US Politically Recognizes Kurdish-led Administration

A US military vehicle near an oil well in northeastern Syria. AFP file photo
A US military vehicle near an oil well in northeastern Syria. AFP file photo
TT

US Politically Recognizes Kurdish-led Administration

A US military vehicle near an oil well in northeastern Syria. AFP file photo
A US military vehicle near an oil well in northeastern Syria. AFP file photo

US President Donald Trump’s approval for an American company to sign an agreement with the head of the Syrian Democratic Forces on oil investment in northeast Syria is a political step for “recognition” of a Kurdish self-administration in the region, a Syrian Kurdish official said.

The official considered that the US move would contribute to encouraging the Syrian Kurdish-controlled city of Qamishli to move further away from Damascus.

“The agreement has a huge political significance,” he said, considering it as a “recognition” of the Kurdish administration.

“It also limits concerns on a possible surprise US pullout from east of the Euphrates,” the official added.

Republican US Senator Lindsey Graham told the Senate on Thursday in the presence of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that SDF General Commander Mazloum Abdi informed him during a phone conversation that the SDF has signed the deal with the American oil company.

In response, Pompeo noted that “the deal took a little longer than we had hoped.”

“We are now in implementation,” he said.

Asharq Al-Awsat learned that Abdi confirmed to Graham that the deal was made by Delta Crescent Energy LLC.

Graham had played a huge role in convincing Trump to keep US troops east of the Euphrates after he announced a partial troop withdrawal from Syria last year.

Trump said in October that a small number of US troops would remain in the area of Syria “where they have the oil,” a reference to oilfields in the Kurdish-controlled region.

“Oil is secured,” he said.

A few days later, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said: “We are now taking some actions... to strengthen our position at Deir Ezzor, to ensure that we can deny ISIS access to the oil fields.”

Under the new oil deal with the SDF, the United States was going to supply two refineries to the area of the Euphrates to produce around 20,000 barrels of oil per day and satisfy part of the oil-rich region’s needs.

Currently Syria produces around 60,000 bpd. Before the war that erupted in 2011, the country produced 360,000 bpd.

The US has expressed determination to stop both Damascus and Moscow from controlling oil reserves in northeastern Syria.

About 300 men working for a Kremlin-linked Russian private military firm were killed in US airstrikes in February 2018 near the Syrian town of Khasham.

"I can promise you that the 300 Russians who were in Syria and who took action that threatened America who are no longer on this planet understand that, too," Pompeo told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday.

Analysts believe that the Trump administration wants to use the oil deal in addition to its latest sanctions on the Syrian regime to pressure Damascus and Moscow to accept several conditions, including “stopping support for terrorism and cutting military ties with Iran and its militias.”

Other conditions include stopping aggression on neighboring countries, giving up weapons of mass destruction, implementing UN Security Council Resolution 2254 to allow for the voluntary return of Syrian refugees and holding accountable those responsible for war crimes.

The new oil agreement is expected to anger Turkey, which rejects the formation of a Kurdish entity in northern Syria. Damascus is also expected to express reservations on the deal because it would worsen its economic crisis and would give Kurds the upper hand in any negotiations between them and the Assad regime.



Three Scenarios for Russia’s Military Presence in Syria

Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
TT

Three Scenarios for Russia’s Military Presence in Syria

Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday he would meet former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who fled to Russia after his regime fell in Damascus. But what will Putin say to his former ally? And how might their first exchange unfold, given Russia’s role in helping Assad escape on a chaotic night?

The Kremlin, known for staging Putin’s meetings with precision, might opt to limit media coverage this time. Putin could be seen sitting at a small table with Assad, now on asylum

in Moscow, in a soundless scene—one that leaves little room for formal pleasantries.

Why has Putin announced plans to meet Assad? Is it to reprimand him? Many in Russia believe Assad’s stubbornness has hurt Moscow’s efforts, threatened its gains in Syria, and could eventually risk its key military presence there.

As details remain unclear, Russian experts are racing to analyze developments in Syria and outline scenarios for the next phase.

Some Russian experts have painted grim scenarios. A member of the prestigious Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy warned of potential risks, including a prolonged conflict with civil war elements, a humanitarian catastrophe with millions of refugees, escalating migration in Europe, and rising tensions among nations like Israel, the US, and Iran.

He also predicted a new wave of international terrorism that could reach far beyond the region.

Other experts echoed this pessimism. One posted an image of a Syrian dissident stepping on a statue of Assad’s father, warning that “this is just the beginning.” Another blamed the crisis on the “Obama curse,” citing the West’s interference, while a third shared a bleak analysis titled, “We Must Pray for Syria.”

So far, Russian media and think tanks have avoided any optimistic outlooks for Syria’s future.

Experts, who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat, believe Moscow may be preparing to handle one of three possible scenarios in Syria.

The first, most favorable for Russia’s interests, involves Moscow reaching an agreement with the new Syrian authorities to maintain its military presence for a limited period.

This could mean replacing the current 49-year agreements with a five-year deal to facilitate a gradual Russian withdrawal. Such an arrangement could help the new leadership in Syria manage Western pressure to cut ties with Moscow.

The second scenario envisions Russia giving up its airbase in Hmeimim while retaining a significant presence in Tartus. This would mirror agreements from 1972, which allowed Russian naval vessels to use the Tartus logistics center in the Mediterranean. This compromise would preserve Russia’s interests while reducing Western pressure on Damascus.

The third scenario involves a full Russian withdrawal from both bases, with Moscow later seeking agreements for shared use of air and sea ports. Such agreements, similar to those Russia has signed with other countries, are less likely to provoke Western opposition.

Regardless of the outcome, the Kremlin has yet to develop a clear strategy for dealing with the emerging situation in Syria.

Key questions remain, including how to curb Iran’s regional influence, manage Türkiye and Israel’s growing roles in Syria, and establish a new regional balance that secures Moscow’s minimum interests.