Hossein Ajorloo told the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations that American forces increased their role and presence in the Syrian crisis for various reasons; Especially in the discussion of the alliance with the militias known as the Syrian Democratic Forces or the Qasd.
He said about America’s goals of presence in the east of the Euphrates that “at the beginning of the crisis, America was trying to confront both the forces present in the east of the Euphrates and the Syrian government by uniting the opposition forces that were defined by the United States as moderate forces.”
Ajorloo said that the US was trying to ensure that these forces would be effective in the future, given the geopolitics of Syria, adding that by being present in this region, Washington wanted to reach a balance against regional actors such as Russia, Iran and Turkey.
Pointing out that another issue is related to the east of the Euphrates, this expert emphasized that this discussion is related to military and security issues, and the United States must leave this region based on its commitment to Iraq, but this country wants to keep its forces in two regions, one east of the Euphrates and the other in Al-Tanf region on the border of Jordan, Iraq and Syria within the framework of support forces.”
Asked about the significance of oil in this region, he said that considering that Syria’s oil is in the region east of the Euphrates, especially in the Deir Ez-Zur region, and the economic artery of Syria is located in this region, America intends to influence the economic developments and even the future political developments of Syria by being present in this region.
Ajorloo explained that in a way, the United States of America wants to cover the costs of supporting the forces aligned with it in the Syrian crisis with the revenues from Syrian oil and provide the economic burden of being present in parts of this country. In this regard, the United States intends to prevent the independence of the Syrian regime.
On the US measures, he said that the United States hosts large oil companies in its country, and due to the military security coverage in the region east of the Euphrates, it has tried to extract Syrian oil in the form of contracts with some of these companies and enter it into the economic cycle of its aligned forces and supply some of its needs in the region.
In summarizing the reasons for these Washington policies, Ajorloo mentioned the following: “First, the financial independence of groups aligned with them in meeting geopolitical economic needs. Second, the use of economic tools for political consultations in the future of Syria, and third, the use of oil tools to provide part of the needs of the US military in the region.
“The benefiting of Syrian opposition groups from oil revenues is the basis for strengthening the dual sovereignty in this country by using economic resources, and this, on the one hand, provides the basis for the continuation of the Syrian crisis, and on the other hand, it provides the possibility that in the case of the rule of terrorist groups in this region this economic resource should be available to terrorist groups in order to spread regional and international terrorism.”
This expert also pointed out that due to the right to use the natural resources of each country by itself, the ruling regime of Syria is the only actor that has the right to exploit the natural resources of Syria. Therefore, the action of the United States in exploiting the oil resources of Syria, for any reason and excuse, is considered to be an illegal withdrawal of these resources. Also, the rights of the Syrian people are violated in this regard.
Ajorloo also explained about the consequences of this American action. He said that it seems that the continuation of this procedure and illegal withdrawals and, as a result, illegal contracts with foreign companies will affect the sovereignty and independence of Syria in the long term and can lead to mistakes in international relations, and it can turn into a wrong tradition in international law becomes that an occupying country abuses the resources of the occupied areas.
The expert on Middle East issues also believes that the Syrian government, as the government that governs the territorial integrity of this country, should take legal action in international courts and use political, security and military means to fulfill its rights, and at the same time, other countries in this field should help the Syrian government prevent this illegal practice from becoming an illegal tradition.
Referring to the role of the media, Ajorloo said that the role of the media in describing and explaining this open theft among the Syrian people and the public opinion of the world can be a deterrent in this field, and this is one of the duties of the media that believe in the rights of the Syrian people.