US Plan to Plunder Oil & Gas in Kurdish Areas of Syria

2020/08/15 | Note, political, top news

Strategic Council Online - At present, the US goal of maintaining presence in the Kurdish regions of Syria is to extract oil and gas, but the question is whether it is possible to implement this agreement and if so, how long will it continue, because the situation in the region is very sensitive and it cannot be assumed that if the Kurds dominate an area, they can use the resources and reserves there as they wish. Reza Mirabian - Middle East Affairs Expert

The United States recently signed an agreement with the Kurds in northern Syria to buy Syrian oil from them; The issue was met with a backlash from Iran, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Seyed Abbas Mousavi calling the signing of the oil deal an act against international law and a violation of the principle of national sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria. Also in recent months, the US military has withdrawn coalition forces from a number of military bases and concentrated them in several larger bases due to increasing pressure on the United States to withdraw from Iraqi territory and escalation of attacks on US bases by the Resistance forces.

In parallel, US movements in Iraqi Kurdistan have increased, and the United States appears to be changing its policy of long-term presence in Iraq by investing more in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq. The question now is what is the US view of the Kurds in Syria and Iraq at the moment, and what goals does Washington pursue to get closer to them?

In fact, it should not be overlooked that over the past decade or two, Americans have always used the Kurds in the region as a tool for their presence in Iraq and Syria. Therefore, during this period, they have tried to establish their presence in the Kurdish region and strengthened their position in Syria under the pretext of defending the Kurds.

Eventually, however, it became clear that these US efforts do not aim at supporting the Kurds, but seizing and looting Syria’s oil and gas resources. Because the Syrian gas and oil resources are located in the Kurdish region, the United States is trying to maintain its presence in Syria in the future under the guise of supporting the Kurds. In other words, Washington wants to have a share in Syria’s future by consolidating its position in Syria.

Experience has shown that when the Americans achieve their goals, they usually destroy the tools they have used in this direction, and in this particular case, if the United States achieves its goal, it will no longer pay attention to the demands of the Kurds. We saw the same situation in the Kurdistan region, where the Americans turned their backs on the Kurds in the referendum or did not support them during the ISIS attack on Erbil, and the only country that supported Erbil was the Islamic Republic of Iran.

So if the United States is making friends with a group or a country in the whole region, it is only to achieve its goals and use them only as a temporary tool. At the moment, the US goal of being in the Kurdish regions of Syria is to extract oil and gas, but the question is whether this agreement can be implemented and if it is implemented, how long it can last because the situation in the region is very sensitive and it cannot be assumed that if the Kurds controlled a region, they could use the resources there as they wished; Because in the end, the issue of security in these countries comes first, and if there is no security in the Kurdish regions of Syria, American companies will not be able to be there to extract oil and gas.

In general, the security situation in the region is unstable, and neither the Kurds nor any other group or country can guarantee American companies that they can safely extract oil and gas. Of course, such an agreement has not only economic value for the United States, but also political and geopolitical goals. The oil deal raises the Syrian Kurds’ cards for future talks with the Syrian government, and with the Kurds likely gaining power in the Syrian power structure, the United States could pursue its political goals in the country.

Regarding the Kurdish position on US actions, it should be noted that in such cases, unfortunately, the Kurds are forced to cooperate with the United States. In the end, however, the Kurds will not be able to fulfil their demands and will not benefit from cooperating with Washington.

It is unfortunate, then, that the Syrian Kurds have vested hope in the promises of the United States instead of consolidating their position in the political future of the country. And in a situation where it is not clear what the future of the US presence in Syria will be. Naturally, since there is also an Arab population in the area, the continuation of this trend will cause them to oppose the US presence. As a result, the Kurds may benefit from such cooperation in the short term, but in the long run, it will be detrimental to them.

It should also be noted that although governments based in Syria, Iraq, and even some regional governments, such as Iran, oppose the US presence in the region and in Kurdish areas; however, the people of these countries must express their dissatisfaction and resistance to this presence in order for this situation to end.

If the people of the region are not satisfied with the presence of the United States, naturally this country will not be able to be present in the region easily and in the long run.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LATEST CONTENT

Reasons Why the Netanyahu Govt Is Preventing a Ceasefire Agreement

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The last round of indirect negotiations between Hamas officials and the Zionist regime, which was conducted in Cairo with the mediation of Qatar, Egypt, and the United States, was unsuccessful due to the Zionists’ “Obstruction.”
Hamid Khoshayand, an expert on regional issues

Claims of a US Arms Embargo against Zionist Regime Reveal America’s Deception

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on international issues said that the US claims to have suspended sending weapons to the Zionist regime is a political deception to silence public opinion because this would make no difference in the nature of Washington’s support for the Zionist army and the existence of this regime.

Goals of Blinken’s Recent Trip to Saudi Arabia

Strategic Council Online—Interview: A researcher of Saudi affairs said that US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken arrived in Riyadh recently during a regional trip and had consultations with the Riyadh officials. It seems that one of the items on the agenda between Saudi Arabia and America, in addition to the Gaza war, is the process of normalizing relations between the Israeli regime and the Arab kingdom.

Dr. Kharrazi's response to the new US position on Iran's nuclear program:
It Was America That Abandoned Nuclear Diplomacy/ Iran Also Considers Diplomacy the Best Approach

Strategic Council Online: The President of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations stated: “The US State Department spokesperson, after my interview with Al Jazeera, reiterated their past remarks, stating that they won’t allow Iran to build nuclear weapons, but ultimately said diplomacy is the best approach. Yes, we too prefer diplomacy since based on the Fatwa of our Supreme Leader are not for nuclear weapons; rather, we are advocates of diplomacy to make the Middle East a nuclear-free region. But, in case the Israeli regime threatens us with nuclear weapons, we surely cannot sit idle and wait for permission from others.”

Europe’s Confusion in Securing Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Red Sea

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The strategic Strait of Bab al-Mandab and the Red Sea have recently faced serious problems and crises due to the Gaza war. This is because of the protectionist approach of the Yemeni army forces toward Palestine, which, since the beginning of the Israeli regime’s attacks on the Gaza Strip, has included attacks on ships bound for or from the origin of the regime in the Red Sea.
They said they will continue their attacks until the Israeli regime’s military aggression in the Gaza Strip ends. The United States, as the most important supporter of the Israeli regime, was the first country to respond to this policy of Yemeni army forces and tried to form a global coalition to counter these attacks under the cover of supporting freedom of navigation, which, of course, failed because of conflicts of interests of Western countries and ended in the actions of the US and British attacks on positions in Yemen. Of course, although European countries were not seriously involved in the American coalition, they have numerous and complex interests in this inflammatory, and as a result, have adopted a particular and independent approach.
Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Mazaheri – University Professor

The prospect of Possible Departure of Hamas Political Office from Qatar

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on regional issues said Qatari authorities will definitely resist Western pressure to expel Hamas leaders from their territory, and probably the United States will not move towards a zero-hundred equation in this regard because if the Hamas leaders remain in Qatar, which is an ally of the United States, is better than moving to a country outside the power of the United States to exert pressure.

Loading

Últimas publicaciones

Reasons Why the Netanyahu Govt Is Preventing a Ceasefire Agreement

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The last round of indirect negotiations between Hamas officials and the Zionist regime, which was conducted in Cairo with the mediation of Qatar, Egypt, and the United States, was unsuccessful due to the Zionists’ “Obstruction.”
Hamid Khoshayand, an expert on regional issues

Claims of a US Arms Embargo against Zionist Regime Reveal America’s Deception

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on international issues said that the US claims to have suspended sending weapons to the Zionist regime is a political deception to silence public opinion because this would make no difference in the nature of Washington’s support for the Zionist army and the existence of this regime.

Goals of Blinken’s Recent Trip to Saudi Arabia

Strategic Council Online—Interview: A researcher of Saudi affairs said that US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken arrived in Riyadh recently during a regional trip and had consultations with the Riyadh officials. It seems that one of the items on the agenda between Saudi Arabia and America, in addition to the Gaza war, is the process of normalizing relations between the Israeli regime and the Arab kingdom.

Dr. Kharrazi's response to the new US position on Iran's nuclear program:
It Was America That Abandoned Nuclear Diplomacy/ Iran Also Considers Diplomacy the Best Approach

Strategic Council Online: The President of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations stated: “The US State Department spokesperson, after my interview with Al Jazeera, reiterated their past remarks, stating that they won’t allow Iran to build nuclear weapons, but ultimately said diplomacy is the best approach. Yes, we too prefer diplomacy since based on the Fatwa of our Supreme Leader are not for nuclear weapons; rather, we are advocates of diplomacy to make the Middle East a nuclear-free region. But, in case the Israeli regime threatens us with nuclear weapons, we surely cannot sit idle and wait for permission from others.”

Europe’s Confusion in Securing Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Red Sea

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The strategic Strait of Bab al-Mandab and the Red Sea have recently faced serious problems and crises due to the Gaza war. This is because of the protectionist approach of the Yemeni army forces toward Palestine, which, since the beginning of the Israeli regime’s attacks on the Gaza Strip, has included attacks on ships bound for or from the origin of the regime in the Red Sea.
They said they will continue their attacks until the Israeli regime’s military aggression in the Gaza Strip ends. The United States, as the most important supporter of the Israeli regime, was the first country to respond to this policy of Yemeni army forces and tried to form a global coalition to counter these attacks under the cover of supporting freedom of navigation, which, of course, failed because of conflicts of interests of Western countries and ended in the actions of the US and British attacks on positions in Yemen. Of course, although European countries were not seriously involved in the American coalition, they have numerous and complex interests in this inflammatory, and as a result, have adopted a particular and independent approach.
Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Mazaheri – University Professor

The prospect of Possible Departure of Hamas Political Office from Qatar

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on regional issues said Qatari authorities will definitely resist Western pressure to expel Hamas leaders from their territory, and probably the United States will not move towards a zero-hundred equation in this regard because if the Hamas leaders remain in Qatar, which is an ally of the United States, is better than moving to a country outside the power of the United States to exert pressure.

Loading