and Tel Aviv in forming a technical team to avoid the spectre of a military confrontation between the two countries’ forces. But it is there because the probability of its occurrence is very high when there is a “deliberate” technical error over the Syrian territory.
Israel did not prevent the entry of Syrian forces into Lebanon in the 1970s and their advancement to the northern border because the Assad regime did not pose a threat to it. But it rejects the Turkish Syrian military agreements towards rebuilding the new Syria. Washington will not allow Israel to do so because the conditions and atmosphere of the past half a century are different from what they are today.
Washington will not pressure Ankara and Tel Aviv for political and security agreements on Syria. But it will remind them of the losses and damages which may befall them when the confrontations between them escalate in Syria.
Israel is expanding its aggression in southern Syria. It is bombing various cities and capital Damascus itself, and finally drawing red lines which are not allowed to be crossed. It says that these measures were for countering terrorism and securing national security. Ankara does not care, but Trump denies that the tent he installed in Syria belongs to Turkey. Washington’s goal is to force the parties to make concessions, whether on the Syrian issue or in the framework of other issues such as energy and regional trade routes, coordination of roles in the geographical circles further towards the Eastern Mediterranean, the Caucasus and the Balkans.
There are many indications that the American withdrawal will not be a concession, but a manoeuvre to reshape Syria in accordance with the interests of Washington and its Turkish and Israeli allies. Evacuating America from its tent in Syria is possible, of course, but under a big deal with Turkey and Israel, and between Turkey and Israel. The confrontation between them will turn into a regional disaster for America and they will not allow it.
[by Samir Salha in Syria TV]
Compiled and translated by Faizul Haque
