GLORIOUS END OF ENDLESS WARS?

Donald Trump's decision to withdraw the US troops from Syria has provoked a number of new military and political processes in this Arab country suffering from the longstanding war. This also concerns the growing regional position of Ankara, which directly affects the balance of powers within the Russia-Turkey-Iran triangle, which plays an important role in the Syrian conflict.

What is in Trump's mind?

Initially, President Trump announced the start of a phased reduction of US military presence in Syria, underlining that it was necessary to start the implementation of this task immediately, as the US has fulfilled the main task – the defeat of the terrorist organisation ISIS, the so-called Islamic State.

Trump described the essence of his decision later, in one of his Twitter posts right after the New Year night, which is actually in line with his foreign policy concept. According to Trump, 'endless wars will eventually come to glorious end, especially those which are fought out of judgement mistakes that were made many years ago, and those where we are getting little financial or military help from the rich countries that so greatly benefit' from the US actions.

This statement again criticises the closest allies of the US, the European countries, who, according to Trump, still benefit from the American military policy and enjoy its fruits in financial and security spheres.

However serious such contradictions between the US and Europe may be, they do not have a direct relationship with the Syrian conflict. Immediately after the announcement of the withdrawal of American troops from Syria on December 19, President Trump has considerably adjusted his own statement by making the expected event subject to the complete defeat of the ISIS and security of the Kurdish allies of Washington. At the same time, Trump has criticised the media, primarily The New York Times, which, according to the US president, misled the public by stating that the US president had allegedly set no more than four months for the withdrawal of the US troops from Syria. "We will be leaving at a proper pace while at the same time continuing to fight ISIS and doing all else that is prudent and necessary! [This is] no different from my original statements," Donald Trump twitted.

The White House press secretary Mercedes Schlapp has later detailed POTUS's position saying that President Trump wanted to ensure the safety of the American troops during the withdrawal from Syria. But all these statements are only nuances of the American political cuisine. It is much more important to determine the goals pursued by the American administration as a result of the withdrawal process, regardless of the specific period set for it.

It should be noted that the military and political leadership of the US expresses readiness to withdraw American troops from all objects and areas of Syria, with the exception of the Al-Tanfa military base in the south of the country, near the Jordanian border, where about 200 US troops will remain. This decision is explained by the need to counteract the "growing activity of Iranians in the region."

The US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo openly stated that the withdrawal of American troops from Syria is nothing but a "change of tactics," and the US intends not only to continue the fight against terrorism, but also to use all its potential to counter the influence of Iran. It is no coincidence that the US so clearly supported the Israeli bombing of positions and objects of Iranian and pro-Iranian groups in Syria in early January. Thus, during his recent visit to Israel, John Bolton, National Security Advisor to President Trump, called for Israeli troops to fill in the "vacuum" that could form in Syria after the withdrawal of American troops. Specifically, Washington proposes that Israeli aviation replaces the US aviation as part of the US-led coalition in Syria.

In other words, the US explicitly states that after the defeat of ISIS, its focus has shifted to Iran. In order to prevent Tehran’s growing position in Syria and the region, Washington will rely on cooperation with Israel, which is now considered the key military component of the US coalition. This perfectly explains the withdrawal of American troops from Syria as announced by Trump. In this case, according to the plan of the American administration, Washington’s close allies should bear the main burden of combat operations as part of the Western coalition. First of all, Israel, which should thank Trump at least for the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state. Apparently, the US will remain the leading political actor in the Great Middle Eastern Game. This is also confirmed by the US Secretary of State’s tour of eight Arab countries (UAE, Qatar, Jordan, Egypt, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia), which started on January 8. One of his goals, according to Pompeo, is to form an anti-Iranian coalition.

"We should continue to build up the coalition – the coalition that includes Gulf states, Israel, European and Asian countries all around the world that understand that the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism needs to cease that activity," Pompeo said.

It's unclear how the European allies of the US will react to these anti-Iranian plans, for the most of them do not consider Tehran 'the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism' and are confused after Trump's announcement of withdrawal, unlike another American ally in the region, Turkey, whose Syrian policy directly affects the very essence of American interests including Iran.

Ugliest slander

Recently, Turkey has started drawing large military forces and equipment to the Syrian border. Apparently, this operation is related to the preparation for the offensive on a strategically important point in Syria, the city of Manbij, which is currently under the control of Kurdish terrorist organisations.

At the end of 2018, Kurds reached an agreement with Damascus on the transfer of Manbij (85 km north of Aleppo) under the control of the Syrian government army to protect themselves from the Turkish offensive. Currently, Manbij is largely controlled by the Kurdish People's Defence Units (YPG), which is part of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Ankara considers both YPG and SDF parts of the terrorist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). According to media reports, a group of YPG militants has already left the city, which is partly under the control of Syrian troops.

Turkey continues to blame the US for direct military support of YPG and SDF. Interestingly, after Trump's announcement on the withdrawal of American troops from Syria, Turkey, which views Kurdish terrorism as a direct threat to its security, explicitly declared its intention to take Manbij after the Americans leave the city and join it to the previously established security zone in the border region.

To protect the north-eastern part of Syria after the withdrawal of American troops, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggested the establishment of "special forces made up of the representatives from all parts of Syrian society". At the same time, he added that a "verification process" would be needed to identify militants who have links with terrorist organisations, in particular with YPG.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cаvusoglu said that the withdrawal of US troops from Syria would not stop Turkey from conducting a new operation in the north of the country. During the meeting with Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in Ankara, Turkish Defence Minister Hulusi Akar called on Washington to ensure the early withdrawal of YPG militants from Manbij.

Apparently, Ankara has accomplished the implementation of the Turkish-American road map agreed last June, which involves the withdrawal of Kurdish groups from Manbij. This issue should have been resolved within six months, but Washington deliberately delayed the implementation. Trump’s decision to withdraw American troops from Syria accelerated the process, giving Turkey a chance to improve its military presence along the Syrian border.

Meanwhile, Washington still tries to force Ankara to consider the Kurdish military-political factor in Syria. During his last visit to Israel, John Bolton clearly stated that the US would demand from Turkey security guarantees for Kurdish organizations. As well, Bolton acknowledged that "the protection of US allies in Syria, including the YPG, was among “the objectives that we want to accomplish that condition the withdrawal” of US forces."

Ankara reacted sharply to the statement of Trump’s national security advisor. President Erdogan refused to receive Bolton during his visit to Ankara saying that Turkey would not make compromises on the fight against Kurdish terrorists. Instead, Bolton met with Erdogan's spokesman Ibrahim Kalin. Calling Bolton’s statement about the war of Turkey against the Syrian Kurds as "the ugliest and cheapest slander", Erdogan underlined that by making such statements the Americans are trying to play on emotions of the world community.

Ankara and Washington have different views not only on the Kurdish issue. Turkey makes it clear that it does not agree with the American policy towards Iran, not only with sanctions against the Islamic Republic, but also with the US intention to form an anti-Iranian coalition, which can lead to serious complications in the settlement of the Syrian conflict. Mevlut Cavusoglu's statement made in Moscow on December 29 is noteworthy: "Whether you like it or not, Iran is a party to a Syrian settlement. My message is addressed to the US and other countries."

Trilateral exam

Apparently, the processes that unfolded in the conflict region right after Trump's statement on the pull-out of American troops (regardless of the period it will take) are also connected with the intention of the US to create chasms among the other external parties involved in the Syrian war. For example, in his interview with Fox News, a retired colonel of the American army Douglas Macgregor said that the withdrawal of American troops from Syria is a "very clever move". "We have to get out of Northern Syria quickly, because there are tens of thousands of Turkish troops poised to attack Kurdish terrorists, who have been attacking Turks in Northern Syria... Putin is going to make a choice. If he allows the Turks into Syria, then he loses his position with Syrians and Iranians," MacGregor believes.

American withdrawal from Syria can indeed turn into a serious test for the Russia-Turkey-Iran triangle. These countries have been known as the guarantors of the Syrian settlement as part of the Astana Process, and in many respects thanks to the joint efforts of Moscow, Ankara and Tehran, a major breakthrough has been achieved in the fight against ISIS. The strength of the triangle will depend on the determination of its participants to reach a compromise in a situation when Turkey, pursuing its national interests, intends to launch a new blow against Kurdish terrorists, while Russia and Iran, which support the official Syrian authorities, are objectively interested in the transition of all, including the Kurdish-populated regions of Syria, under the control of Damascus. It is noteworthy that the Russian military command in Syria has recently decided to use watch patrols on the territory surrounding Manbij. Thus, Russia is trying to ensure the irreversible transition of northern Syria to the control of Damascus. Soon we are going to see to what extent this situation makes Ankara happy, taking into account the complete transfer of control over Manbij from Kurdish organisations to the Syrian government forces, as prepared by Moscow.

Nevertheless, Turkey continuously expresses its readiness to make the cooperation with Moscow and Tehran more effective so that the war in Syria is over as soon as possible. Thus, the Turkish Foreign Minister spoke in favour of exercising joint control with Russia and Iran over the withdrawal of American troops from Syria so that various terrorist organizations would not take the "vacant place". Mevlut Chavushoglu noted that Ankara "continues to confer with the Syrians and with the entire world community" on how to resolve the situation in Syria.

Obviously, these signals coming from Ankara, as well as the ongoing search for peace within the Astana process jointly monitored by Russia, Turkey and Iran, are good news for the war-torn Syrian people. As well as the frequent facts of recognition by many countries, which previously denied legitimacy to the legitimate government of Syria, the existing realities in this Arab country. For example, the government of the UAE decided to resume the work of its embassy in Damascus. Bahrain expressed similar willingness. Finally, Italy decided to restore diplomatic relations with Syria. It seems that the world is tired of the Syrian slaughter no less than the Syrians.