Albinaa’ Newspaper August 19, 2024
Nasser Kandil
At an eye-catching timing and with striking analysis, the Washington Institute opens discussions about the American occupation of Syria, key to the occupation of Iraq, basing it on the American narrative about dialogue with the Iraqi Government which linked backing away from a timetable for American withdrawal from Iraq to the need to remain in Syria and protect forces there, and the inevitability of remaining in Iraq. What is striking is the angle the Washington Institute has taken in addressing the American Occupation, in that it absents any direct linkage between withdrawal, and the confrontation taking place with Al Mukawama Axis and its demand for American withdrawal, and addresses withdrawal in the context of the result of failure, but for other considerations, depriving Al Mukawama Axis of a victory.
The choice of a context associated with the relations between the SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces) and the Arab tribes as an introduction to failure, and the risks of being in a situation similar to the one in Afghanistan before withdrawal through the illusion of the feasibility of reliance on a corrupt government distant from reality and from its surrounding social milieu, can be considered a preface to easing the discussion away from the language of challenge and hostility which will certainly emerge should the withdrawal be linked to Al Mukawama Axis, the war in Gaza, and Israeli interests, all headlines which American objectivity is hard to imagine in their discussion.
The Institute in renowned for its zeal in defending Israeli positions and interests, and of adopting the most extreme policies in favor of the entity. It is also renowned for its closeness to centers of decision-making in Washington, and rendering advice to the State Department and the National Security Council, which in turn delineate for the Institute the approaches for discussions that end in recommendations. The discussions undertaken by the Institute appear confined to the headline of the clash between the Arab tribes and the SDF, under the title of the American loss of the Arab tribes resulting from SDF’s poor administration, and the certainty of withdrawal if the efforts of winning back the Arab tribes fails.
The study identifies that the triad of SDF corruption, prejudice on the part of the American forces favoring the SDF, exclusive reliance on this group (SDF), and the atmosphere of the war in Gaza, have collectively alienated the Arab tribes who constitute the majority of the population in Eastern Syria where the American forces are spread. The complete reliance on the SDF can be understood from the perspective of American Forces’ and SDF’s complicity in corruption related to the looting of Syrian oil and the desire to prevent new partners from joining in. What can also be understood is the existing contradiction between the project of the establishment of a Kurdish mini-state, and a mixed Arab- Kurdish leadership in the areas occupied by the Americans called for in the study. As for the atmosphere created by the war in Gaza, which the study says it does not want to delve into, (an illness without a remedy the Institute is well aware of), because Washington’s blind alignment with the occupying entity has inflamed feelings of enmity towards Americans in the entire region.
The study says that withdrawal at the current stage is the wrong step, and calls on Washington to realize that “Withdrawal from Syria now with the reappearance of ISIS, and the mounting danger of the outbreak of a larger scale regional war, and encouragement of what is called the Iranian “Axis of Resistance” will be a mistake.” In return, it calls on Washington to realize that “To preserve the American presence and the capabilities of the local forces allied with the U.S., American officials should tone down the problematic approach to leadership adopted by the Syrian Democratic Forces.”
The essence of the study, however, is based on the admission of failure. It states: “In light of these events, it appears that Iran’s efforts to foment tensions in Eastern Syria are expanding along with her efforts to expel the American forces. And while thinking about the possibility of withdrawing from Syria in the future, Washington should take measures now to avoid a scenario in which the SDF suffers a collapse similar to what occurred in Afghanistan, with forces loyal to Assad and forces loyal to Iran returning victorious to the east (East Syria). This includes preserving diplomatic support for the mission against ISIS, and the military support for the SDF to repel attacks from the areas across the Euphrates that are under Iran’s and Assad’s control.”
