October 17, 2005
Repetitive clashes took place between U.S. and Syrian forces on the Iraqi border
Analysts suggest that the U.S. wars on Iraq and Afghanistan are part of a broader military agenda to control the Middle; a continuation of the 1991 Gulf War and the NATO led wars on Yugoslavia.
The post Iraq war period has been marked by President Bush’s rhetoric and threats against Damascus, raising the prospect of another U.S. war in the Middle East, but on Syria this time.
According to analysts, the deployment of the U.S. war machine purports to enlarge its economic sphere of influence.Syria, with considerable oil reserves, has long been a pawn in the larger game of great power politics and oil interests in the Arab world.
After World War 1, France hampered the Arab’s attempts for an independent kingdom by installing a colonial regime in Damascus, which was part of the Ottoman Empire. After gaining independence, Syria became the target of military coups, sponsored by Britain and the United States, both competing to control the region’s oil wealth.
Former U.S. officials have recently revealed that the U.S. Army is considering conducting special operations inside Syria, using small teams for intelligence gathering.
Repetitive clashes between U.S. and Syrian forces on the Iraqi border over the past year, according to former military and government officials may become a new front in the Iraq war.
The firefight, between Army Rangers and Syrian troops demonstrates the dangers facing U.S. troops as Bush’s admin steps up both political and military pressure on Damascus, which Bush labels one of the "allies of convenience".
The U.S. has, in recent months, broadening its military presence along the Iraqi-Syrian border as depression mounts among members of the Bush administration over the failure to prevent foreign fighters from boosting the strength of and assisting the Iraqi resistance in the face of the occupation forces.
During a White house meeting earlier this month, officials said, senior aides to Bush raised a variety of options including military strike against Syria to pile up the pressure on the Arab state the coming weeks.
However, Bush has not given the green light for any specific strategy yet, nor has he started to take moves to oust the Syrian President like he did in Iraq more than two years ago; in part for fear of who might take over, senior U.S. official said.
But the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, has repetitively stated that Washington's "patience with Syria is running out”, fueling concerns that Syria might be the U.S.’s next stop.
Also Dr. Flynt Leverett, former national security adviser on Syria to the White House and now with The Brookings Institution, has stated recently that "There's been frequent criticism of the administration for not having a policy on Syria"- Now it seems that U.S. has a policy, 'regime change- to get rid of another Baathist leader in the Middle East, stepping up contacts with the Syrian opposition in exile.
