The Syrian south...a Russian-American agreement besets Turkey- 2

The Syrian south...a Russian-American agreement besets Turkey-

NEWS DESK/ROJ MOSEs

Russian-American agreement worries Turkey

Like al-Ghouta al-Sharqiya, the Syrian south and its armed gangs are moving. According to the US-Russian agreement about the de-escalation zones in the south has been troubling Turkey and threatening its plans in Syria which was torn by the interests of the world and regional powers, so it worked hard to strike this agreement to continue benefiting from the contradictions between the Russians and the Americans to achieve what it has been unable to achieve for years interfering into Syria.  

The agreement of de-escalation held by Russia, America, Jordan and Israel did not last long because some regional powers such as Turkey which tried to exploit the contradictions between Russia and America to achieve their interests do not want the Russians and the Americans to reach a permanent understanding in Syria as that threatens their occupation and colonial plans and eliminate the mercenary gangs that receives their support from Turkish intelligence.

The strategic importance of South Syria

The governorates of al-Quneitra and Daraa in the south of Syria are of great strategic importance in the events of the Syrian crisis. Daraa is considered the cradle from which the Syrian revolution began in 2011 before the militarization of the revolution and its deviation from its course. The two governorates are strategically important as they are a key to a series of areas along the Syrian geography. They are a point of contact between southern and central Syria, located on the Syrian-Jordanian-Palestinian-Lebanese borders and on the borders of the occupied Jolan. They also form a link point between the Syrian geographical areas that are related to the capital Damascus to the west and the Jordanian, Palestinian and Lebanese borders to the south. This reflects the great strategic importance of Daraa and al-Quneitra in the battle map in Syria.

The Agreement of de-escalation

In conjunction with the agreement of the countries involved in the Syrian issue which calls themselves the guarantor "Russia, Turkey and Iran" in Kazakh capital Astana to preserve their interests in Syria, and the announcement on May 4, 2017 of the agreement of de-escalation which included four areas in Syria; an area in the south that includes the governorates of Daraa and al-Quneitra of more than 2,000 Km2 and they are controlled by the armed gangs. In the same month, talks began between Russia, America and Jordan within a Jordanian initiative to discuss the situation of southern Syria.

The talks led to the agreement of supporting the ceasefire and de-escalation that began on July 7 of the same year. On November 11, 2017, Jordan, the United States and Russia agreed to establish a temporary escalation zone in southern Syria. The representatives of the three countries signed the memorandum of principles in this regard in Amman.

The agreement supports arrangements that were taken by the three countries on July 7 to support the agreement of the ceasefire along the agreed contact lines in southwest of Syria as the deal was considered a step towards a permanent de-escalation in southern of Syria and allowed aid to reach.

Israel and removing Iran from the border

Although the Israeli government welcomed the US-Russian agreement to a cease-fire in southern Syria, the Israeli dissatisfaction with it began through diplomatic channels first to be announced after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's talks with French President Emmanuel Macron. Netanyahu told reporters that America and Russia did not take into account the Israeli interests in the agreement. According to Netanyahu, the text of the agreement did not take into account the interests of the "Jewish state". Hezbollah and Iran are still close to the Israeli border. The ceasefire is monitored by Russian soldiers. Israel is fully aware of the alliance between the Russians and Hezbollah and Iran in Syria. In the same context, Russian expert Constantine Dushinkov talked about Israel's disappointment in the agreement.

To reassure Israel, the Russian TASS news agency issued a statement to Lavrov at a press conference after holding a meeting with the members of the Collective Security Treaty, in which it said, "We have done everything possible to take into account the Israeli interests in the agreement held between Russia and America concerning South Syria."

Israel has focused on the need to take Iran away from the Syrian border with Jordan and Israel, as it considers the Iranian presence near its borders as the red lines of their security. The Iranian forces were existed near the Syrian-Israeli border, and at a distance of only 2 km in some sites. This is firmly rejected by Israel because it seeks to create an area free of arms with a depth of 40 Km from its borders, similar to the 1974 area which separated between Syria and the occupied Jolan, and it was supervised by the UNIFIL.

That is why Israel has carried out air strikes from time to time against the Iranians in Syria which explains the withdrawal of the Iranians from southern of Syria and replacing them with Syrian forces.

Some sources also pointed out that Jordan also rejects any Iranian presence on its borders and border crossings, especially the Syrian Desert ports, and the surrounding areas of Jomruk Daraa. It also rejects any military operation in that area for fear of further influx of refugees into its territories within its economic bad situations especially after the demonstrations that were come out against the government of Hani al-Mulqi and led to resigning it.

Turkey between the welcome and fear... The agreement threatens its interests

After all Turkey's plans of the Syrian crisis failed and the mercenary gangs failed to achieve their ambitions, Turkey sought to get closer to Moscow, especially in the northern part of the country, but on the same time, it did not sever its relations with America. It tried to play on the contradictions between America and Russia in some of the files and exploited it for its benefit, and the largest example of this is the consent of Russian and America about launching Turkey the aggression on Afrin and occupying the area, as previously the Turkish occupation of Jarablos and al-Bab aress have been approved by Russia and America.

In the file of South Syria, Turkey also considered the US-Russian agreement on the cease-fire in the south positive and its government welcomed this agreement at the outset, as it saw an entry to be allowed to hold such agreements with Russia about the northern part of Syria.

But the Turkish welcome to this agreement quickly turned into a fear that Russia and America would reach a similar agreement in the north of Syria, especially in Idlib and the areas of Autonomous Administration.

The other issue which feared the Turkish administration is that if the US-Russia agreement succeeds, it will have a negative impact on the Turkish-Russian rapprochement and make the meetings of Astana seem secondary.

Therefore, Turkey’s interest is that the agreement of de-escalation reached by America and Russia to not continue because if it succeeds, Moscow will push for more cooperation with Washington to seek a settlement of the Syrian crisis away from the regional powers in the area.

Intensive diplomatic moves, and the area heads towards war

In Syria, the scene is very complex for the interplay of the interests of the world and regional powers, and everyone monitors with fear of developing the situation. Any step that is not agreed upon by these parties, that will lead to the eruption of the situation, so Russia performed the rule of the mediator between these parties and involved in complicated and very complex talks with Israel, America and other regional forces involved in Syria In order to reach an understanding formula about the South of Syria.

In the file of south of Syria, the interests of the Syrian people are not taken into consideration, but the Israeli interests are taken into account. The parties "the United States, Russia, Israel and Jordan" agreed that the spread of the regime forces in this area is the best option on the condition of taking away the Iranian forces.

Turkish interest lies to the agreement’s non-continuation... Russia: Al-Nusra attacked regime.

There is no talk about the Turkish role in this area, but it is in the interest of Turkey to not continue the US-Russian agreement, so the mercenary gangs that receive their support from Turkey launched an attack on the regime's forces for another war to start in the area.

The regime continues its military operations in the area which began on June 19, as the regime's forces continue to shell the eastern countryside of Daraa, while Russian warplanes launch raids on the armed gangs’ positions in the eastern and northern countryside of Daraa, and the raids resulted in killing the civilians.

Now, negotiations are being held between the Russians and the armed gangs whose main title is the surrender and settlement. Those who refuse to do so will be transferred to the Syrian north occupied by Turkey. This seems to be the most likely scenario in this geographical area which has been far from bombing for a full year of the continuation of the agreement of de-escalation by Russia and USA.

Where is the destination after the south?

After the regime took full control of Damascus and its countryside last April, the Syrian regime officials said that they had two destinations; the south (Daraa and al-Quneitra) and the north (Idlib). After agreements held with Turkey to empty Homs countryside and al-Qalamoun area, the regime's forces began to strengthen reinforcements in the neighboring governorates of Daraa and al-Quneitra.

But the question is: Where will the regime's forces go after controlling the Syrian south? Will Idlib be the next destination? Will Turkey be removed from Syrian land as Iran has been removed from the borders of Syria, or are there other changes that will happen and change the course of events in this country which was destroyed by the wars of interests of the regional and international powers?

A.H

ANHA