More Oil, More Syria

After President Trump’s fake withdrawal that politicians on both sides of the aisle were crying about, it is now apparent that American troops will remain in Syria for an unspecified period. However, the primary purpose of this occupational force is not to defend Syria from ISIS, which was the original justification for the deployment of troops in the country in the first place, but rather, it is to protect the precious resource that helps dominate twenty-first century life. He attempted to appease the anti-war and war hawk groups simultaneously, but the war hawks will have the last laugh in the end.

It is unfortunate that there is so much pressure from politicians and government officials and advisors to go to war and that an American president cannot really be considered great unless he or she starts or continues a war. Our war culture ensures that American troops will always be deployed in some capacity in every part of the world, and Americans have been propagandized into accepting this as the norm. Americans believe the justifications that are spewed from the politicians, officials, and mainstream media outlets without question, and then when the idea of a withdrawal is brought up, there is opposition and claims that the job that was never specified clearly from the beginning has not been completed and that leaving would cause chaos. The cycle continues with each new operation and war, and the result is the same every time. When American troops are deployed overseas, future problems will arise and the invaded country will end up worse than it was before.

Syria is no different, and President Trump was not able to fully implement a withdrawal before there was an outcry and public pressure to remain in the country. As one can expect from historical precedent, it was then announced that American troops would remain in Syria, but this time to guard the oil fields. Superficially, the decision was announced as a measure to keep the resource from falling into the hands of ISIS, but in reality, it should be clear that the United States does not want Syrian oil being controlled by “bad man” Bashar al-Assad. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper even admitted this.

The Trump administration wants “our” oil to be under the control of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and not Russia or Syria. Russia has even claimed that under this plan, the United States government would smuggle over $30 million worth of oil out of Syria per month, which would be a violation of its own economic sanctions. Even if this did not happen, the president did make it clear that he wishes for American energy companies to move into Syrian oil fields. It should not be a surprise to anyone that oil and the economic system in place is motivation for having American troops in Syria, and if you are still not convinced that this is a resource conflict, listen to President Trump’s own words, “We're keeping the oil. I've always said that -- keep the oil. We want to keep the oil, $45 million a month. Keep the oil. We've secured the oil."

Even Assad jumped in on the action, “All the US Presidents commit crimes, but get Nobel prizes, and act like defenders of human rights and the noble unique US values -- or Western values -- but they are a group of criminals who act on behalf of lobbies…Trump's declaration that ‘we want the oil' -- at least that's honest.” Whether you like Assad or not, he is being honest here, as the intentions of American administrations is not always what is declared, and decisions regarding war are often about economics and profiting the military-industrial complex. The actions in Syria prove this.

Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on November 05, 2019 02:39
No comments have been added yet.