North of Syria goes to the Americans: why Damascus should forget about its lands

February 24 2021 52

President Biden continues to revise all external policy his predecessor, Republican Donald Trump. Not having time to really leave Syria and Iraq, the Americans are returning there again. The United States is redeveloping the Middle East, and the Kurds it supports are likely to play a major role in this.

The Kurdish people live on the territory of several countries at once, Turkey, Syria and Iraq, and do not have their own statehood. In the Soviet period, Moscow favored and supported him. After the collapse of the USSR, the balance of power in the Middle East changed, and the Kurds made a bet on the United States, with which they hoped to create an independent Kurdistan. After the Islamic State terrorist group banned in the Russian Federation raised its head in Iraq and Syria, Washington quite successfully used Kurdish armed groups to fight it, which also managed to take control of the oil fields in the north-east of the SAR in the province of Deir ez -Sor.

It is generally believed that after that the Americans "threw" them, leaving them alone with Turkey, which considers the project of independent Kurdistan as a threat to its territorial integrity. Ankara has conducted several military operations in northern Syria, creating a so-called "buffer belt" along its entire border. President Trump limited himself to leaving the oil fields under American control, from where Syrian oil is pumped out and shipped for sale to neighboring Iraq. By According to official Damascus, from the daily mined 89 thousand tons of "black gold" in 2020, 80 thousand tons were stolen. Raw materials are what is stolen, money is not paid to the budget of the SAR for subsoil use, and no tax revenues go to the budget. It seems like a part of the proceeds from the United States is transferred to the Kurds, if they can be trusted in this matter.

And now a new "movement" begins around the Syrian Kurds. It is reported that the Russian military contingent in the northeast of the SAR has redeployed, de facto leaving the Kurdish "Syrian Democratic Forces" (SDF) alone with the Turks. It is not hard to guess that this was done in order to put pressure on them to restore the territorial integrity of the republic. It is obvious that the armed groups of Kurds, which have shown themselves well against the irregulars from the banned ISIS, but do not play at all against the Turkish professional army, want to bring the arm of official Damascus. At the same time, on the way from Iraq to Syria, American Avenger short-range air defense systems were spotted on the road. Their main purpose is to combat drones and low-flying aircraft and helicopters. It is quite reasonable assumptionthat air defense systems are being transferred either to guard US military bases in the SAR, or, more likely, to cover Kurdish armed formations from attacks from the sky. It is highly likely that more powerful Patriot-type air defense systems will follow the Avenger in the future.

But why is the United States going to aggravate relations with its NATO ally Turkey, directly supporting its enemies in the person of the Kurds? Is it just to steal some more Syrian oil? In fact, Americans are killing several birds with one stone at the same time.

At firstWashington, apparently, is really deliberately going into conflict with Ankara. Yes, Turkey is an important ally for the United States within the NATO bloc. It was generally believed that the North Atlantic alliance itself would not go anywhere, since it needed it to contain Russia. However, a lot has changed during the relative "freedom" in the Middle East, which was during the presidency of Donald Trump.

Ankara began to pursue an open neo-Ottoman policy in the region. She de facto "squeezed" the north of Syria from Damascus, came to her former province of Libya, where she was able to achieve a revision of the boundaries of the Eastern Mediterranean sea shelf in her favor. Turkey is preparing to build a full-fledged aircraft carrier, which, obviously, can be used by it in the matter of changing the status and ownership of the Greek islands. President Erdogan helped Azerbaijan to resolve the long-standing Karabakh problem in just a month and a half, due to which the Turks received a new land corridor to the Caspian Sea. In Central Asia, Ankara is actively promoting a pan-Turkist integration project under its auspices.

It is not hard to guess that Washington and Brussels are looking at all these processes with obvious disapproval. Turkey is clearly striving to become a macro-regional player, on which a lot of things will depend, but why is this “hegemon”? In this context, direct and unequivocal support for the Kurds can become a deterrent to Ankara's ambitions. The Americans will be able to respond to the attempts of President Erdogan to elevate Turkey and expand its international influence with the project of Kurdistan, which threatens the very existence of the Turkish state. In addition, the Kurdish factor should make Ankara more accommodating in the procurement and use of Russian weapons.

SecondlyBy supporting the Kurds, Washington puts an end to the attempts of Damascus, Tehran and Moscow to restore the integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic. This seriously reduces the capabilities of Russia and Iran, forcing them to keep, supply and dissipate significant forces there.

Thirdly, obviously, Syrian oil will not be superfluous for the Americans. By taking it away from Damascus, the United States is thereby weakening the ruling regime of President Bashar al-Assad. We will not be surprised if in the future among the beneficiaries of the scheme for the resale of "black gold" are the Biden family or persons close to him. Ukraine has shown that these people, despite belonging to the Western elite, do not pass easy money easily.

Thus, the Kurds are now becoming the most important geopolitical factor in the Middle East. By supporting them, the United States can kill several birds with one stone, playing simultaneously against Turkey, Iran, Russia and Syria itself.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

steelmaker

+4

24 February 2021 15: 56

When the world is at peace, the United States does not feel well. And there is no peace, because there is no one to give the Americans to play!
1. Cyril
  
  -5
  
  24 February 2021 18: 21
  
  There is never peace on Earth. The Soviet Union, in the same way, when it needed to, resolved issues by direct military intervention or support of opposition groups.
  1. tulip
    
    +2
    
    5 March 2021 20: 46
    
    The Soviet Union intervened only after the Americans had already shit. He just doesn't go anywhere - no need to lie
    1. Cyril
      
      -1
      
      5 March 2021 21: 30
      
      The Soviet Union intervened only after the Americans had already shit.
      
      Yes, yes, yes, yes, the United States went into the Baltics or Finland before the Second World War. Where to go.
amateur

+3

24 February 2021 16: 55

Another "analytics" from "Ekperd"
1. Pivander
  
  -1
  
  24 February 2021 19: 37
  
  "Expord" in all directions from Baltkrievia)))
2. Marzhecki
  
  -1
  
  25 February 2021 08: 16
  
  Another "analytics" from "Ekperd"
  
  Can you tell the world something meaningful on the topic?
  1. Cyril
    
    -1
    
    25 February 2021 12: 49
    
    Sergey, look at his nickname :)
gorenina91

-6

24 February 2021 16: 57

North of Syria goes to the Americans: why Damascus should forget about its lands

- The theme is as old as the world ...
- It's just that it is beneficial for the Americans today to preserve this entire status quo; this is a position that ... -situations, will ensure the success of the passage of time ... - Today, the Americans are happy with everything in Syria ... and time is working for the Americans ...
- So to the "three sorrows" that the author leads ... - personally, I would add the "fourth point" ...
Fourthly:
- This is ... - wait patiently for Biden (or his clique) to gain strength; to turn the whole situation in Syria in an absolutely positive direction for the United States ... - The United States is quite satisfied with the situation in Syria today, and today the United States has the main headache ... is China; but in Syria, after the time has passed ... - you still need to change something:
- Change Erdogan (which may well happen soon);
- Arrange a petty war between the Kurds themselves (Syrian, Iraqi and Turkish);
- Arrange the same between the Kurds and Turkish formations on the condition (it can be just declarative promises) that Kurdish autonomy will be created on the territory of Syria ... - And literally all Kurds (Syrian, Iraqi, Iranian, Turkish ) ... - And even a completely militarized Turkey in such a situation is unlikely to be able to cope with such a situation so easily ... - especially if the United States also supports the Kurds ...
- And what an absurd situation then Russia gets into ... - it's just a complete "Syrian Russian fiasco" ... - Here, for sure ... - The United States is killing three birds with one stone ...
- Well, Russia won't take Turkey's side in that case; providing Turkey with direct military assistance ... - It will be something unimaginable ... - Although in such a situation, Erdogan will become even "more valuable" for Russia than ... Assad ... - This is such a paradox ...
1. Kofesan
  
  -1
  
  24 February 2021 18: 44
  
  A plus.
  Unfortunately, the policy of the Russian leadership is heavy and not creative. Not only in Syria. There are objective reasons for this, namely, not to get into bloody meat grinders on a large scale. Otherwise, the power of the present "masters of the taiga" will collapse. I mean the "elite" from the cooperatives "Lake", "Praskoveevka" and others ...
  This is well understood in the United States and they use this advantage almost 100%. And they leave laws and nobility for us.
  Russia's advantage in Syria is the support of the Syrian government. It would be possible to form and train special brigades of the Syrians, up to the payment of salaries to the latter, and ... to protect them after those attacks on the Americans. Adopting US tactics. And how to harm the gangs of the Saxons, Russia has.
  There is only political will. And there is no fearlessness either! ... Before the loss of the property dear to their hearts, acquired by overwork and moved to the cote d'azur.
  Then you won't have to "forget about your lands."
Binder

-10

24 February 2021 17: 56

And again Mr. Marzhetsky accuses the Kurds of robbing Syria. But the Kurds are the indigenous inhabitants of these places, what kind of robbery are we talking about? Their land, theirs and bowels, and they do not want to return to Assad.
1. Cyril
  
  -1
  
  24 February 2021 18: 22
  
  Well, in fairness, the author did not say anything about the robbery, like
  1. Binder
    
    -3
    
    24 February 2021 21: 15
    
    Not paying attention, Cyril, the theme of theft is present in the text:
    
    Quote: Cyril
    Syrian oil is pumped out and shipped for sale to neighboring Iraq. According to the official Damascus, from the daily mined 89 thousand tons of "black gold" in 2020, 80 thousand tons were stolen. Raw materials are what is stolen, money is not paid to the budget of the SAR for subsoil use, and no tax revenues go to the budget. It seems like a part of the proceeds from the United States is transferred to the Kurds, if they can be trusted in this matter.
    1. Cyril
      
      +1
      
      24 February 2021 22: 24
      
      he means that taxes are not paid to the state (after all, this is still a united Syria)
2. Marzhecki
  
  +3
  
  25 February 2021 08: 18
  
  Quote: Bindyuzhnik
  And again Mr. Marzhetsky accuses the Kurds of robbing Syria. But the Kurds are the indigenous inhabitants of these places, what kind of robbery are we talking about? Their land, theirs and bowels, and they do not want to return to Assad.
  
  Mr. Bindyuzhnik, as I understand it, Ukraine's claims regarding the Crimean assets against Russia also have no grounds? After all, these are assets belonging to the Crimeans, and they do not want to return to Zelensky?
  And oil is pumped out and sold by the Americans, not the Kurds. The Americans, your fellow citizens, are invaders and invaders in Syria.
  1. Cyril
    
    -3
    
    25 February 2021 12: 50
    
    Israel is not an occupier and interventionist in Syria
    1. isofat
      
      +3
      
      25 February 2021 14: 03
      
      Quote: Cyril
      Israel is not an occupier and interventionist in Syria
      
      Cyril... Not everyone is of this opinion. The UN disagrees with you.
      1. Cyril
        
        -2
        
        25 February 2021 15: 34
        
        The UN does not agree with you.
        
        The UN opinion is the UN opinion. The UN also calls the annexation of Crimea annexation. But do you object to this interpretation?
        
        The Golan was captured from a country that launched a war against Israel. You are the one to blame.
        
        isofat
        
        0
        
        25 February 2021 16: 03
        
        Quote: Cyril
        The Golan was captured from a country that unleashed a war against Israel.
        
        Early in the morning, 05.06.1967/XNUMX/XNUMX. The Israeli Air Force delivered a powerful blow to the coalition air bases. The war began and Israel started it!
        
        Cyril
        
        -1
        
        25 February 2021 17: 03
        
        The war started and Israel started it! yes
        
        This would be the case if, on the date indicated, both countries had not been at war since 1948. And in 1948 it was Syria (including) that unleashed the war. And immediately before Israel's preemptive attack on Syrian and Egyptian airfields, both Egypt and Syria brought troops to full combat readiness, pulling them to the borders of Israel.
        
        isofat
        
        +1
        
        25 February 2021 18: 58
        
        In 1948, the Jews who came to the land of Palestine did not provide the Arabs with convincing evidence to build their state there, Israel. The population was presented with a fact.
        
        This was the beginning of the war, the responsibility lies with the Jews. They came to Palestine, where no one invited them.
        
        They came with weapons. The Jewish brigade, created by the British and with combat experience, became the backbone of the Israeli army.
        
        Cyril
        
        -1
        
        25 February 2021 20: 38
        
        In 1948, the Jews who came to the land of Palestine did not provide the Arabs with convincing evidence to build their state there, Israel. The population was presented with a fact.
        
        Jews in the region called Palestine have always lived - during the time of Judea, and during the time of Rome, and during the Arab rule, then the Turkish, etc., etc. Actually, until 1948, it was the Jewish population of the region that not Arabic.
        
        At the time of the end of the British Mandate, there was only aliyah (repatriation) of Jews from Europe and other countries after WWII.
        
        Well, to cite the agitation of the Soviet agitprop as proof is, of course, the height of your "argumentation". Especially considering that Stalin (let me remind you, if you have forgotten - he was the head of the USSR) was one of the first to speak out for and contribute to the creation of modern Israel.
        
        isofat
        
        0
        
        25 February 2021 21: 22
        
        Cyril... Recent over a thousand years the vast majority of Muslims lived in Palestine.
        
        In 1919, 568 Muslim Arabs, 74 Christians and 58 Jews lived in the mandated territory of Palestine.
        
        In 1922, 584 thousand Muslim Arabs, 71 thousand Christians and 84 thousand Jews lived in the mandated territory of Palestine.
        
        In 1948, 1 Arabs and 180 Jews lived here.
        
        Once again: at the beginning of the 20th century, Jews constituted less than 10% of the Palestinian population, the rest of the Palestinian population was almost entirely Arab.
        
        As for the documentary, all the facts are easily verified. You watched and heard what one of the Rothschilds, Ben-Gurion's associate, etc. said.
        
        Cyril
        
        -1
        
        26 February 2021 03: 18
        
        Once again: at the beginning of the 20th century, Jews constituted less than 10% of the Palestinian population, the rest of the Palestinian population was almost entirely Arab.
        
        So no one argues with that. I argue with your following statement:
        
        In 1948 the Jews who came to the land of Palestine, did not present the Arabs with convincing evidence to build their own state there, Israel.
        
        And the Jews were not obliged to prove something to the Arabs - they had the UN declared right to self-determination, including the creation of their own state in their historical homeland, where they lived for thousands of years.
        
        And, for that matter, how does the Palestinian issue relate to Syria? These are two different state entities.
        
        isofat
        
        0
        
        26 February 2021 16: 41
        
        Cyril... The people living on the land and cultivating this land have the right to it. The Arab people had the right to build a state.
        
        What did the UN do? They adopted Resolution 181 of the UN General Assembly, which proposed a plan for dividing the British mandate into two states - Jewish and Arab.
        
        What did the Arabs do? The Arabs did not agree with the plan.
        
        What did the Jews do? On the last day of the British Mandate, the Jews announced the creation of an independent state of Israel.
        
        Having proclaimed their state, the Jews from the colonists became the occupiers. Nobody gave them, the Jews, the rights to this territory.
        
        The bottom line: The Arabs started a liberation war against the occupiers. Jews are occupiers.
        
        Cyril
        
        -1
        
        26 February 2021 16: 53
        
        The people living on the land and cultivating this land have the right to it. The Arab people had the right to build a state.
        
        First, the Arabs already had their own states - the same Syria, Egypt, Arabia, etc.
        
        Second, the Palestinian Jews cultivated the land they lived on in the same way.
        
        Having proclaimed their state, the Jews from the colonists became the occupiers. They, the Jews, were not given rights to this territory.
        
        How is it? They were given this right by this very UN resolution on the division of British Palestine into 2 states - Jewish and Arab. The Jews agreed to this plan - the Arabs balked. Who is to blame for them?
        
        The funny thing about this situation is that most of the territory that was allotted to the Arab state was captured during the first Arab-Israeli war by none other than Syria, Egypt and Transjordan. Such are the "Arab brothers".
        
        Outcome: Arabs started a liberation war against the occupiers. Jews are occupiers.
        
        Sucked from your finger, you have the result.
        
        isofat
        
        0
        
        26 February 2021 17: 11
        
        Cyril... And Syria and Egypt ... Arab states. And Palestine is an Arab state fighting for its independence.
        
        Quote: Cyril
        They were given this right by this very UN resolution on the division of British Palestine into 2 states - Jewish and Arab.
        
        The resolution does not give such rights. Now, if an agreement was reached, then all subsequent actions would acquire some kind of legitimacy.
        
        No agreement was reached, the occupation began. Israel is the aggressor and occupier!
        
        Cyril
        
        -1
        
        26 February 2021 17: 21
        
        And Syria and Egypt ... Arab states. And Palestine is an Arab state fighting for its independence.
        
        Palestine would not have to fight if it had agreed to the plan for the formation of two independent states proposed in the resolution. Palestine did not agree - its problems.
        
        The resolution does not give such rights. Now, if an agreement was reached, then all subsequent actions would gain legitimacy.
        
        The resolution just gives such rights. It gives these rights to both Jews and Arabs. The Jews accepted the UN Plan, and the Arabs:
        
        Arab leaders, including the Arab League and the Arab Supreme Council, have flatly rejected the UN plan to partition Palestine.
        Arab countries fundamentally rejected the creation of a Jewish state.
        
        In other words, the Arabs were denying the Jews their right. The Jews, let me remind you, did not deny the Arabs their right.
        
        The fact that no agreement was reached is exclusively to blame for the "principled" Arabs.
        
        isofat
        
        0
        
        26 February 2021 20: 02
        
        Quote: Cyril
        In other words, the Arabs were denying the Jews their right.
        
        Cyril... Only the Arabs have rights to this land, they live there and have worked their land for many centuries in a row. And here Jews have no such right... They did not live or cultivate this land, a short period of colonization is not enough to pump the right to build their own state on a foreign land.
        
        Only by agreeing with the Arabs who have lived in this territory for centuries, the Jews could legitimately build their country. Arabs agreed to a state, for all residents, and did not agree with the division of Palestine into two countries. This is their legal right.
        
        The Jews did not agree. They have illegally declared their state. Those who began to drive out the invaders, they called the instigators of the war. All the Jewish lamentations that their people were again attacked and oppressed are untenable. They have taken over foreign territory illegally.
        
        There was an attempt by the UN to resolve the conflict, which was unsuccessful. The decisions of the UN Assembly are of a recommendatory nature. Israel is a state, an aggressor.
  2. Binder
    
    -2
    
    25 February 2021 17: 32
    
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    As far as I understand, Ukraine's claims regarding the Crimean assets against Russia also have no grounds?
    
    I don't know much about Ukrainian issues, so your question is not at the right place. As for oil from fields located in areas where the Kurds are an indigenous ethnic group, then there can be no two opinions - the oil belongs to them. About American participation in its sales is just your speculation.My American fellow citizens carry out a peacekeeping mission in those areas, preventing with their presence large-scale bloodshed and genocide of Kurds both from the Turks and from the Assad regime. By the way, they also beat ISIS, the Russian forces are more and more occupied by the opponents of the Alawite dictator.
Alexzn

0

24 February 2021 18: 37

All parties involved in the conflict want a piece of the pie. Turkey wants the north inhabited by Turkomans, the Americans control the Kurds as a lever in relations with all parties, the Kurds their own state, Russia control over the territory controlled by Assad, Iran the Shiite axis from Afghanistan to Lebanon. Today, the status quo is already in place and everyone is afraid of sudden gestures.
AICO

+4

24 February 2021 19: 01

- Who decided that - the canary godfather during the next enlightenment between the Alzheimer's quirks ?!
Shadow041

+3

24 February 2021 20: 18

If the United States makes new enemies for itself, especially in NATO, this is only for the benefit of the Russian Federation
Ulysses

+1

24 February 2021 23: 51

North of Syria goes to the Americans:

Ankara began to pursue an open neo-Ottoman policy in the region. She de facto "squeezed" the north of Syria from Damascus,

Ekperdu would have to decide for a start who got who and what he squeezed ..
And so, again with a finger to the sky ..
1. Marzhecki
  
  0
  
  25 February 2021 08: 19
  
  Quote: Ulysses
  Ekperdu would have to decide for a start who got who and what he squeezed ..
  And so, again with a finger to the sky ..
  
  Study the question before scribbling comments.
  Turkey took north of Idlib and Afrin as a buffer against the Kurds.
  The Americans are picking up the Kurdish territories in the north-east of the country as a counterbalance to the Turks and everyone else.
  As for the "finger in the sky" can you somehow refute my theses and conclusions? Or simply ...?
Marzhecki

+1

25 February 2021 08: 24

Quote: Pivander
"Expord" in all directions from Baltkrievia)))

Actually, I am a citizen of the Russian Federation, I was born and have lived all my life in the Urals.
Nickname "pivander" suits you well, clearly corresponds to the essence
Marzhecki

0

25 February 2021 08: 37

Quote: Ulysses
And so, again with a finger to the sky ..

And what does "again" mean? Can you substantively imagine where exactly I "hit the sky with my finger" earlier, so that it was "again"?
Do you want to change your nickname to "dilettant-2"? It would suit you. I can offer a couple more options.
kgf

-1

25 February 2021 12: 20

There are only two legitimate forces in the Middle East - democratic Israel and
Democratic Kurdistan. USA pragmatically and far-sightedly bets on democracy
as the only possible legitimate basis. Dictator Assad will sooner or later be overthrown as well as the Nazi regime of the Ayatollahs.
And Syrian oil does not have such a significant factor.
kriten

+1

25 February 2021 13: 07

The reason is simple: Russia's assistance is always limited to partial betrayal of the allies. This can be seen both in Ukraine and in Syria ...
Lime Bayun_2

0

25 February 2021 15: 32

P AND N D O S S (the site does not allow this exact definition) They will help the Kurds to CREATE Kurdistan, and MANDATORY they will squeeze the entire north from Syria, right up to the Mediterranean Sea.
Michael1950

0

26 February 2021 01: 56

- They forgot to indicate that part of the Kurdish lands is located on the territory of Iran. And American support for the Kurds also plays against Iran ...
Michael1950

-2

26 February 2021 01: 58

Quote: Lime Bayun_2
P AND N D O S S (the site does not allow this exact definition) They will help the Kurds to CREATE Kurdistan, and MANDATORY they will squeeze the entire north from Syria, right up to the Mediterranean Sea.

- And it will be great! Long live independent Kurdistan!
Igor Berg

+1

26 February 2021 15: 03

Quote: steel maker
When the world is at peace, the United States does not feel well. And there is no peace, because there is no one to give the Americans to play!

Just the other day I read it - for about 4 thousand years on Earth, there was no war in the whole world for about 3 months in total.
tulip

-1

26 February 2021 18: 19

Why America can support separatism in Syria, but Russia is not allowed in Ukraine?))) Why America does not care about the integrity of Syria, does not care about the "integrity" of Ukraine? And when will our Russian Foreign Ministry finally begin to respond normally to the West ??? Russia has a lot of trump cards, since the US and NATO have done so much in the world that they can be blamed for another 50 years - but for some reason our Foreign Ministry is silent and only turns the other cheek ...
Michael1950

-2

26 February 2021 23: 33

- Well done Americans! Keep it up!
Michael1950

-1

26 February 2021 23: 36

Quote: Marzhetsky
Quote: Ulysses
And so, again with a finger to the sky ..

And what does "again" mean? Can you substantively imagine where exactly I "hit the sky with my finger" earlier, so that it was "again"?

- Alas, - very often ...
Michael1950

0

26 February 2021 23: 47
Quote: isofat
Cyril... Recent over a thousand years the vast majority of Muslims lived in Palestine.

In 1919, 568 Muslim Arabs, 74 Christians and 58 Jews lived in the mandated territory of Palestine.

In 1922, 584 thousand Muslim Arabs, 71 thousand Christians and 84 thousand Jews lived in the mandated territory of Palestine.

In 1948 year here lived 1 million 180 thousand Arabs and 630 thousand Jews.

Here is where ?! Here is the territory of Mandatory Palestine:

Here the British colonialists cut off 3/4 of this territory and formed the kingdom of Transjordan, where Jews were forbidden to live on pain of death:

On what basis and by what right did they do it ?!
And then the scraps of Palestine, 1/4 of the former territory was again called "Palestine" and this scraps were again divided into two parts: Jewish and Arab:
1. isofat
  
  0
  
  27 February 2021 00: 10
  
  Michael1950... In how it was sold. Calm down and repent of the crime committed by the Jews. You Jews did not have the right to build your own state on the territory of Palestine. The war is on your conscience!
Michael1950

+1

27 February 2021 05: 55

Quote: isofat
Michael1950... In how it was sold. Calm down and repent of the crime committed by the Jews. You Jews did not have the right to build your own state on the territory of Palestine. The war is on your conscience!

- Learn history.
Marciz

-2

1 March 2021 05: 53

The North of Syria departs to the United States because Syria has trusted Russia, which has betrayed the entire Russian world, turning it into a Ghost, so it will be with Syria !!!!
Dust

+2

1 March 2021 10: 46

Well, yes, the main thing for the Americans is that Syria does not turn into a second Vietnam ...
kriten

-1

2 March 2021 11: 46

Syria cannot cope on its own, and Russia is a poor helper. At the end she always gets into a half-betrayal pose,
remember Ukraine: they came up with an agreement that is essentially treacherous. Why then did they climb?