Syrian War: News #23

And also:

Russia Restores Balance in the Middle East, by Gevorg Mirzayan for VZGLYAD. 03.24.2023.

Saudi reconciliation with Syria will affect Russia's interests.

Tectonic shifts continue in the Middle East, which until recently it was difficult to even imagine. Saudi Arabia is now reconciling not only with Iran, but also with Syria - and it was the Saudis who first of all gave money to overthrow Assad. What is happening is directly related to the interests of Russia.

“It seems that there is a wide process of shuffling the cards in the region, the result of which may be new alliances - as a result, everything will turn on its head,”  writes the regional edition of Al-Jarida about the current situation in the Middle East.

And one of the main participants in this process is Saudi Arabia. Riyadh recently reached an agreement, brokered by China, to restore diplomatic relations with its main regional adversary, Iran. Now the Saudis are restoring relations with another of their enemies - Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. For the relevant negotiations, a high-ranking member of the Assad family came to the Saudi capital (according to rumors, this person was the president's brother, Maher). The Saudi embassy in Damascus is expected to open at the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. And the return of the embassies will be followed by the return of Syria to the League of Arab States.

Saudis rush to reconcile

The Saudi-Syrian process is part of a more global process of normalizing relations between Damascus and the Middle East countries. After the devastating February earthquake, the Syrian capital was visited by the foreign ministers of Egypt and Jordan for the first time since the start of the civil war, and the Saudis sent a plane with humanitarian aid to Aleppo. On March 19, Bashar al-Assad and his wife were met with all honors in the United Arab Emirates.

However, Saudi Arabia is the main Arab country now, and the degree and pace of the restoration of contacts between Bashar al-Assad and his neighbors depends on it. Judging by the current position of Riyadh, the choice was made in favor of acceleration.

Saudi Arabia has several reasons for this.

First of all, it is fixing losses. The wrong bet on the overthrow of Assad not only did not lead to success, but also deprived Riyadh of a number of positions in the Middle East.

Saudi Arabia was ousted not only from Syria, but also from Lebanon - and not only the Iranians were ousted, but also the Turks, who turned out to be much more flexible than the Saudis. And now Riyadh wants to do what Ankara (its rival in the struggle for regional leadership) began to do several years ago after joining the peace process at the Russian invitation - that is, to return to Syria, located in the center of the region. As rightly pointed out by the UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it is imperative to "strengthen the Arab role in Syria."

But if Turkey has not yet completed this process (everyone is talking about a possible summit between Erdogan and Assad, but potential negotiations on this in Moscow between the Syrian and Turkish delegations did not take place), then Riyadh wants to go through the entire procedure in a matter of months. And thus bypass Ankara, which made a powerful debut in the endgame of the diplomatic game on the Syrian board.

Saudi Arabia wants not only to return, but also to acquire. Initially, the main goal of Riyadh in Syria was not the overthrow of Assad, but the withdrawal of Syria from the influence of Iran. Regime change was seen only as the (seemingly) most effective method to achieve this goal.

Now this method is not feasible - however, according to Riyadh, the goal still looks partially achievable. It will not be possible to drive Iran out of Syria, but it is quite possible to tempt Assad into creating a parallel strategic cooperation with the Saudi leadership. If only because Saudi Arabia (unlike Iran) has tens of billions of free dollars that it can invest in the reconstruction of Syria from the consequences of the civil war and the February earthquake. Simply put, the Saudis are ready to exchange a broken stick for quite an attractive carrot.

Damascus is not against, Moscow is for

Apparently, Assad is not opposed to the Saudi proposal. Moreover, in the process of negotiations, the Syrian side, apparently, removed a number of details that were unfavorable for it (according to the Wall Street Journal, Assad was required to find a compromise with the opposition and accept troops from Arab countries to protect refugees returning to Syria, but he refused).

The Syrian president needs not only Saudi (as well as Emirati, etc.) money, but also the balance of an overly strong Iran. The Syrian leadership sees its country as a friend and partner of Tehran, but not as a vassal state that does not have the right to a multi-vector policy. So Tehran has every reason to be wary of the Syrian-Saudi rapprochement.

However, another ally of Damascus - Moscow - has every reason to be pleased. Of all the outside countries, Russia is likely to be the main beneficiary of this rapprochement. At least because it helps Russia in the implementation of the three most important goals: internal Syrian, Middle Eastern and diplomatic.

The main task of Russia in the intra-Syrian space is the complete victorious end of the civil war - and this task has not yet been completed.

Moscow has destroyed the terrorists and helped Damascus regain control over vast areas, but the political process is not yet complete. Assad's opponents still have large resources - and above all through funding from external players. Same Saudi Arabia. And if Riyadh actively gets involved in the political settlement of the Syrian crisis (that is, in other words, forces its proxies to either negotiate with Assad or live without Saudi money), then it will be much easier for Moscow to achieve reconciliation between various Syrian groups.

From the Middle East point of view, the Syrian-Saudi normalization plays to the de-escalation in the region. It destroys another pivot around which regional conflicts are built. This means that it deals another blow to the reasons for maintaining the American military presence in the Middle East. In effect, the Americans (and their European allies, who are still saying “Assad must go”) are isolated.

From a global point of view, the restoration of relations between Damascus and Riyadh strengthens Russian diplomacy. If Washington in the Middle East played according to the principle "you are either with us or against us", then Russia acted on the basis of the thesis "we are friends with everyone who is not friends against us."

In the 2010s, when Russia entered the region with this thesis, it seemed almost impossible. The Turks were in conflict with the Syrians, the Iranians with the Saudis, the Israelis in general with all the Arabs (as well as the Iranians, who were also in conflict with the Israelis). And each side tried to take Russia as its ally against the other.

As a result, Moscow not only managed to stay on the thin line of neutrality, but also actively contributed to the process of reducing these conflicts (Saudi-Iranian, Syrian-Turkish, and now Saudi-Syrian). This not only contributed to the stabilization of the situation in the region, but also corresponded to Russian interests.

Russia has effectively shuffled all the cards in the Middle East, resulting in new alliances and turning everything upside down. Well, more precisely, from head to foot - that is, to that form of interaction and cooperation between states, which is considered normal, civilized and correct. And that means - beneficial to Russia.

https://vz.ru/world/2023/3/24/1204606.html

…it is quite possible to tempt Assad into creating a parallel strategic cooperation with the Saudi leadership…....tens of billions that it can invest in the reconstruction of Syria from the consequences of civil war and the February earthquake..

Assad would want something more and should insist on it: Additional funds to strengthen the Syrian military, and not just its air defenses. A stronger Syria, able to deter attack and stop being a zionist shooting gallery, is long overdue.

Attacks are hotting up.



What's the media hiding?
@narrative_hole
·
4h
the USA threatening to attack Iran because because their invading forces sitting next to an oilfield in Syria came under fire… if you don’t see the problem with this you have lost your critical thinking

Suribelle
@Syribelle
·
15h
Syrian military sources count eight missiles that were fired at the US Conico base and its surroundings.

Tony
@Cyberspec1
·
6h
More than 20 rockets were fired at US military facilities near the Konoko oil and gas field in northern Syria.— Al Jazeera.

The report says that the Americans were fired at by the artillery of the Syrian army, and Iranian-made drones
Americans say 2 drones were shot down



New York Times: The US Department of Defense is conducting an investigation into why the main air defense system at a coalition military base in northeastern Syria malfunctioned when an Iranian drone struck the facility.

Fox Reports indicate high numbers of US military casualties as a result of targeting their bases in Syria.


Pentagon: American planes that bombed eastern Syria took off from the Al-Udeida base in Qatar

The best comment of all demonstrating the Pentagon's tenuous grasp of logic

Pentagon spokesman claimed:
Iran is responsible for attacks on US bases in Syria because it supports militias. The drone that targeted the coalition base in Syria is Iranian!

Spriter
@spriter99880
·
13h
All US bases in Deir ez-Zor, eastern Syria, are subjected to Iranian bombardment, including the Koniko field, Al-Omar field, Al-Jufra field, and Al-Shaddadi base.

Referring to last night's attacks by American warplanes on the positions of resistance groups in eastern Syria, Bloomberg wrote that America's behavior is consistent with the wider approach of the White House towards Iran.

The American ABC :
One of the American bases in Syria was targeted today with three drones and the other with five missiles.

Al-Masira: During the past hours, more than 40 missiles targeted 4 American bases in eastern Syria

Fox News: The Pentagon is conducting an assessment to respond to the new rocket attack

Fox News website said that a number of American troops were injured in a new rocket attack in Syria and said that the Pentagon is conducting an assessment to respond to this attack.



29, by my count, salvo. Not sure where

Nice hits, the oil fields are easy to hit them with Long range weapons s

The air support is coming from AL Udeid, meaning they definitely don't have air support round the clock

And the airbase in Iraq was already hit by Iranian missiles when Trump went, Ayn AL Asad airbase

So Iran could hit their planes in Iraq, if push came to Shove the US would have to rely on Qatar

As Jordan would also be bad for planes, to close to Iranian Ballistic Missiles and rockets and drones

The US would have to beef up its position in Syria, and they're not in a position to do it

The US will not reduce its military presence in Syria after the attacks on its bases, 03.26.2023.

The Pentagon announced on Thursday that a drone "of Iranian origin" attacked the facilities of a military base belonging to the Washington-led coalition forces in northeastern Syria.

The United States has no intention of reducing its military presence in Syria, after a series of attacks on its bases, according to the coordinator for Strategic Communications of the National Security Council of the White House, John Kirby, in an interview with the CBS network.

"We will always act to defend our troops and that will not change, our mission to destroy the Islamic State will not change. We have less than 1,000 troops in Syria dedicated to this task," Kirby said, stressing that Washington intends to maintain the military presence in Syria with its current size.

The spokesman did not rule out more retaliatory attacks against pro-Iranian groups in Syria. "I would absolutely not rule out the possibility of additional US action if the president deems it possible and necessary to protect our military and bases," he added.

Yandex Translate from Spanish

https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/462036-eeuu-reducir-presencia-militar-siria

Recent hostilities between Syrian and US forces could be a turning point, by Robert Inlakesh for RT. 04.09.2023.

Damascus’ troops and their Iran-backed allies seem to be shifting towards a head-on confrontation with American occupiers.

US President Joe Biden ordered airstrikes on a number of positions in northeastern Syria last month, after Washington announced the death of a contractor in a drone strike.

What followed was an unprecedented response from the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and allied militias, shelling US positions throughout the duration of the following day. This exchange of fire marks a turning point in the conflict between the two sides.

On March 23, the US Department of Defense claimed that a drone of Iranian origin had struck US forces stationed near al-Hasakah in northeastern Syria, killing an American contractor and injuring a number of service members. F-15 fighter jets were subsequently launched from Doha in order to target Iranian-allied militia groups in the Deir ez-Zor province of Syria.

In recent years, there have been several exchanges between US and Iranian-allied militia groups in the east of Syria. However, these rarely resulted in American casualties and the brief escalations were controlled.

What changed following the US strikes on March 24 is that there was intense return fire from not only Iranian-aligned militias in Deir ez-Zor, but also from the SAA itself. A number of US bases were struck in the response, which primarily targeted American forces around the al-Omar oil fields, inflicting traumatic brain injuries on six US troops, according to the Pentagon. During a trip to Canada the following day, Joe Biden remarked that the US was “not going to stop” when asked about retaliating against Iran for the exchange in Syria. “Be prepared for us to act forcefully to protect our people” he said.

It later emerged that the Biden administration had moved one of its aircraft carriers, USS George H.W. Bush, closer to Syria, which Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh explained was due to “increased attacks from [Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)]-affiliated groups targeting our service members across Syria.” What this represents, regardless of whatever action the US may take in the future, is a strategic change in the equation set forth by Syria and its allies in the east of Syria. An Iraqi source with intimate knowledge of the situation claimed this had been an “order to now kill American troops and not just fire warning shots.”

According to a Syrian political source who chose to remain anonymous for security reasons, the escalation in the northeast is directly tied to ongoing Israeli aggression against the country:

“The recent move by Syria and allies is a direct response to a wave of Israeli escalation against the country that began last year. If you remember in August of 2022, there was a similar stand-off between the Americans and IRGC allies in northeastern Syria. The Israeli escalation is directly enabled by the United States, whose officials talked in the past about the importance of the American military presence in Syria for Israel’s war-between-wars campaign against Iran-aligned forces there.”

The “war between wars” is one of Tel Aviv’s inter-war campaigns, where covert operations are carried out against enemy states during a period of relative calm between both sides. Israel’s recent campaign has primarily consisted of operations against Iranian-linked targets, both inside and outside of Iran; it also has included a large number of unannounced airstrikes inside Syria, where members of the IRGC have been targeted, along with allied militia groups. The Israel Defense Forces have a policy of not commenting on these attacks but Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has in the past admitted that “hundreds” of them had taken place over the years.

If Damascus’ new approach of responding forcefully against the US military in northeastern Syria is adopted going forward, it will give Washington only two options: negotiate with Damascus or leave the country completely. If American soldiers are coming home in body bags over maintaining an occupation inside a country that the US public or Congress were never consulted on, the pressure of remaining could become a burden on the Biden administration. This is especially the case at a time when the Arab world is beginning to normalize formal ties with Damascus, in addition to Washington’s NATO ally Türkiye.

A Syria-Türkiye rapprochement could be essential to forcing the US out of Syria also, as both countries could end up coordinating during any future Turkish offensive against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the northeast. The SDF operate as a kind of US proxy force, allowing for the Americans to use a small number of their own troops to occupy roughly a third of Syria’s territory; included in which are the most fertile agricultural lands and the majority of Syria’s natural resources. Both previous attacks, launched by Ankara in 2018 and 2019, led to a withdrawal of US forces so as to not accidentally cause friction with their NATO ally. In the event that another military operation from Türkiye is launched, Syria could be poised to retake its oil fields, in theory. 

The adoption of a head-on confrontation strategy by Iran-aligned groups and the Syrian government could lead to new horizons and to the possibility of a US withdrawal, that is assuming the Biden administration is not wedded completely to the idea of staying.

https://www.rt.com/news/574431-syria-us-iran-fighting/