Tensions are escalating between U.S. and Russian forces in areas east of the Euphrates, particularly in the Hasaka governorate in eastern Syria. These tensions are translated into scuffles between the two countries’ forces, as the United States tries to set the boundaries of its spheres of influence, while Russia seeks to expand its influence in that region. This threatens a collision, especially in light of the divergence in the two countries’ view of the final solution in Syria.
This paper highlights the shift in the relationship between Russian and U.S. forces around the Euphrates region and attempts to project its trajectories.
Causes of the Conflict
The withdrawal of the U.S. forces from areas in eastern Syria in October 2019 stirred Russia's ambitions to control the oil- and natural resources-rich region, east of the Euphrates. This region is home to the trade route with Iraq and is close to oil fields in northern Iraq, where Russia aspires to build pipelines to transport oil from northern Iraq to the Syrian ports instead of exporting it via Turkey or Iran.
Russian forces have redeployed in a number of areas after the U.S. withdrawal from the border strip. After the Turkish offensive code-named "Operation Peace Spring" on areas east of the Euphrates, Russia took advantage of the deal it concluded with Turkey and it was agreed that Syrian and Russian forces would deploy in areas east of the Euphrates for the first time since 2012. The Russian forces deployment in areas east of the Euphrates aims to achieve three goals: Ensure military control of those areas in Syria; reach the trade route with Iraq “M4”; and create a balance against the US military presence in the Gulf region and Iraq.
U.S. Attempts to Undo the Mistake
The Russian moves made U.S. military leaders understand the magnitude of the mistake they made as a result of curtailing U.S. military presence in Syria. Even if it is not possible to return to the areas from which they withdrew and became under Russian forces' control, the U.S. forces have been trying to remedy the situation by stopping the Russian expansion and confining it to specific areas. 1
On January 21, a U.S. military patrol intercepted a Russian military patrol on the international highway in Hasaka, near the town of Al-Malikiyah, in northeastern Syria. The U.S. patrol forced the Russian force to turn back toward Qamishli. This incident is not the first of its kind. The U.S. forces have been doing something like "ambushes" against Russian patrols in Qamishli and surrounding areas. Driven by the belief that Russia will not stop at the borders of Syria and is setting its sight on Iraq's Kurdistan oil wealth, the Americans insist on preventing the introduction of the Russians into the city of Hasaka or gaining access to the border crossings with Iraq. 2 In addition, the Americans know, through their experience in Syria, that Russian-controlled areas are open to Iranian influence, either because of Iran's ability to penetrate local communities in those areas, or because of the Russians’ use of local forces to help in maintaining the security of those areas.
The U.S. response to the Russian moves is evident in pursuing a strategy of encirclement and containment applied against Iranian expansion in those areas, and maintaining control of key areas, especially the border triangle between Syria and Iraq in the Qamishli region. Other U.S. measures also include ensuring that the "Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)" remains in control of the region, as the local force that represents the American will. 3
Movements on the Ground and the Two Parties' Presence
Russia was quick to impose facts on the ground with the aim of permanently changing the previous reality, establishing a series of bases in areas east of the Euphrates, as follows:
Thus, the Russian forces established military bases interconnected with each other south of the city of Ain Al-Arab, about 40 km on the international Aleppo-Hasaka highway. 5
Locations of U.S. Forces
The U.S. withdrew from 16 military bases and positions, including from Manbij, Ain al-Arab, Raqqa, and Hasaka, but maintained its presence in the oil-rich Deir Ezzor, and keptbases in the oil fields of Hasaka, on the pretext of protecting the oil fields from ISIS and depriving the group of any financial resources. The US forces evacuated 4 observation posts on the borders with Turkey, but they returned to 6 military bases and posts after "Operation Peace Spring" stopped. The U.S. army also established new bases in Deir Ezzor, and sent reinforcements to those areas.
Additionally, the U.S. forces have redeployed to new areas in the easternmost of Syria, near the Iraqi border, and established Baghouz, on the left bank of the Euphrates, a small base for it. By establishing this base, the U.S. aims to monitor and control the Iraqi-Syrian borders on the left bank of the Euphrates, or as it is known locally the Al-Jazira region. This base is also considered the closest U.S. point to the Al-Qaim border crossing between Syria and Iraq, which is controlled by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard6. It is noted that the U.S. redeployment is centered on the Euphrates River, where Iranian militias control the opposite bank. Therefore, the U.S. army established a base in Al-Susah desert region, west of Baghouz, to which it brought tanks and humvees, and built an Apache attack helicopter helipad. To the west, specifically in the town of Hajin, the U.S. army has set up a base in a railway structure.
These U.S. moves are accompanied by an accelerated process of building bases for the SDF in the oil-rich region east of Deir Ezzor and Hasaka. The U.S. had already announced that it would remain in that region and, therefore, had built several bases in the Rawdha region between Deir Ezzor and Hasaka, and the Sijan, Maleh and Azraq oilfields. 7
The U.S. has maintained its most important bases in Syria and east of the Euphrates, where the Rumailan base is the largest, in addition to the Tel Baidar base, the Al-Hawl base, and the Al-Shaddadi base south of Hasaka. In addition to the bases east of the Euphrates, there is the Al-Tanf base on the Iraqi-Syrian-Jordanian border, which cuts the international highway between Iraq and Syria. The U.S. maintains that base with the aim of reducing the activity of Iranian militias in Syria and encircling Iran.
The map of U.S. bases in Syria indicates that the territory east of the new Deir Ezzor-Hasaka road, down to the south of Hasaka and east of Qamishli, will be a purely American sphere of influence.
According to U.S. officials, there are now about 750 American soldiers in eastern Syria, deployed across a stretch of lands spanning more than 150 kilometers, from Deir Ezzor to the border area east of Hasaka. 8
Areas Targeted by Russia East of the Euphrates
In light of their movement east of the Euphrates, the Russians are setting their sights on controlling certain strategic regions. Achieving that control would change the strategic balance in their favor in the current stage, even as U.S. forces remain in control of oil fields.
In this regard, it is noted that the Russians imposed their control on the Semalka border crossing with the Kurdistan region of Iraq, which serves as a point for the introduction of U.S. forces, weapons and equipment to the areas under the control of the "SDF". They also took control of the vital road linking Aleppo and Qamishli, which is the lifeblood of the region and the Rumailan oil field, near which the U.S. forces built a huge military base.
The Russian control of these points is a blow to the U.S. presence in Syria, because the U.S. forces will have no access to supply routes, and will be at the mercy of Russian forces. Additionally, the U.S. bases will also become isolated points, and military leaders will soon be asking to bring the U.S. forces back home. This is what U.S. field commanders realized and made them express strong resistance to the Russian attempts to control these areas.
Russian Tactics and the U.S. Response
In addition to field action, Russia is pursuing a number of tactics to counter the U.S. presence east of the Euphrates, namely:
However, it appears that the Russian tactics are not producing the desired effect on the U.S. policy for several reasons, the most important of which are:
The Tools of Both Parties to the Conflict
The eastern Euphrates region has become a key target for both the Russians and the Americans who have used tools available to them to enhance their influence in the region, through:
U.S.-Russian Conflict in Syria: Future Scenarios
First Scenario: A direct confrontation between the Russian and U.S. forces in the east of the Euphrates. The increased complexity on the ground in the areas east of the Euphrates, and the large overlaps in the spheres of influence, point to the possibility that frequent scuffles will turn into real confrontations. This is due contradictory strategies, differing motives, and struggle for influence, especially with Russia's insistence on achieving absolute domination over the entire Syrian issue in the face of U.S. intransigence and refusal to recognize Russia's right to monopolize the Syrian issue.
At a time when Russia is acting on the basis of its conviction that the U.S. presence in oil-rich Syrian regions, and its approval of the "Caesar Law for the Protection of Syrian Civilians" at the end of last year, will undermine its role in Syria, and that there is no solution but the departure of U.S. forces, the United States seeks to correct the mistake the Trump administration has made and restore its allies' confidence, as demonstrated by Jeffrey's tour of the region. This scenario appears likely unless one of the two parties backs off from its moves or if they re-fix coordination channels between them and agree on the boundaries of each party's sphere of influence.
Second Scenario: A proxy war in areas east of the Euphrates. The two sides began to militarize and recruit local forces to establish their influence and destabilize the other side. This scenario appears less costly than a direct confrontation, but it serves the purpose of exhausting the adversary's energy and capabilities. The situation may even develop into a direct clash of proxies, the SDF and the Assad regime, as the most armed and trained forces in those areas.
This scenario is likely in the event of failure to reach a quick end to the crisis of relations between the two sides. This scenario is also based on the perception of each party that the other is determined to hold its ground, and that direct clash is a dangerous gamble.
Third Scenario: The continuation of the status quo, that is, the continuation of controllable skirmishes between the two parties. This scenario is backed by previous cooperation between the armies of the two countries to avoid escalation since the Balkan War. Leonid Ivashov, President of the Academy for Geopolitical Problems, explains this by asserting that the United States does not want to turn the conflict there into a confrontation with Russia10. Therefore, it can be said that some skirmishes between the two countries ’military will continue to occur, but there are intersections in many interests, and that the situation will not reach a touch-and-go state. In addition, Russia, preoccupied with Idlib, will not open a new front in areas east of the Euphrates, before resolving matters in Aleppo and Idlib.
1. "A source close to" SDF "reveals a new US plan in norther Syria ... air traffic control only," Al-Quds Al-Arabi, January 28, 2020.
2. “Can we witness a direct Russian-American conflict in Syria?” Al-Waght, February 2, 2020.
3. Yahya Ayyash, "These are the reasons for America's tension with Russia over" Al-Qamishli "... How does it end?," Arabi 21, January 23, 2020.
4. “Russia establishes helicopter base at Qamishli Airport,” Asharq Al-Awsat, November 14, 2019.
5. "Air and ground bases ... Russia strengthens its military presence east of the Euphrates," Al-Jazeera Net, 15 November 2019.
6. Manhal Barish, “East of the Euphrates: America builds bases in the face of Iran and isolates Syrian oil,” Al-Quds Al-Arabi, November 9, 2019.
7. "American forces bring reinforcements to the east of the Euphrates in a surprising move," Alsouria Net, January 27, 2020.
8. "A source close to" SDF "reveals a new US plan in norther Syria ... air traffic control only," Al-Quds Al-Arabi, January 28, 2020.
9. "General McKinsey: Washington is committed to fighting in Syria and strengthening its operations against ISIS," Asharq Al-Awsat, January 27, 2020.
10. “Gunfire without casualties: The United States and Russia are fighting in Syria,” Russia Today, 27 January 2020.
Zeinab F. Shuker | 21 Jan 2021
EPC | 12 Jan 2021
EPC | 11 Jan 2021