Washington’s decision to reduce its military presence in Syria raised a wave of questions about the extent of confidence between the administrations of US President Donald Trump and his Syrian counterpart Ahmed Al -Shara, in addition to the practical impacts and the ongoing plans to fill the expected void.
In this context, Hino Klink, former US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, said that the United States’ decision is “an indication of a new era between Washington and Damascus,” noting the Trump and Sharia meeting in Riyadh, which created a higher level of confidence among their administrations.
According to Klink’s talk to the “Beyond the News” program, the Trump administration re -evaluates its relations with the Middle East, and prefers diplomatic and economic relations over its military counterpart, noting that Washington trusts that it has partners in Damascus to cooperate to face any possible threat.
The Trump administration also learned the lesson from the “catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan”, which took place during the era of Joe Biden, and ended any American presence there.
Likewise, it comes in the context of reducing the American military presence in the Middle East and Europe to focus on other priorities in the area of the Hadi and Hindi, according to Clinic.
Two US officials told the island that the American forces would retain one base in Syria – from the original bases – in the vicinity of Hasaka in northeastern Syria.
These two officials revealed that the American forces will abandon all other bases in Syria, including Al -Tanf, and confirmed that the withdrawal in Syria will require several months and appropriate security conditions.
In turn, the Dean of the Faculty of Political Science at the University of North in Idlib, Kamal Abdo, believes that the decision is expected based on the new American strategy in the region, and that it was the culmination of the Trump and Sharia meeting in Riyadh.
Abdo explained that the American decision is conditional on the cooperation of the Syrian government and the implementation of what was agreed upon, pointing out that the understandings have reached a high degree that allows the American withdrawal from Syria.
He stressed that the Damascus government is looking with a high positive of the American decision, speaking about what it called “a strategic partnership that constitutes a coup in Syrian foreign policy.”
According to US officials’ talk to the island, more than 500 American soldiers left Syria as part of the withdrawal process, noting that the number of American forces in Syria will decrease to less than a thousand by the end of the year “if the circumstances allow.”
And they confirmed the evacuation of 3 bases in northeastern Syria, which are the Green, Hasaka and Euphrates village, and some of them handed over to the “Democratic Syria” forces (SDF).
For his part, the first researcher at the Al -Jazeera Center for Studies suggested that Makki meet that the American withdrawal from Syria and the lack of similar steps in Iraq, Jordan and the Gulf may relate to “preparations and expectations of the possibility of conflict in the region.”
Makki explained that the American bases in Syria are relatively modern, and “will not play a role in possible battles,” noting that it was established for logistical and security reasons to confront the Islamic State and terrorist elements.
He pointed to the possibility of terrorism again in Syria, after Israel destroyed the capabilities of the former Syrian army, adding that the remainder of the new Syrian army is moderate to light.
Post -withdrawal challenges
But Abdo stressed the need to fill the void in the region after the withdrawal, noting that this falls on the Syrian government and its allies in Ankara, Doha and Riyadh, and stressed the importance of Damascus taking the file of the Islamic State prisons in northeastern Syria.
He recognized the inability of the Syrian forces alone to manage this file, so there is a need for “regional cooperation and the establishment of a center to coordinate operations against terrorism in Syria.”
Washington aims from its decision – according to Makki – to protect its forces from a possible conflict in the region, considering that it is related to the fragility of the security situation in these rules, which makes it easy goals for its opponents.
According to Makki, there are no indications of American withdrawals from Iraq, Jordan and the Gulf, referring to the region that is a strategy for Americans to confront the influence of China.
Israel’s position
Regarding the meeting of the American envoy to Syria Thomas Barak with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Klink said that he gives the impression that there is an American concern that Israeli strikes in Syria continued, which “may destabilize them, and do not support American goals there.”
As for Makki, he said that there are differences between Washington and Tel Aviv regarding the Syrian file, and he said that the Trump meeting and Sharia were surprising and annoying to Israel, which was in the midst of “an attempt to divide Syria and create a Druze entity in southern Syria.”
He explained that Washington has established security relations with the new regime in Syria, which stopped Israeli efforts to “divide Syria and create chaos in it in order to remove a possible threat to it in the future.”
But Abdo sees the American -Israeli dispute over Syria, “tactically”, not strategic, considering that it falls in the context of “distributing integrated roles to deal with the Syrian file.”
He said that Israel needs “a regime capable of controlling the situation in Syria, and this is preferred to divide it”, so it is pressure through the minority paper and incursions in order to “force the new system to make continuous concessions.”