It does not seem that America is obliged to maneuver in the date of its withdrawal
from Syria for security and military considerations, since no one announced the
resistance or the confrontation of the US presence in Syria despite it has been
described as an occupation by Syria. Therefore, any surprises will be due political
considerations in order to confuse the opponents whenever the staying is extended,
and to manipulate the allies whenever the staying is reduced.
The US President Donald Trump talked in the beginning about a 100-days deadline
that ends in the end of March, then, he talked about an extension for six months, then
for four months. And then he talked about withdrawal that has no specific deadline.
It was clear that the talk about the extension was an attempt to absorb the objections
of the allies and their confusion of how to deal with the post - withdrawal era, but it is
clear that any extension will not solve the problems which have not been resolved
before, especially the Turkish-Kurdish engagement about who will have control on
the territories from which the Americans withdraw.
The Iraqi officials who are concerned with the Syrian- Iraqi borders and the US
forces which will withdraw from Syria quoted officially from the American officials
the date of the withdrawal in the end of March. This explains the quickness in getting
rid of the last stronghold of ISIS.
It seems that the Americans want to see a Kurdish-Turkish clash on the northern
borders of Syria and to see confusion in Astana axis in dealing with the Turkish-
Syrian dispute over who will occupy the areas in the eastern of Syria.
The readiness of the Syrian army to carry out its sovereign responsibilities has
imposed on the Russian and Iranian allies the role of putting Turkey in front of the
challenges of accepting Adana Agreement with Syria to prevent Washington from
spreading chaos as an alternative of their presence, where there is no winner but only
a group of losers.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,
2019-03-03 | عدد القراءات 1557
