The final word in the region will remain for Syria

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The only true criteria of progress or decline of any alliance in the region and the world is the progress and decline in geography. Even if the area of this geography expands, the importance is the geography which plays a role in the considerations of the fighting forces. Here the importance is not discretionary, rather it is the size of the political, military, and diplomatic investment to achieve this progress and prevent any retreat. Geography is land, sea, and air. In politics, it is strange that the one who reads the future of the critical balances between the two opposite allies which one of them is led by Washington and the other is led by Moscow not to depend in his reading on the geographic and strategic essence which is represented by Syria. As it is strange to indulge in mysterious details to read the balances where the words are contradictory, and where the importance is discretionary, and where the one who has the upper hand is governed by political obsession versus the clarity which is presented by reading the Syrian geography and the two opposite fighters.

The center of the American battle with Russia and Iran is Syria despite the variety of its vocabularies, such as the American – Russia confrontation regarding many titles; the strategic weapons to Ukraine, the issues of oil and gas, the American proposal of a compromise entitled Russia’s acceptance to remove Iran from Syria, and the American-Iranian confrontation which extends from Yemen to Iraq  under several titles; the future of the nuclear weapons, the issues of interference to destabilize Iran, and the size of the bet on sanctions. All of these are summarized through the focus of America on the willingness of Iran to withdraw from Syria. Syria as well is the center of debate between Israel and Russia, from the future of the presence of Iran and Hezbollah to the freedom of the Israeli aircraft movement in the Syrian airspace. It is not a secret that the future of the Israeli conflict with Iran is determined only in Syria not elsewhere.

Reading the Syrian geography between the two opposite parties shows: First, that the alliance which includes Russia, Syria, Iran, and the resistance is coherent due to the cohesion of its parties in geography, no party accepts to give up its partner. Second, the alliance which accepted to entrust Russia to represent it in confronting the alliance led by America is achieving progress in the Syrian geography on land, sea, and air for two years without interruption, from the liberation of Aleppo to Deir Al Zour, Badia, Ghouta, and the countryside of Homs and Hama towards the south to the borders of the occupied Golan, in  addition to the closing of the Syrian airspace through S-300 networks, and enhancing the Syrian sea capacities with missiles and the boats of the electronic jamming. Third, it shows that the opposite party is adapting to these transitions despite its denial, from the Quneitra Crossing to the Nasib Border Crossing, along with the readiness of America to withdraw from Tanf base, and the silence towards the Iranian missile messages in the Eastern of the Euphrates.

Idlib forms a pivotal point in reading the future of the Syrian geography and the conflict around it. Tomorrow is the date of the entitlement determined at Sochi Summit for the end of the first stage which stated the removal of heavy and medium weapons, after the bets on Turkey’s change of its position towards the cooperation with Russia have failed. It is clear that the path which started in Idlib after the splits of the armed groups and their fighting puts the options between either an impossible peaceful compromise or the application of Sochi’s understandings by force. It is clear that the application forcibly which surpasses the application peacefully means the preparation for battles where the participation of the Syrian army supported by the Russian aircraft and the participation of allies will be unilateral under unremarkable international noise after Sochi understanding and with reluctant Turkish acceptance. The geography will show that the one who advances in geography is the one who changes the balances, and that the area which is good for determining the balances of power is where geography is, so how if the critical geography is Syria.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,