04.11.2019 Author: Salman Rafi Sheikh
Column: Politics
Region: Middle East
Country: Syria
In the name of what the US
president called “securing the oil” or what the Pentagon chose to describe as
an attempt to “protect” Syria’s oil, the US is basically indulging in what can,
in simple terms, be described as purposeful pillaging of Syria’s natural
resources. There are three objectives that the US aims to achieve through this
“control” of Syria’s oil. First, it can thwart all attempts towards Syria’s
territorial reunification under Damascus. Secondly, it can keep a lid on a
critical source of Syria’s economy and can thus thwart Syria’s economic
recovery and reconstruction. Thirdly, by “controlling” the oil, the US can clip
Kurds and prevent their bid to make a deal with the Russians and the Syrians
for integration with Damascus; hence, Pentagon’s “warning” to everyone—Russians
and Syrians in particular—-against any attempts at recovering the oil fields.
This, however, is equally going to make US-Turkey rapprochement extremely
difficult, if not impossible.
The US, by deciding to
directly control Syria’s oil, has re-intensified its geopolitical struggle in
and around Syria. The US position close to the critical M2 Baghdad-Damascus
highway indicates how it intends to stay militarily engaged in the Levant after
the defeat of the Islamic State and Syria’s strong drive, supported as it is by
Russia and Iran, towards re-establishing Damascus’ authority all over Syria.
During the recently
concluded NATO summit in Brussels, Esper confirmed that that the US is sending
an unspecified number of troops and materiel to “guard the oil fields” held
presently by Kurdish forces, adding also that reinforcements “will continue
until we believe we have sufficient capability” [to hold the oil fields for as
long as we want].
The decision to “control”
oil fields has, unsurprisingly enough, come at a time when Russia, Iran and
Turley, have advanced well enough into bringing peace to Syria and creating a
new constitution. Even the Syria opposition groups have confidently said that a
political deal will be clinched next year. According to co-chair Hadi al-Bahra,
“I hope that the 75th
anniversary of the United Nations next year will be an opportunity to celebrate
another achievement by the universal organization, namely the success of
efforts under the auspices of a special envoy for political process, who will
bring peace and justice to all Syrians.”
The joint statement
released after a meeting of the foreign ministers of Russia, Iran and Turkey in
Geneva emphasised the same. All the parties, said the statement,
“Confirmed the continued
commitment of the guarantor countries of the Astana format to the sovereignty,
independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic.”
Even if a deal happens,
lack of enough resources available to rebuild Syria will start causing new
crisis, weakening Damascus’ hands. A “struggle for resources” might tear Syria
apart. Given the US plan that goes specifically to this direction and mindful
of the consequences that a minus-oil Syria will have to face, Russia is all the
more critical of US policies. With the Russian foreign minister calling US
policies “arrogant”, “illegal” and a violation of international law, the tempo
for intense geo-political struggle has been set. This puts the US on one side,
and the Astana countries on the other.
Notwithstanding the US
‘permission’ to let Turkey do its military operation in Syria, the fact that
the US has once again started supporting Kurds (although it is more like
thwarting Kurdish attempts to make peace with Damascus) means that Ankara will
have some serious objections to it. This puts Russia, Iran and Turkey on the
same page, reinforcing the Astana peace process.
Turkey, without any doubt,
will see in the US “control” of Syrian oil fields and a tactical support for
Kurds a threat to its interests… a process that might continue to gain momentum
towards the ultimate objective of creating an autonomous Kurdistan in Syria – a
territory that is supposed to become the bedrock of US and Israeli activities
in the whole region.
This means that the prospects
of a US-Turkey rapprochement will become a lot weaker than they seemed three
weeks ago. There can perhaps be nothing more inflammatory to the Turkish
national security establishment and public alike than collaboration between
Kurdish militias and a NATO ally, the US. Within Turkey’s national security
calculation, this collaboration can have no objective other than breaking
Turkey from within and creating an independent state of Kurdistan in the Middle
East.
The US’ renewed attempts at
creating a mess in Syria through controlling the life-line of its economy is,
therefore, going to have many consequences that will, once again, leave it
surrounded by foes (Russia and Iran) and estranged allies (Turkey). It is
obvious that the bid to control Syria’s oil has nothing with the fight against
terrorism; it signifies a renewed US geo-political struggle to stay alive in
the Middle East – something that no country in the region, save Israel and
Saudi Arabia, will appreciate and welcome.
Salman Rafi Sheikh,
research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign
and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.