Russian efforts to bring about a rapprochement between Damascus and the Turkish occupation.. What is truth of US position on that?

 At a time when Russia and Iran continue their efforts to achieve a "marriage of convenience" within the context of the "Astana track" between the Damascus government and the Turkish occupation, in preparation for restoring relations between the two parties, the United States of America has taken moves that some put in the context of responding to these efforts.

A few days ago, Washington called for a meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, that included envoys from the European Union, Britain, the Arab League, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Qatar, which observers considered a continuation of a path that Washington had led over the past years under the name "Friends of the Syrian People", which was marginalized after Astana led the Syrian scene.

 Washington indicated its displeasure with this planned rapprochement between Damascus and Ankara, according to a US State Department official. This US official revealed his country's position on Turkey and other countries' normalization of relations with Damascus.

 "The United States does not aim to strengthen diplomatic relations with the Assad regime. We do not support other countries to normalize relations," State Department Deputy Spokesman Vidant Patel said August 30.

 Turkey continues to play on contradictions

 However, observers of the Syrian situation considered the current US move to be timid and ineffective, and in this context, the researcher and political analyst from Berlin, Abdul Masih Al-Shami, said during an exclusive interview with our agency: "The United States is unable to escalate against Turkey, the biggest proof of that is  these are the previous experiences when Turkey occupied the territories in the north of Syria more than once even attempts to attack, bombard, war and enter the territories that are considered under American influence. However, Washington did not interfere, but rather withdrew.

 He added, "America is unable and unwilling to engage in a military confrontation because it cannot confront Turkey. This is its approach because the war is very costly, and this reflects a state of helplessness towards the Turkish position and Turkish plans."

He explained, "It (Washington) today does not dare direct confrontation due to the sensitivity of the global situation after the Russian war in Ukraine. The West today cannot escalate against Turkey, because escalation with it will negatively affect the Ukrainian war in favor of Russia."

 Based on the conflict between Moscow and Washington in Syria and other countries such as Ukraine, Ankara tries to play on the contradictions, in order to win the largest amount of concessions from the Russian and American sides.  Which includes in addition to Ankara, the two archenemy of Washington (Moscow and Tehran).

 Previous experiences have proven that Washington does not want to increase the screws on Ankara in Syria so that it does not move to the Russian side, nor does the latter pressure it enough in order to remain within its circle and isolate it from NATO later. Turkey, for its part, tries to obtain as much as possible of the gains from both sides, and therefore does not want to lose its alliances with the two countries.

 Analysts believe that the United States is unable to influence the Turkish position, which will most likely make a comparison between the benefits of Washington's plan that seeks to stabilize the status quo on the one hand, and the Russian-Iranian efforts to open up to Damascus, on the other hand. So far, Ankara has shown its desire  in continuing to work according to the “Astana” path, which is supposed to achieve many gains, most notably getting rid of the burden of refugees, and allowing it to attack the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria as it aspires, before running in presidential elections next year.

 Washington does not want an escalation

 Regarding the US position on Russian efforts to bring about a rapprochement between the Damascus government and the Turkish occupation, Nicholas Heras, a senior researcher at the American New Lines Institute, said during an exclusive interview with our agency: "The United States, above all, does not want an escalation in Syria."

He explained, "The Americans do not necessarily want to see Turkey approaching Russia and working with Iran, but the Astana process is better than a war between Iran and Turkey that could cause major problems in the region."

 He commented on Washington's role in activating the Geneva process and implementing the international resolution (2254), saying: "In practical terms, the Geneva process has ceased to be relevant for years, and most importantly is the relationship between the major powers that have a presence on the ground inside Syria."

 In turn, Al-Shami considered the recent Geneva meeting as evidence of the American position that rejects and is not satisfied with Turkish projects in northern Syria, and said: “The United States may want to adopt an approach that it has long followed by supporting the opponents, inciting the street, fabricating internal problems, inciting the world against Turkey and imposing sanctions on Ankara.  And these are the methods that Washington has always used through indirect pressure through political issues and support for opponents.

 A

 ANHA