On February 24, the Syrian Arab news agency SANA reported that the United States was sending another military escort to Syria, which again acknowledged Washington’s ongoing occupation policy in this Middle Eastern country. It has been continued since 2014 without any UN sanctions and without any permission from official Damascus authorities.

The US military convoy from Iraq, consisting of 23 transport units, including 18 trucks with weapons, ammunition and logistics equipment, as well as 5 empty tank trucks, crossed the border at the illegal Al-Waleed border crossing. The military convoy headed to the Rmelan district in the north-east of the Al-Hasakah Governorate, where the US military bases, in particular, Al-Tanf, are located. The American convoy was accompanied by two vehicles belonging to the opposition Syrian Democratic Forces, equipped with small arms.

It is assumed that the next batch of weapons delivered by the United States to Syria is intended for the military bases of Kurdish insurgents from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) located in the north of the country, who regularly receive assistance from the Americans. The tank trucks in the above mentioned US military convoy are, for sure, intended to transport the oil as part of continued Washington’s pillage of Syrian oil resources, most of which are concentrated in the east of the country where the major Syrian oil fields are located: the Conoco, Al Omar, and Al Tanak oil fields are located on the left bank of the Euphrates, in the area controlled by the pro-American SDF. US Kurdish allies are also actively involved in smuggling oil from Syria, and in exchange, the Americans supply them with weapons.

The Kurdish illegal armed groups that appeared in the midst of the civil war in Syria managed to gain support in the United States, which was facilitated by lobbyists hired by the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (Rojava) to build links with the American establishment. The names of those people in the USA who promote the interests of SDF in the United States, can be easily found in the database of the US Department of Justice, which contains relevant information provided in accordance with the law about registration of FARA foreign agents.

The Syrian Democratic Forces were formed in the midst of the civil war which began in Syria in 2011, right after the “Arab spring,” their official date of formation is October 11, 2015. The skeleton of this organization consisted of Kurds, and also includes Arabs, Assyrians, Turkmens, Armenians and Circassians. By now, SDF has taken control over parts of the North-East of the Syrian Arabian Republic (SAR). The United States is interested in having the Kurds as the opposition to the official regime in Damascus, and for this reason, in 2013 the administration of the then President Barack Obama took a decision to supply weapons to that armed group. However, in July 2017, when Donald Trump was in office, this “CIA’s secret program for weapons provisioning and training of certain groups of insurgents” who were fighting against the government of Bashar Al-Assad, the Syrian President, was terminated. Already in early 2018, SDF launched their first representative office in Washington, the US mission of the Syrian Democratic Council, which was headed by the US citizen, Ahmed Al-Khendi, having declared in its US registration documents its goals. The Kurds managed to establish relations with a number of MPs, including a representative of the Republican party, Marco Rubio.

In 2021, with the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidential term in the White House, the US office of the SDF expanded its activity, including mining and sale of illegally extracted Syrian oil with the participation of Delta Crescent Energy, a US-based company registered in Delaware. Up to three million barrels of raw materials are extracted monthly at the fields in the Al-Hasakah, Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor Governorates. About a third of the stolen oil is sold to the Kurdish Autonomous Region of Iraq at a price of USD 35-40 per barrel, with the US support. According to Al-Monitor, this “cooperation” was made possible with the support of the White House and under the protection of the US military.

Hundreds of terrorists in Syria were released to join the US-controlled armed groups, some of which have been delivered to the territory of the Al-Tanf zone.  The US intelligence agencies plan to offer to the extremist cells in Damascus and Latakia to commit actions against the Syrian, Russian and Iranian military forces, and try to arrange a media campaign to provoke protest sentiments in the Syrian civil society.

With its illegal activities in Syria, the US military continues to kill hundreds of civilians in this country. At the same time, the United States kept hiding the real data on the number of civilians killed after the air raids in Syria, as well as in Afghanistan and Iraq, as evidenced by the results of the investigation by the New York Times, in particular. So, on February 22, as a result of another armed attack by landing troops in the village of Ad-Dakhla in the east of the Deir ez-Zor Governorate, the US armed forces together with SDF commenced intense and random fire attack at the residential buildings and agricultural land. As a result, the elder of the Al-Bakkara tribe, Ibrahim Al-Omar, was killed.

Alexander Efimov, Russia’s ambassador in Syria, in his interview with RIA Novosti on February 9, 2022, made the following comments on the US presence in Syria: “First of all, I shall repeat what has been repeatedly said: the presence in Syria of the forces of the so-called “international coalition” led by the United States has no legal basis — such as the resolutions by the UN Security Council or the consent of the legitimate Syrian authorities – and this presence should be terminated immediately. Moreover, the United States obviously has not succeeded in combating terrorism in Syria. In addition to the Trans-Euphrates region, there is another “grey zone” that emerged thanks to the efforts of the Americans, and located in the south of the SAR – the Al-Tanf zone, where Magavir Al-Saura gunmen (an organization banned in Russia) do whatever they want, acting in the atmosphere of impunity and permissiveness, in particular, they hinder the overdue resettlement of the Rukban camp for IDPs located there.

In other words, they divide terrorists into “bad guys” and “good guys,” many of them are given a “second start,” and they continue to accumulate power potential and radicalize civilians. And the longer the United States stays here, the more powerful the delayed-time bomb may turn out to be. We shouldn’t forget the fact that Washington continues to support the illegal appropriation of the SAR’s natural resources – primarily oil and wheat in the North-East of the country.

These facts are sufficient enough to persistently demand the illegal American occupation of the SAR to be terminated.”

This appeal to terminate the US illegal aggressive operation in Syria and to have the presence of the US occupation forces in Syria recognized as illegal by the UN, is a burning issue today, especially in the context of the criticism against Russia by Washington and NATO countries regarding Russia’s military special operation in the Donbass. Recall that this operation is intended to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, and it was started because no reaction from the Ukrainian authorities followed to stop the policy of genocide of the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine, a policy supported by Kiev militants since 2014, which resulted in killing hundreds of civilians.

It makes one wonder, how come the political demagogues from Washington and Western Europe have the right to criticize other countries, impose unilateral sanctions, at the same time being silent about their war crimes in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and earlier in Yugoslavia? Thus, they are demonstrating “double standards” in assessing international events and understating Washington’s blatant violation of international norms!

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

In recent years, Syria, unfortunately, has increasingly become an arena of confrontation between many countries, primarily through the fault of the US, Israel and Turkey.

As a result of Washington’s blatant neo-colonial approach to Syria, US military personnel, that has been illegally deployed to the country in violation of all international norms (as has been repeatedly stated by Syrian officials, including from the UN podium) and with the support of thousands of US PMCs, ensures that Washington secures its gains on the ground. This is particularly evident from the incessant plundering of the country, from the continious theft of its energy resources, with historic works of art and all sorts of goods being stolen from the people of Syria. In essence, US activities here are a smuggling business seized by Washington from ISIS (a terrorist group banned in Russia), which exacerbates the situation in the war-torn region. Meanwhile, the US military continues to be responsible for the deaths of Syrian civilians, most recently in a so-called “counter-terrorism operation” conducted by the Pentagon on February 2 near the town of Atme in Syria’s Idlib province, which killed six children and four women.

Israel too is pursuing an aggressive policy by killing innocent civilians in Syria and targeting pro-Iranian forces in the SAR. Israeli aircraft regularly strike targets inside Syria without entering the SAR’s airspace, mainly operating from Lebanon, which violates international norms, or from the Mediterranean Sea. In the last two years alone, the IDF has launched around a hundred missile attacks on Syrian territory and air strikes, killing dozens of people and causing significant damage to Syria. Such barbaric acts go on despite repeated statements to the UN by the official Syrian authorities, as well as proposals made by Moscow to all the countries concerned to hold meetings and discussions to prevent relations from escalating into armed conflicts and civilian deaths. However, these calls and appeals were never heeded in Tel Aviv.

Such provocative tactics by Tel Aviv could lead to a serious escalation of the situation at any time, as the Syrian Foreign Ministry and authorities have repeatedly stated before, stressing that the country could use “all legitimate means” to respond to Israeli strikes on its territory.

Turkey, which has effectively declared war on the Syrian Kurds, is acting in a similarly aggressive manner in Syria. This is how Mazloum Abdi, commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces, said in his comments on the recent airstrikes by the Turkish air force on the Syrian Kurds in his Twiiter account on February 1: “Turkish bombardment of Ain Diwar and Derik has resulted in the martyrdom of civilians and fighters and also hit public infrastructure, including a water dam and power station. This attack amounts to a declaration of war, endangers civilians, and undermines our fight against ISIS [an organization banned in Russia] … With the rising threat of terrorism, our Coalition partners bear a large part of the responsibility to prevent such Turkish attacks.” Ankara considers the People’s Self-Defense Units (YPG), part of the Syrian Democratic Forces, an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, recognized as a terrorist organization in Turkey.

Days earlier, on February 3, Turkish army shelled Kurdish People’s Self-Defense Forces (PSDF) positions near the city of Manbij in northern Syria, firing 19 shells into the village of Sheikh al-Nasir, with another 19 shells exploding in al-Sayyada and al-Yalanli. And before that, in late January, the Turkish air force struck Kurdish militia lines in northern Aleppo and the neighboring provinces of Raqqa and Hassakeh. Four Kurds were killed in a massive attack on an area where a local power plant is located. The command of the Syrian Democratic Forces coalition, the core of which is the PSDF, has accused Turkey of deliberately fomenting new conflict in the Kurdish-controlled northern regions.

Meanwhile, the Turkish army and the Syrian opposition are regularly shelling population centers in the north of Hassakeh province. One such shelling occurred on January 13, which, according to the Syrian Arab News Agency SANA, hit the villages of Umm Al-Khair near Abu Rasein and Al-Abush close to the town of Tell Tamer. Because of the shelling, locals were forced to flee their homes at night as the shelling caused serious damage.

The uneasy situation manifests itself in southern Idlib, where there is a periodic surge of militants, including those actively supported by Turkish forces. In early January, for example, the militants launched an offensive across virtually all of southern Idlib. There were rocket and mortar attacks on Syrian positions near Kafr Nabl, Maaret al-Numan and Malaja. Also, mobile missiles fired by militants exploded behind the Syrian army lines in the area of Beit Ahmad Qaddour. The news of the major operation is confirmed by fighters from the so-called “Syrian opposition” themselves, including from the Ankara-backed “Free Syrian Army.”

On February 9, a Turkish drone fatally struck two civilian vehicles travelling on the Derbessia-Amuda highway near the village of Bahira. Missiles disrupted the electricity supply to 40 Kurdish settlements near the Syrian-Turkish border in Hassakeh province, one vehicle carrying adults and children was blown up and the other was thrown into a ditch. There were casualties, including one child, as well as wounded.

In this context, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s statements that Russia “systematically and resolutely opposes attempts to turn Syria into a scene of armed confrontation between third countries” sound more relevant than ever. Such actions on the territory of Syria by third countries and their attacks on Syrian civilian and military targets result in economic losses for the SAR, reduce the combat capabilities of the Arab Republic and have a negative impact on the effectiveness of the efforts of the Syrians and their allies to eliminate the presence of terrorists in the country. For these reasons, these actions by third countries in Syria must be stopped.

Valery Kulikov, political expert, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

On February 2, the Pentagon chief announced that US Special Forces had completed a counter-terrorism operation in Syria, controlled by the US Central Command, stressing that “the mission was successful” and “there were no US casualties.” As it turned out, the target of this operation near the town of Atme in the Syrian province of Idlib, close to the Turkish border, was the leader of the terrorist group ISIS (banned in the Russian Federation), Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Quraishi. Damascus cannot yet confirm US reports of the killing of al-Quraishi, the chairman of the Syrian parliament’s international committee, Butrus al-Marjan, said on February 3.

Only blatantly unhealthy individuals would accept the American military establishment’s bold assessment of the results of the “operation,” since no operation can be considered successful when civilians are killed in the process! Associated Press reported on more than ten deaths, which was further confirmed by the White Helmets, who pointed out that six children and four women were among the victims!

Another example of the US military failures is the incident from a week before in the same Kurdish-American zone of influence in northwestern Syria, in the city of Al-Hasakah, where a terrorist group stormed the Al-Sinaa prison on January 23. It is noteworthy that the terrorists managed to form a storm unit of 200 militants right under the noses of US officials. As a result, they released some 800 (!!!) militants, who subsequently escaped and dispersed among the local population.  It is also worth noting that several thousand Kurds, led by “Pentagon specialists” and supported by US armored vehicles, aircraft and US special forces, were unable to recapture the Al-Sinaa prison from the remaining militants for several days. In the act of utter desperation, the Americans called in British special forces for a decisive storming of the prison, ultimately confirming the US military’s lack of ability to even suppress the remaining militants.

Eventually, on the night of January 26, US aircraft struck the prison building and its surroundings, killing many ISIS militants. There were reportedly many ISIS militants among the prisoners, including minors, both from Syria and other countries. In addition, not only militants, but also their relatives, women and children had been kept in this prison “for their links with ISIS.”

As a result of massive strikes by the US Air Force, including on neighboring residential areas, more than 40,000 civilians fearing for their safety were forced to flee their homes and move to safe areas under the control of the Syrian government. According to Hasan Khalil, head of the regional administration, the province of Al-Hasakah in northeastern Syria has suffered extensive damage inflicted the US Air Force, particularly to the academic buildings of the Technical University. According to Arab News, there were civilian casualties.

The UN is concerned about reports of civilian deaths in US operations and believes “it would be important to have an investigation,” deputy UN Secretary General Farhan Haq told at a briefing.

According to eyewitness accounts, US-controlled territory in Syria has become a grey area where militants operate with impunity. This was already the case in Afghanistan, which US soldiers ignominiously abandoned in August.

In this context, it is entirely justified that on January 27, Dmitry Polyanskiy, Russia’s first deputy permanent representative to the UN, demanded at Security Council meeting that US troops be withdrawn from Syria, as they are failing in the fight against terrorism and are in that country without UN and Syrian government sanction. “The problems remain where the Americans created legal vacuum and where Syria’s sovereign territory remains occupied by foreign troops. The United States clearly fails fight against terrorism even on a local scale to say nothing of the global dimension,” he said.

Polyanskiy called attention to the dangerous situation in northeastern Syria, illegally occupied by US troops. According to him, “areas that Americans have been robbing of oil suffer from a true environmental disaster… We must say that cross-Euphrates area is another “grey spot” on the Syrian map, same as the al-Tanf area, where militants from ”Mahavir as-Saura“, indulged by the United States, enjoy total impunity and permissiveness. The illegal presence of US military in Syria created a “lawless zone” in the north-east, where foreign terrorists and militants, as well as various criminals feel perfectly at ease,” the Russian representative continued. That is why the Syrian armed forces, with the support of the Russian military, continue to seek out and destroy ISIS terrorists in Syria and this work will continue.

Polyanskiy added that “anarchy and violence” characterize any location “where the US military has been stationed – both during their presence and upon withdrawal.” The most recent evidence of this was Afghanistan, from which the US withdrew, unable to cope with the enormous burden of problems that had accumulated over the years of US occupation.

The armed conflict in Syria has been ongoing since 2011. The US, under the pretext of fighting terrorists, invaded the country without permission from the Syrian authorities and the UN. In recent months, anti-American sentiments have noticeably intensified in Syria, with Syrians demanding the withdrawal of the US troops from their country. The growth of these sentiments is also due to the continuing illegal export of Syrian oil by the United States to Iraq, as has been regularly reported by the Syrian Arab news agency SANA and from the UN rostrum by the official Syrian authorities.

On January 28, and before that in late December, Syrian Arab Army (SAA) units barred a US military convoy from entering the city of Al-Hasakah in the north-east of the republic. The residents of Tell Dahab, with the help of the Syrian military at the roadblock, prevented US armored vehicles from entering the village, forcing them to turn around.

Washington’s use of the US Army and mercenaries to secure neo-colonial targets has become the standard of US behavior. And this is especially clearly visible in the actions of Washington in Syria, where the US, backed by its army and thousands of private military companies (PMCs), continues to plunder the country, its energy resources, artefacts and any other valuable property, and kill civilians. The international community must pressure the US into immediately ceasing this treacherous behavior.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

The use of armies and mercenaries to support colonial commercial projects has become the standard of US behavior. And this is particularly evident due to the actions of Washington in Syria. The US, supported by its army and its many thousands of private military companies (PMCs), continues to loot the country, its energy resources, artifacts, and any property of the SAR. Demonstrating its colonial rights, trying to dictate who they allow contact with the official authorities in Damascus. The attempt of the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken to limit his partnership with Syria on November 13, expressing concern about the recent increase of visits of foreign delegations to Damascus and warnings to American allies against trying to normalize relations with the Syrian authorities, is clear evidence of this.

As for the US PMCs, led by the US, operating in Syria under the umbrella of an international coalition against terrorism, they are currently busy looting Syria’s oil resources, most of it concentrated in the east of the country, where the largest Syrian oil fields are located: The Conoco, al-Omar, and al-Tanak oil fields are located on the left bank of the Euphrates, in an area controlled by the pro-American coalition Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). US Kurdish allies are also actively involved in smuggling oil from Syria, and in exchange, the Americans supply them with weapons.

The activities of American PMCs are a smuggling business taken by Washington from DAESH (a terrorist group banned in Russia), which exacerbates the situation in the war-torn region. In doing so, the US is solving two problems, using the revenues from illegal oil sales to finance the militants loyal to them and inflaming anti-government sentiment by, among other things, bribing the sheiks of unruly Arab tribes, which is getting worse since the tribes are extremely displeased with the Kurdish-American occupation power in eastern Syria. At the same time, they are bleeding the Syrian economy by maintaining a fuel crisis in the oil-producing country.

Although recently the number of US troops operating abroad has officially declined, the ratio between the number of PMCs and official soldiers in the conflict zones has increased to three to one. Particularly now in demand in Washington are contractors from companies such as Six3 Intelligence Solutions. Blackwater, which became gained notoriety worldwide in 2007 when its squad killed 17 civilians in Baghdad.

For the authorities in Washington, who are constantly fighting wars abroad, the use of private military companies has been a real boon, as their use avoids public outrage in the United States because how many of them die on the battlefields is virtually unknown. In addition, most of the employees of American PMCs are not Americans at all. In Afghanistan, for example, only about a third of the PMC employees are US citizens. In Syria, a significant number of them are Kurds. Further, and importantly, private status protects PMCs from the US Freedom of Information Act.

After the tribal entities in eastern Syria nearly launched a full-scale revolt against Kurdish authority, the Americans gradually withdrew crucial oil fields from Kurdish control, no longer fully trusting their allies in Syria. After all, many Kurdish groups sell oil across the Euphrates on their own, including buyers with ties to Damascus, and when caught in the act, they blame the local Arab population. And the US PMCs, seeking to maximize profits from staying in Syria under the umbrella of the US coalition, also peddle oil from the western part of the Syrian Arab Republic through local smugglers. However, they primarily seek to direct the flow to Iraq and Turkey, to intensify the crisis in the fuel market in Syria.

In general, however, private military companies operate almost universally in US control in Syria. But it is challenging to say their exact numbers because they often move around in US control zones in Syria, Iraq, and Jordan, working, among other things, at military bases, maintaining and transporting equipment from Iraqi territory to Syrian territory. In addition, PMC personnel are also involved in the al-Tanf area, where they are engaged in support operations at the border, shuttling between the territories of Syria and Jordan.

By supporting the predatory neo-colonial policy of the US in Syria, where the US military remains illegally, stated many times by official representatives of Syria, including the UN podium. Washington actively joins PMCs in the regular illegal removal of hundreds of oil tankers from the Syrian Republic. Thus, a giant convoy of stolen Syrian oil was spotted on November 8 in Kurdish-controlled territory, which stretched for several kilometers. Evidence captured by a drone, Syrians spotted a long convoy of oil tankers in Qamishli heading east into Iraq. Earlier, another convoy of 40 trucks was spotted, presumably carrying weapons for the Kurdish SDF units.

As for the US, humanitarian work in Syria is entirely neglected and is fully in line with its neo-colonial policy.  So, if in 2021, thanks to the joint efforts of the Syrian Government and the Russian Center for Reconciliation of the warring parties in the territory controlled by official Damascus, 26 refugee camps were closed and about 1,300 people received new housing in different provinces of the country. The situation in the US-controlled Syrian territories can be characterized only as hell.

In particular, the Al-Hol, Arisha, Al-Mabrouka refugee camps in the US-occupied and Kurdish-controlled autonomous administration of the north and east, where tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian citizens are being held, continue to operate. According to the UN, the situation in Al Hol camp in northeast Syria, where some 63,000 people live, is extremely tense, with no tangible progress in resolving the return of refugees to their places of origin. The situation is similar in the Al-Rukban refugee camp. According to James Jeffrey, the US Special Representative for Syria, the US has no intention of providing food or medical supplies for the people detained in the Al-Rukban refugee camp, blatantly demonstrating its racist policies. The Washington-backed autonomous administration of northeastern Syria is not rebuilding civilian infrastructure and war-damaged housing. As a consequence, at least 150,000 people are unable to return to their former places of residence. Attempts by refugees to leave the camps for the displaced have been suppressed by strong-arm tactics.

However, despite Washington’s desperate attempts to establish its dominance in Syria, today, everyone, including the American media, already understands that the US has already lost in Syria! Therefore, it is not surprising that regional media outlets are increasingly reporting how the Syrian army and popular militias are stopping US military convoys from patrolling through the country, especially with stolen Syrian oil. One such incident, in particular, occurred on November 11 at the entrance to Qamishli. As a result, the Americans are forced to turn back. Very soon, they will be forced by the people of Syria to leave the Arabian country altogether, following Washington’s recent version of the panic flight from Afghanistan.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

It would seem that Syria is finally experiencing a period of relative calm after a protracted and debilitating war. Having defeated DAESH (banned in the Russian Federation) with the help of Russian partners, Syrian authorities hoped to focus on rebuilding the economy and infrastructure. The Syrian Constitutional Committee and the Syrian opposition resumed work in Geneva, hoping to compromise constitutional reform in the country.

However, the peace plans may be derailed because Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has already started preparing another military operation against the Kurds in northern Syria. This was prompted by the October 6 attack on a Turkish military convoy in Idlib, Syria, which killed two servicemen, wounded five others, and destroyed an armored vehicle. One can get the impression that the anti-tank guided missile launcher attack on the Turks was carefully prepared. In response to the incident, Erdoğan indicated that Turkey is determined to address the threats in the region and act more firmly.

In that way, the Turkish President demonstrated his readiness to launch a new military offensive against the Kurdish-controlled northern regions of Syria (Tell Rifaat, Manbij, etc.). Notably, Ankara blames the United States and Russia, which were supposed to ensure that the People’s Defense Units move 30 kilometers away from the Syrian-Turkish border. These are the terms under which Turkey agreed to halt the offensive on Syrian territories in 2019.

Now it turns out that Turkey can use any incident as a pretext for another invasion of Syria. The only hope of stopping it, for now, is the prospect of complicating already strained relations with Washington, which has been supporting the Kurds and, back in the day, guaranteed their security in exchange for help in the fight against DAESH.

On October 15, Turkish drones dropped leaflets over the Syrian town of Tell Rifaat, 25 kilometers north of Aleppo in northwestern Syria. They warned locals about the imminent cleansing of the town of Kurdish fighters, calling for assistance to Turkish soldiers and volunteers in the areas of Operation Olive Branch and Operation Euphrates Shield. The People’s Defense Units (YPG, the armed formations of the Supreme Kurdish Council), the Afrin Liberation Forces, units of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), and Russian military police units are known to be in Tell Rifaat. Thus, if Ankara implements its plans for a new military operation in northern Syria, Russian soldiers could also be hit by the Turkish army.

Regarding Erdoğan’s plans to seize Aleppo, Reuters, citing its sources as two high-ranking officials in the Turkish government, suggests taking them seriously. Reuters also points out that “Turkey is preparing for further possible military action against the US-backed Kurdish militia in northern Syria if talks with the United States and Russia on the issue fail.” The target of Erdoğan’s military operation is the town of Tell Rifaat, from where YPG fighters allegedly launched the October 6 attack and killed two Turkish soldiers. Reuters further notes that Turkey will launch the operation if Ankara’s diplomatic efforts fail to force Kurdish forces to withdraw another 30 kilometers from the current frontline. It is expected that Erdoğan may make controlling warning calls to Putin and Biden before hitting Tell Rifaat.

However, Ankara’s current bid to seize Aleppo will meet strong resistance from Syria, Russia, and the US.

According to the Arab news agency SANA, Turkey and the Turkey-backed opposition have already resumed attacks on populated areas in Syria on October 19 with artillery and missile shelling of Al Dardara village located north of Tal Tamir in the northwestern Al-Hasakah Governorate, resulting in material damage to infrastructure and property. Turkish troops in northern Al-Hasakah Governorate are reportedly receiving reinforcements from a Turkish base in Ras al-Ayn.

At the same time, Turkey is moving additional special forces to the zone of a possible military operation against Kurdish paramilitary groups in the northern regions of Syria. Before this, Ankara-controlled militant forces were sent to the area of Tell Tamer in Syria in anticipation of a possible Turkish Armed Forces military operation to dislodge Kurdish militias.

Following Turkish President Erdoğan’s aggressive statements threatening a new invasion of the neighboring Arab republic, the Syrian army command is moving reinforcements to a possible front line in the Aleppo province. The Syrian military has been conducting intensive combat readiness checks and sending additional units north to the Tell Rifaat and Manbij areas, suspected of another cross-border operation by the Turkish army. In particular, heavy Russian T-90 tanks, Grad multiple rocket launchers, BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicles, and other weapons have been sent there.  Although the situation here has been relatively calm over the past 24 hours, it appears that Turkey needs time to prepare for an attack on Syrian-controlled territory.

Russian warplanes dropped leaflets printed by the General Command of the Syrian Arab Army on the positions of the militants and the Turkish troops with an ultimatum: any attack will be seen as a violation of the agreements, and Russia will be ready to attack the terrorists and protect the Syrian army as its ally.

The Syrian media reports that Assad’s Armed Forces and the Russian military are deadly serious. US officers, the YPG’s advisors, are also preparing to repel a Turkish attack, finding themselves “in the same trench” as the Syrian and Russian militaries.

Against this backdrop, the situation in Syria is visibly deteriorating. Terrorist formations in Syria have visibly increased their activities in anticipation of possible chaos due to a new military operation being prepared by Ankara in the north of the country. In particular, on the morning of October 20, there was a terrorist attack in the center of Damascus. Two explosive devices detonated as a bus carrying Syrian troops drove past the Presidential Palace, killing 14 soldiers and wounding dozens more with varying degrees of severity. The fact that such attacks in Damascus have been rare in recent years after government forces took control of suburbs of the capital that were once held by rebels may serve as a proof of just how much influence Turkey’s preparations for a new military operation in Syria have on the intensification of terrorists in the country.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

In his briefing at the UN Security Council, the organization’s Special Envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen, proposed taking advantage of the relative halt in military hostilities in the country to bring together the main regional and international parties concerned. According to the official, this should be done for the sake of preliminary negotiations on confidence-building measures and to pave the way for a political settlement to the crisis that has continued to tear apart the unfortunate country since 2011. But the general view held by many specialists is that Pedersen’s proposal is unlikely to yield the desired results, and a more effective alternative would be to encourage the interested parties to agree on a single issue to start with before gradually addressing the rest.

Indeed, the conflict in Syria was actually composed of a number of conflicts on different fronts from the very start: between the regime and the armed opposition, between coalition forces led by the USA and the radical terrorist group ISIS (banned in Russia), between Turkey and the Kurds, and between Israel and Iranian volunteers who came to the aid of the Syrian people at a time of need. Tel Aviv is actively pouring fuel on the flames by regularly carrying out aggressive air strikes on the Syrian territory, exploiting Damascus’s weakness during these trying times.

With the interference of different regional and international powers, Syria has fallen into disarray and become a web of numerous conflicting agendas and interests. Today, ten years after the start of the conflict, the regime has restored control over almost 70% of the country. The rest is divided between Turkey, the Kurds, the USA, the armed opposition, and various terrorist groups.

Aside from insignificant skirmishes in the south-west and north-west of Syria, relative peace reigns on various fronts for now. This has largely been the case since, on Russia’s initiative, Turkey signed the Idlib agreement in March 2020, which led to a ceasefire. In some analyses and reports it is argued that the current peace is a result of the consensus among key parties after they reached the conclusion that they had achieved as many of their aims as they could. The authorities in Damascus were also satisfied by the size of territory under their control, after consideration of the economic and military costs associated with the efforts to retake more from the militant opposition. Moreover, Russia and Iran were pleased with their successes in ensuring survival of the regime led by Syria’s lawfully elected president, Bashar Assad, and the expansion of their influence in the region. Turkey was wary that new hostilities in northern Syria would lead to a new wave of refugees in Anatolia, which is already home to over four million Syrian refugees. Ankara also found an acceptable formula for dealing with the perceived threat of the People’s Defense Units (YPG) near its southern border. Israel, by the look of things, was also very pleased with its own aggressive air strikes against Syrian regions where it believes Iranian military instructors are stationed and from which mythical Iranian strikes could be carried out against Israel.

However, although the majority of strategic research centers predict that this relative peace will remain for the foreseeable future, independent experts continue to caution against relying on a so-called consensus that is provisional and fragile. After all, the Syrian crisis is highly complicated and is bound up with many other problems in the Middle East. There is always something dangerous that can provoke an escalation in military-political tensions and spiral out of control. This is the main reason that various sides have taken advantage of the current peace to suggest ideas for overcoming the divide between regional and international powers and to encourage them to adopt a conciliatory policy with a view to bringing an end to the suffering of the Syrian people.

It is well known that the UN envoy’s main mandate is to promote a political settlement of the crisis in the country “under the leadership of Syria,” in accordance with the UN Security Council Resolution 2254 and the Geneva Communiqué. The resolution calls for a credible, inclusive, and non-sectarian system of government, a timetable and process for drafting a new constitution, and free and fair elections in accordance with the provisions in the constitution. These elections will be supervised by the United Nations, and all Syrians, at home or abroad, will be able to vote. It is obvious why they will be controlled by the UN, whose management operates in the United States and is now wholly subject to Washington’s strong influence.

However, the UN has been unable to make any progress in achieving these goals. Syria’s 150-member constituent assembly, representing the government, opposition, and civil society, has made no progress with drafting a new constitution for the country in its five meetings to date. The UN envoy has tried to persuade the members of the Assembly to convene for a sixth session, but the majority of observers don’t anticipate that it will bring any success due to recriminations between various Syrian camps and the divergence of views between Russia, China, Iran, and Western countries, which are trying to impose their selfish point of view in spite of reality.

Effectively, the conflicting opinions and interests of the main regional and international powers in Syria, and no doubt the self-serving interests of the West that seem more like colonial ones, are the main obstacle to the UN’s efforts to carry out its mandate. This is what inspired Pedersen’s recent proposal, made at a briefing to the Security Council on August 24, to invite “key states to cooperate in preliminary discussions on a package of concrete and reciprocal steps that are realistically and precisely defined, that are implemented in parallel, and that are verifiable.” Pedersen emphasized that “such steps are necessary, above all, in order to help save the lives of Syrians, to alleviate suffering, and to promote regional stability and the further implementation of resolution 2254.” According to those who sincerely seek to help the people of Syria, this resolution specifically aims for a comprehensive and lasting political settlement of the Syrian crisis.

Although in theory the UN envoy’s proposal is justified and consistent with the principles and procedures of gradual confidence-building measures in conflict resolution, its application in the case of Syria is unlikely to yield any results. The main reason for this is that the contentious issues between the main states involved in the Syrian conflict are not the sort that can be resolved through confidence-building measures. For example, they do not have a common vision for the future of Idlib, or even whether the Syrian authorities have the right to assert their sovereignty over it and fight the terrorist groups that currently control it. They cannot agree on the future of the militant groups that have been moved to Idlib as a refuge under various de-escalation agreements. One of these groups is Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (banned in Russia), a former branch of Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), which the UN Security Council, the United States, Russia and Turkey have declared a terrorist organization for its criminal activities. However, there are reports that some politicians are now calling for the USA to revise this definition, which would supposedly allow, under certain conditions, for the assimilation of this terrorist organization into political process, thereby legalizing its members.

Proponents of this idea claim that the organization has ostensibly made certain ideological changes to distance itself from jihadist fundamentalism, that withdrawing the terrorist classification will facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to the population of Idlib province, and that it will help to pave the way for negotiations on the future of its capital. Needless to say, this proposal, if implemented, will exacerbate already significant tensions over how to proceed in the area. Turkey, fearing a further influx of refugees, would categorically oppose any attempt by the Syrian authorities to regain control over Idlib by military means, even if it agreed with the declassification.

Other important and related examples of why the UN envoy’s proposal will not work include the future of the YPG and the status of the Kurds in northern Syria, the future of the Turkish military presence in northern Syria, the role of the USA in Syria, the impact of the Iranian military presence on Israel, the effectiveness of economic sanctions on Syria, the future of Assad’s government, and the issue of deals to rebuild the country. All of these questions, and many other things, are highly controversial. In response to them, differences do not only exist between countries that are either in favor or against the current authorities. For example, the USA, Syria, Iran, and Turkey differ sharply on the matter of rights to natural resources and other economic areas, their respective roles in relation to the Syrian government and their spheres of influence in the country. Not least around Syria’s southwestern borders, where the presence of Iranian instructors could cause problems with Israel. Furthermore, drawing attention to itself is the US military’s overt plunder of oil from Syrian oil producers, depriving the already disadvantaged Syrians of the last of their money. The wealthy USA is robbing poor Syria! There’s a worthy topic for a UN resolution: condemnation of Washington’s vile policy towards not only Syria but other countries that have also found themselves in poverty through the fault of the West.

In view of the abundance of issues, and the complex structure and depth of disagreements on them, it is highly unlikely that regional and international powers will be able to reach а consensus on confidence-building measures that are acceptable to all parties. It would be a waste of the relative peace that now exists in the country to participate in preliminary negotiations, which, in all likelihood, will go nowhere. Some analysts believe that direct negotiations between Russia and the United States, which will result in a comprehensive agreement on various issues, are the only way to put an end to the conflict in Syria. However, it is difficult to imagine, especially as there are no precedents that validate such a possibility. And while Russia strives towards a peaceful and prompt solution to the protracted Syrian crisis, a continuation of the plunder of national wealth, including of historical treasures that are now fairly prevalent on America’s shadow market, suits Washington just fine.

A more realistic approach would be to invite the key parties and, most importantly, the two superpowers, to initiate negotiations on one issue, such as the issue of Idlib and the fate of terrorist groups there. If they could reach a consensus on this issue, it would open the door for a range of further decisions on other issues. Certainly, an international consensus on Idlib would prevent many complications. It would address the numerous consequences of any use of military force to capture Idlib under the pretext of fighting terrorism. It would also encourage the Syrian authorities to take positive steps towards a political solution and help resolve other issues such as economic sanctions and obstacles to the country’s reconstruction.

However, it is the West that is increasingly turning the screw on the Syrian people, extending economic and other sanctions against Damascus in every possible way. It is clear that until progress is made in Idlib, the most that can be hoped for is a prolongation of the relative peace in order for as much humanitarian aid as possible to be delivered to the suffering Syrian people.

Still, the upcoming negotiations on drafting the Syrian constitution, which will resume in Geneva on October 18, are inspiring particular optimism. This was voiced by the UN Special Envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen, following consultations in Moscow with Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov.

Viktor Mikhin, corresponding member of RANS, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

According to the Syrian news agency SANA, on September 19, US Air Force helicopters transported two new groups of militants to their base in Al-Shaddadah in Al-Hasakah Governorate, northeastern Syria, for retraining. There were about 60 people in total who had previously fought in the ranks of the terrorist group ISIS (banned in the Russian Federation).

These militants were transported from a prison in the city of Qamishli, where they were guarded by Kurds from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) after ISIS’s defeat in 2019. The majority of these prisoners have Iraqi citizenship, and among them are also Saudi Arabians and Tunisians. According to SANA sources, at least three former ISIS members have held senior positions in its regional structure in the past. One of them presided over the police force in Deir ez-Zor, another headed penitentiary facilities, and the third was responsible for finances.

SANA elaborates that they will undergo retraining at the US military base in order to later integrate into puppet groups under the label of the “Army of Free Tribes,” which are used by the US command to conduct subversive operations in northeastern Syria.

It is notable that this is not the first such US operation to organize “retraining courses” for Islamist militants at its bases in Syria. For example, on August 7, 40 ISIS supporters were transported to a base controlled by the US Armed Forces in Al-Shaddadah. As reported by the Syrian media, the terrorists, among whom were an ISIS “spy group leader” and “explosives specialist,” were moved to the military base from prisons under the control of the Kurdish SDF. It was stressed that the terrorists “were armed and received logistical support for the perpetration of further acts of terrorism, the target of which could be populated areas, sites occupied by the Syrian army, and infrastructure.”

On June 21, US Air Force helicopters transported yet another group of militants to Al-Shaddadah from the Es-Sanawiya prison, situated in the administrative center of Al-Hasakah. They were also preparing to join the Army of Free Tribes group, which the United States uses to conduct operations in northeast Syria.

Prior to this, in April no less than 70 other former mercenaries from the ranks of ISIS were transferred from Ghuwayran prison, which is also controlled by SDF fighters, to the pro-Western coalition base at Al-Tanf where the borders of Syria, Iraq, and Jordan meet.

Mehmet Ali Güller, the Turkish author of “ISIS. Black Terror,” writes that ISIS has always been a “convenient enemy” for the USA and has served as a “skeleton key” for doors, which Washington has wanted to open.

Another Turkish publication, Milliyet, emphasizes that the USA has constantly signaled the need to focus on the fight against ISIS, but it has never acted with the aim of destroying it. The USA used ISIS to change the map of the region, reconstruct it, establish the space for a terrorist mini-state, and partition and destroy the region’s states. Somewhere there was ISIS, and somewhere “Al-Qaeda” (a terrorist organization which is banned in the Russian Federation) or “Khuras al-Din” (a terrorist organization which is banned in the Russian Federation). In other words, the USA has never seriously fought against the by-products of its own creation, which have appeared under different names. The publication emphasizes that the USA only ever acted with the consideration of exploiting them in their own interests and for their own benefit.

Any supporting information about secret ties between the USA and ISIS should not surprise anyone, since even The Washington Post writes that the leader of ISIS, Amir Mohammed Said Abel-Rahman al-Mawla, also known as Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Kurashi, previously performed the role of informant for the US military in Iraq. An in-depth investigation of the support that several Western intelligence agencies, including the CIA, provide to jihadist groups in Syria can be found in “The Secret War in Syria” by Maxim Shae, an expert on covert operations, intelligence and US foreign policy.

Not only does the USA continue to conduct “retraining” for former ISIS fighters and other extremist groups in “its own interests,” but it also supplies them with weapons. The aim of such US actions is extremely simple: to prepare a new detachment of radical pro-American groups that will perform the rough work of Special Force units. And the results of these actions are already plain to see: on September 17, the militants cut off the power supply across Damascus and sabotaged a gas pipeline to the South near Deir Ali. In addition to disabling the pipeline, according to Reuters and Al-Ikhbariya there have been attempts to blow up two power lines in the Khuran district of Damascus.

Besides training ISIS fighters at American military bases in Syria, the US-backed SDF abduct civilians to force them to fight in their ranks, carry out raids on Syrian cities, and wreak havoc in the country. Thus, on September 20, as reported by SANA news agency, the SDF executed another raid on houses in the town of Abu Hamam in Deir ez-Zor during which they abducted nine local residents, who were taken in an unknown direction. It is reported that the militants indiscriminately opened fire to disperse some people who were trying to recapture the abducted residents, sowing panic among the civilian population. Windows were also broken in several houses. The kidnapping was carried out with the support of the US military.

In order to avoid allegations against the US Air Force of killing civilians, the Pentagon plans to train SDF militants in independent operations with the use of military aircraft. For this, training in aviating and using T-6 Texan aircraft and MD-500 helicopters was organized at the Al-Kafr base. For this purpose, according to the available data, three such aircraft and two helicopters have already been delivered to the American base.

Furthermore, as El Mundo and many other Western media have already reported, US militants who have undergone “special training” are actively deployed in Syria, along with mercenaries from the American private military company Academi, to guard and transport convoys with stolen Syrian oil to Iraq.

Meanwhile, it should be recalled that US military personnel are in Syria illegally, violating the norms of the UN Security Council. Washington funds the militants through a program of assistance to the “Syrian opposition” and is using them to retain its positions in the Syrian oil fields.

These illegal and predatory actions on behalf of Washington must ultimately be subject to a legal assessment by the international community and be stopped!

Valery Kulikov, political expert, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

On Sunday, May 23, another American convoy of 86 trucks and many armored personnel carriers drove from Iraqi Kurdistan Territory to the northeastern province of Syria, Hasakah. The US vehicles passed through the US-controlled illegal border crossing of al-Walid and headed towards the Harab al-Jir military base in the Al-Yaarubiyah region of northeastern SAR.  The movements of the Americans are reported by the Syrian state agency SANA, based on local sources of information.

These US trucks, heavily guarded, delivered logistical equipment and tanks for the upcoming next transport of petroleum products from Syria to Iraq. In doing so, the United States occupation troops, illegally on Syrian territory, continue to plunder Syria, removing hydrocarbons from the oil-rich northeastern provinces of the SAR, causing economic damage to the independent Syrian state and its inhabitants.

Previously, SANA has repeatedly reported to the world about trucks carrying wheat from Syria to Iraq through the Semalka crossing on the Syrian-Iraqi border. It was emphasized that such actions of the US troops and units of the “Syrian Democratic Forces” have been taking place for a long time against the background of a large-scale food crisis caused by the war in the Syrian Arab Republic. Even at a rough estimate, in recent months the Americans have moved thousands of trucks loaded with weapons and military equipment from Northern Iraq to Syria, and then returned them from Syria with stolen food and petroleum products!

Dozens of convoys with oil illegally extracted in the east of the Arab Republic have already been moved into Iraq by US Armed Forces in recent months. On March 23 alone, they transported a convoy of 300 (!) gasoline tankers.  The so-called “Syrian Democratic Forces“ (SDF) militants, supported by the United States, are stealing 140,000 barrels of crude oil every day from oil fields in the northeastern Syrian Al-Hasakah province, the governor of this province, Ghassan Halim Khalil, said in February, adding that this happens with the direct participation and support of the American occupation troops deployed in the region.

The Syrian news agency SANA has repeatedly provided the world community with exhaustive information about the export by the US military and the Syrian Democratic Forces militants under their control to northern Iraq from the occupied Syrian territory of dozens of trucks with Syrian wheat and petroleum products stolen from storage facilities.

The intensity of military cargo shipments, the movement of US-led coalition equipment in eastern Syria and outright pillaging of the Arab Republic has especially increased in recent weeks, clearly in an effort to create additional social and economic tensions in the country on the eve of presidential elections and thereby inspire additional social unrest in the country.

“The actions of the US command to build up its military presence in Zayefratye against the background of the extreme socio-economic situation created by the strangling US sanctions seriously damage the prospects for a political settlement,” said Rear Admiral Alexander Karpov, deputy head of the Russian military’s Reconciliation Center in Syria. He also expressed confidence that Syria is capable of coping with terrorist cells on its territory on its own, while the presence of military contingents of coalition countries in the country “is illegal and contradicts the norms of international law”.

Recall that Damascus authorities consider the US military presence in Syria as an illegal occupation, coupled with the looting of natural resources belonging to the Syrian people, of which Syria has already been officially notified by the UN Security Council several times.  In fact, General Raymond Thomas, head of the US Special Operations Command, also acknowledged the lack of legal grounds for the US to be in Syria, speaking at a security forum in Colorado in July 2017.

To disguise its criminal activities in Syria, Washington, through its underhanded media, regularly organizes a series of information attacks with fake accusations of official Damascus authorities and Russian representatives in that country for allegedly being responsible for the humanitarian crisis in that Arab country. In addition, fighters from the Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham terrorist group (banned in Russia), accompanied by the White Helmets, transported six containers, allegedly containing chlorine, to the Syrian Idlib province to prepare another provocation facilitated by the West.

The US occupation policy in Syria has been sharply condemned by numerous public figures in different countries. For instance, Irish peace activist Dr. Declan Hayes stressed that, after the failure of Washington’s covert operations for regime change in Damascus, the United States and Syria’s regional enemies are increasing economic pressure through sanctions, as well as stepping up the plundering of the country’s resources. The purpose of such actions is “to prevent the stabilization of the situation in Syria”. The West’s hostile plans for Syria are part of a broader geopolitical campaign by the US and its allies to destabilize Iran, Russia and China. Declan Hayes is a former lecturer at a British university, and during the last ten years of the war he traveled to Syria several times, where he collected evidence and documented the facts of the West’s covert terrorist aggression.

In a recent interview, Peter Ford, former UK ambassador to Syria, also condemned Western sanctions, calling them an “economic war”. He said these sanctions were as brutal as those imposed on Iraq before the Americans and British eventually went to war against that country in 2003.

Similar criminal actions by the American military in the US involving the theft of Syrian oil and grain had previously been carried out by militants of terrorist groups against which an international coalition had been formed.  Still, it is unclear why the United States is doing the same thing with impunity today, and why the UN stands idly aside, failing to stop such actions of foreign invaders in Syria.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

The US government’s decision to supply some types of weapons to the Syrian rebels has given rise to a wide variety of interpretations and assessments. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham were quick to say that the United States should not limit itself to increasing aid to the Syrian rebels but should undertake a military operation — that it should use cruise missiles against Syrian government forces — and that helped things along. “But providing arms alone is not sufficient. That alone is not enough to change the military balance of power on the ground against Assad. The President must rally an international coalition to take military actions to degrade Assad’s ability to use airpower and ballistic missiles and to move and resupply his forces around the battlefield by air. This can be done, as we have said many times, using stand-off weapons such as cruise missiles,” McCain and Graham said in a joint statement. In addition, news reports from Washington have been saying that the United States is considering introducing a no-fly zone over Syria near the Syrian-Jordanian border. Plans call for establishing a temporary Syrian rebel government in the areas that would then be under rebel control.

 Many analysts, including Russian analysts, have begun saying that the Iraqi or Libyan scenarios will be used against Damascus to overthrow the ruling regime. But how realistic would an action like that be in Syria?

Of course, we cannot rule out the possibility that the United States will respond to developments even though it does not have a UN Security Council resolution legitimizing a foreign military incursion in Syria. For now, however, that is difficult to believe. Therefore, the United States will probably act on the sly by beginning arms deliveries to the rebels in the near future, and it will intensify its information support for the rebels by employing modern news manipulation technologies.

In any event, another factor is completely clear — Washington clearly does not intend or does not want to cooperate with Russia in a serious effort to resolve the Syrian conflict despite the fact that in recent weeks it has been actively working with Moscow on the Geneva 2 conference. The Americans clearly want to fan the flames of war in order to show that they are involved in the Syrian conflict and to look good to their allies in the Wahhabi-Franco-British coalition.

            The Obama administration’s decision was sparked by the Syrian army’s recent significant successes in defeating numerous opposition units and restoring government control over a number of important areas in the country. It became clear that if this continues the rebels will soon be driven underground to employ guerrilla warfare methods and terrorist attacks, and that will ultimately lead to their dénouement as a political force.

  It is quite clear that the United States’ allies, Britain, France, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, cannot and do not want to let that happen. After all, that would mean the complete failure of the Middle East political policy they have been pursuing for the last three years and the end of the Arab Spring — especially since neighboring Turkey, which was the Syrian opposition’s main base and a transit point for weapons being sent to the fighters in Syria, has seen the beginning of its own “revolutionary spring,” which for a time has taken Ankara out of the fight against Assad.

In addition, US President Obama has faced strong criticism on a daily basis from various hawks who have used the media to accuse him of unwillingness to get involved militarily in the Syrian conflict. Therefore, in part for propaganda reasons, he was forced to a decision that is contrary to international law and clearly not in tune with his personal opinion about the policy Washington should pursue in the Arab region should be.

 Thus, on Friday the White House said that in using chemical weapons the government of Syria crossed red lines set by the United States, and America would respond. However, it presented no strong proof of that. Any excuse at all was needed to somehow explain such an extravagant decision. On Thursday, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes sent a clear message that a no-fly zone would not be an effective solution to the Syrian conflict and could be more costly than the same type of operation in Libya. Thus Obama tossed a bone to the hawks and came across to the voters as a strong leader. However, he set very clear limits on America’s involvement — US soldiers would not set foot on Syrian soil. Afghanistan and Iraq left their mark. Most Americans are with Obama on this issue — they do not want another war that would cost the lives of American soldiers.

          However, we should not understate the significance of the White House decision. After all, the weapons that the United States reportedly intends to provide to the rebels include MANPADS, antitank missiles and light armored vehicles. These are significant items. Damascus will be forced to look for ways of neutralizing them in order to prevent a change in the military balance of power, which currently favors the legitimate government. Under the circumstances, Russia, which has already expressed its strong opposition to Obama’s decision, may very well help the Syrian authorities boost the fighting strength of the Syrian army with more modern weapons. Nor will Iran stand idly by.

 The EU’s reaction to the White House decision has clearly been mixed. NATO is already split between the Franco-British “Crusaders,” who are depending on the Wahhabis — truly an alliance between Satan and Shaitan! — and Europe’s wholesome powers, which do not want wars and conflicts. After all, they have their own problems from the economic crisis to deal with. The West’s disarray only weakens the positions of the United States and the European Union, not to mention NATO, in a world where China is becoming increasingly active.

          Time is needed to assess the impact of Washington’s decision and see how it will be implemented in practice. The White House most likely will take things slow while shouting loudly and belligerently for internal and external consumption. It is unlikely to begin arms deliveries before August. I would like to believe that by then the Syrian army will have soundly defeated the alliance of radicals, cannibals, terrorists, foreign mercenaries and those who are simply international scum. Then the people crying to the world about democratizing Syria and about its “bloody dictator Assad” can finally move to five-star hotels in Doha and onto Al Jazeera television, from where they can pour out their familiar angry speeches urging jihad. Qatar is always willing to give people wanting to complain about their failed dreams of grabbing power a shoulder to cry on and money to prevent them from getting too upset. Unless, that is, the Qatari government has been replaced by then — something many media outlets have been talking about for two weeks now — and Prince Tamim, its likely new ruler, changes his country’s approach to foreign policy. Otherwise, the natural gas “dwarf” could crack under the strain and its delusions of grandeur.

 Vladimir Simonov is an expert on the Middle East. Exclusively for New Eastern Outlook.

“We’ll turn Taksim into another Tahrir Square,” the protesters said, suggesting that the time has come for Erdoğan and the AKP to give up power. They have been steadily leading the country towards Islamization even though most educated Turks favor the secular state whose foundations were laid by Kemal Ataturk nearly 100 years ago. In addition, calls are increasingly being heard for Ankara to stop intervening in the Syrian conflict. Erdoğan gradually removed the military from control of the country after taking power, and since then he has done much to revive conservative Islam in Turkey. He evidently has been guided by the motto of that Turkish nationalism and pan-Turkism theoretician, Zia Gökalp (1876-1924) who said: “Minarets are our bayonets, domes are our helmets, mosques are our barracks, believers are our soldiers.”

Over his 11-year reign, Erdoğan has worked consistently to transform Turkey into an Islamic state. After promising in 2002 to erect minarets throughout Istanbul, where he served as mayor for almost 20 years, Erdoğan became the head of state. He has restricted the consumption of alcohol, mandated the study of Islam in primary and secondary schools and the wearing of the burqa, and even banned lipstick for flight attendants on Turkish Airlines. He has seriously violated the principles of free speech and a free press. According to Amnesty International, there are 72 journalists languishing in Turkish prisons. Members of religious minorities have been severely persecuted under Erdoğan, particularly the Alevi community, which some consider a branch of Shi’ism and others a local Islamic cult holding secular ideas similar to Kemalism.

But he has gone even further, plunging Turkey into the Syrian conflict under the influence of the most conservative regimes in the Arab world — Saudi Arabia and Qatar. As a result, southern Turkey is almost directly involved in it, to the extent that it could spill over onto the regions that border on its northern neighbor. Indeed, they now harbor more than 400,000 refugees from Syria, including both Sunni Arabs and Kurds, Alevis, Christians and Alawis, among others. It is all because Erdoğan decided to bet that the Muslim Brotherhood — a fundamentalist movement of radical Sunni Muslims — would take power in Damascus.

On the one hand, Erdoğan has taken steps towards reconciliation with the Kurds, against which he waged a merciless war to erase their national identity for decades under the banner of fighting terrorism. On the other, he did not do it to stop the discrimination against the Kurdish minority, which comprises almost a third of the country’s population. He did it to enlist their support against the secular opposition and the military in order to pass legislation more representative of Islamic norms and win the 2014 presidential election by a wide margin and then proceed to more radically Islamicize Turkey. After all, by changing the constitution he wants to introduce a presidential system of government in Turkey that gives the president the right to dissolve parliament, which would allow him to establish authoritarian rule and decisively negate the role played by the military. That is, he intends using reconciliation with the Kurds through Islam against those who advocate preserving Turkey’s foundations as a secular state.

Despite tough actions by the police, the demonstrations in Istanbul have spread to Ankara, Izmir, Antalya and other large cities where the secular populace is in the majority. However, we have to admit that Erdoğan remains a very popular leader in the country. Especially since he is supported by the conservative “hinterland,” the religious Islamic believers, and now also by Southeast Anatolia, which is populated mainly by Kurds. This has enabled him to avoid giving in to demands of the protesters, who have essentially transformed the environmental protest over the Gezi Park into an open political demonstration by opposition forces. So far, the army is staying out of it and not intervening in the conflict. During his years in office, Erdoğan has actually undermined the generals’ political influence by forcing many of them to retire.

But if the protests flare up with new strength — and the demonstrations are still growing — the military may intervene anyway to prevent Turkey from splitting and descending into civil strife. After all, they have neighboring Syria as an example. In any event, the first alarm bell has sounded for the prime minister and his party — as well as for that part of the Turkish elite that favors Ankara’s active involvement in the Syrian conflict alongside the Wahhabis. Also, the EU is now viewing Turkey’s aspiration to become a full-fledged member of the European Union with even greater caution. Especially since the United States and the European Union have already expressed concern about the government’s use of excessive violence to suppress the opposition demonstrations. Many human rights organizations in the West have also condemned them. The situation has reached the point that Deputy Prime Minister Bülent Arınç has apologized to the public for the authorities’ “disproportionate reaction” to the demonstrations.

Russia has a very specific question —how safe is Turkey currently for Russian tourists, especially if the demonstrations continue as they did this June in the resort towns on the Mediterranean coast? After all, there is no guarantee that they will not recur. It happened in Egypt, where the numbers of Russian tourists dropped off significantly after the locals demonstrated.

In any case, Turkey is facing difficult times, and Erdoğan needs to consider whether it is worthwhile continuing to Islamicize his country and participate in the games being played by the conservative Arab regimes. Taksim could actually become another Tahrir. Then the Arab Spring will truly come to Turkey, but it will be secular and democratic, rather than Islamic.

Alexander Orlov is a political analyst and an expert Orientalist. Exclusively for New Eastern Outlook.