 Hello and welcome to this episode of Mapping Fortlines, a show where we look at the major geopolitical issues across the world and the implications on the region. Today, we'll be talking about the situation in Syria and we have with us Prabir Prakash. Hello, Prabir. Prabir, so as we know, US President Donald Trump announced that the ISIS leader, al-Baghdadi had been killed in Barisha and there's been a lot of speculation about whether it actually happened because it's the fourth such report of his death. But taking for the moment his statement at face value, what do you see as the immediate implications of this death? Well, let's first go over to this fourth time, hopefully, lucky for the United States that al-Baghdadi has really been killed. It does not mean that the whole situation is going to change because one man dies and as you can see, this is the Idlib sector, which the United States prevented Syria from going in, threatened them with airstrikes, various other things. The West has a huge campaign, particularly in the Western media, regarding this area. This is the last free zone of Syria, where apparently the freedom-loving people are there against the brutality of Assad regime, all this campaign. How we find that Idlib is where al-Baghdadi was holed up? It substantiates what we have always been told, that this is a place where all the different kinds of forces which have gone with the idea of regime change aligned with the United States and earlier Turkey with the Gulf monarchy, so what regime change in Syria are now located, they are basically al-Qaeda, light or al-Qaeda or ISIS, light or ISIS and with the defeat, the fact that they have been squeezed into this area after successive defeats, this is the place where they have been evacuated to. So this is what the West and Turkey have protected it now and this is where al-Baghdadi was also holed up. So I think that narrative is also establishes what the correlation of forces are even today in Idlib and whether the Syrian government with the support of the Russian, Iranian and other forces will be able to clear this zone because I think that's where the Syrians are really interested in because after all more than the northern border which also is of course something we need to discuss or the eastern part of the desert which also there are oil wells over there but this is where the populated area is, Idlib is really the populated area and this is where the major communications between Aleppo, Damascus, all of it lie. So Idlib clearing is very critical for Syria and I think therefore it does substantiate what they have always been saying that this is the haven at the moment for forces which are really different kind of Islamist extremists who are located there. Let's not even call them Islamists, they're basically Islamic extremists or Islamic supremists if you will. This is the kind of forces which have been holed up and we have to see that what is the West's attitude towards now Idlib. Now that there is substantiation this is where al-Baghdadi was also holed up obviously under the protection of various forces. Now United States as you know does not really have any permanent enemies. Everything for it is transactional, supports the ISIS to embarrass Syria, put pressure on the Iraqi government that was what was done under Obama and now under Trump that policy has also become transactional but differently transactional. So now what Trump will achieve in Syria whether it will be for peace which I doubt very much whether it will be for transient advantage to embarrass Russia or whether actually it says well we are overstretched it's time we pulled back from the region and let the region solve its own problems that's something we still need to see. So moving on to the northern border as you said so we have a situation we have a highly uncertain situation right now so there was the Turkey-Russia deal which in some senses almost legitimizes Turkish control over portions of Syria and we have talked about this before but what exactly does this imply for the Syria-Russia project of bringing the country back together under the government what exactly does it imply considering they themselves have given up bits of the country. Well I don't think they have given up bits of the country they have accepted that Turkish forces at the moment will control some part of the territory because they think Turkish forces or Turkey thinks that this is on the border of Turkey and they don't want Kurdish control over that area and their argument has always been that the Kurdish forces are aligned to the PKK which they regard as terrorist forces. So this is the whole narrative that is there. The question is that Syria is not in a position to find the United States, the Islamists, extremists and Turkey simultaneously. So it has to prioritize what it wants to do right now and for it getting back the whole region from Aleppo to Idlib that was one of the priorities. Its second priority will be getting really the borders across Euphrates to Iraq. This whole area cleared of essentially the control from SDF which as you know are Kurdish-led forces supported by the United States to integrate that back into the Syrian government's control. So this would be its primary targets. One is the population, other is area. This is also where there is the Euphrates river flowing so there are areas which produce grain and other things but also the gas and oil. Now the gas and oil as you know see there is not a major producer but nevertheless it would help Syria if it could recover this and use its revenue for reconstruction. At the moment the United States posture or we have controlling the oil seems to be more of a spoiler and also possibly for negotiating later with the Russians with the Syrian government and so on but it does seem that the way the whole accord has been worked out between Turkey and Russia that while Turkey has been given certain role in the border particularly between Kobane and Qamshli, which is really where they had the Rajab Rojave canton was supposedly located which they don't accept but that they have been given some role but how much of land they will occupy is not clear at the moment. The Astana Accord had said up to 5 kilometers. Now the Adana Accord had said up to 5 kilometers. Now that seems to be a very old agreement as I think it was 1997. So what the reality of this area will emerge is not clear. At the moment Kurds have been told to withdraw the YPG has been told to withdraw 32 kilometers from the Turkish border which means actually beyond the M4. So M4 which is the main highway at the moment who is going to control it is not clear from what it appears Russian forces along with Syrian forces and Turkey would jointly control the area. So it's been left vague at the moment. Turkey has been using what it calls the Syrian National Army which is really the old Free Syrian Army which is what the Americans and others had all supported. Now we know from the Grey Zone report that 21 of the groups which were supported by the CIA and others are essentially a part of this forces and they all essentially had Islamist antecedents and as I said when I'm using the word Islamist I really mean the Islamist extremists that they have those antecedents. So how this will pan out whether it will be really the SNA controlling it trying to resettle certain of their brethren over there whether it will be Turkey that will control it is at the moment not clear. So the hashed area that you have shown earlier that area is uncertain. What is at the moment clear is the Kobane area is being controlled by Syrian forces. So both Kobane and Manbij it seems to be is going to fall into Syrian and Russian forces supporting the YPG over there and the other area in the east that part of it if you see that if you see there you will see that those parts seem to be again under the Syrian government forces control what's going to happen in this hashed portion in between we're really not sure at this point but I think Syria at the moment its main focus is the eastern part and Idlib and Idlib even more than the eastern part because that's where the population really is and secondly it will be the eastern part and last part of it will be the northern part where Turkey has made some inroads put some favourites of theirs in control that I think is a card to be negotiated it's a Turkey is holding some cards and that is the negotiation that will take place when this whole shall we say collective responsibility becomes norm that collectively the region will work out its own problems neither Russia or United States really do have any role the Russians have always been saying they're really there only to facilitate this discussion and they are not going to talk about their interest in this this is something that the others have to negotiate but the Americans have always been talking as if they're overseers and I think that's the distinction that we see between the Russian intervention in this case as well as that of the United States there are very clear differences the way they look at it and even today when Mr. Trump talks about it while it has this rhetoric about bringing people boys back but the boys are going to Iraq or going to Saudi Arabia so we don't see them going home but nevertheless let's put it this way not having decided to take on everybody in Syria as the American establishment was talking about earlier they'll fight Turkey, they'll fight Syrian government they'll fight Iranians, they'll fight Russians we don't know how many of them they'll still continue to fight but if they have at least withdrawn partially I think there is a hope that the region as a whole will be able to negotiate with each other and try to reach a more durable peace so building on that a bit further so we've established that Russia has sort of concretized its role as a major player in the region and like you said it's not been through a process of declaring its own interests as much as being a facilitator and the US on the other hand especially over the past couple of weeks has seemed quite a loss in this new situation so do you think that the recent attempts by Trump to say cozy up to the Turks might and say sort of affect some sort of discussion between the Turks and the Kurds might actually have some impact or is it likely to just fail at the ground and Trump's attempt at Nobel Prize by trying to reach an agreement with the Kurds you know I think what people forget about the US foreign policy the US foreign policy is entirely transactional that means who do I deal with today while the Russians or any deep player and that would also be for instance Brzezinski or Kissinger while their imperial interests of the US at heart but they also had a geopolitical or geostrategic understanding of the globe. What has happened increasingly is that the US has lost that boring has lost that larger framework has actually looked at each region at what does it help me to do A, B or C now in that frame the Russians seem to be playing a longer game they basically they're saying look, Tatar sport is only one part but how do I bring a situation where there is peace the countries can talk among themselves even if they are monarchy like Saudi Arabia to the bath leadership in Syria how can they talk to each other and how can we facilitate without grabbing anything for ourselves except the bases we already have in any case so that is the kind of relationship they're not looking at it for bases the US as we know has bases across the world so you know US is the last one to talk about Russia having a base in Turtus so I think given all of that the transactional versus the geostrategic approach approach is actually what we see as the clearest indicator how this region is going and how the two major players Russia and the United States they still are the major military players China is the major economic player apart from the United States I think what we see is that we are probably heading back towards a more geostrategic approach to issues except for the United States who still think that the world can be controlled transactionally and by the sheer fact that the United States can be a spoiler it can no longer set the terms of the engagement but it certainly can act as a spoiler and this ability of the US to spoil any effort for peace in Syria we'll have to see whether that bears fruit that's what they seem to be doing when you say trying to cozy up to Turkey is basically to attempt to see can we give you something more and therefore can I spoil the kind of agreement Russia is seeking to establish between Syria and Turkey I think that is more the role that the US we have to observe can this transactional role can the spoiler role continue and what its effect of the region will be because it's very clear to everybody that the US role is no longer being able to establish peace and no longer able to establish a new equation between players it's really one of trying to control A, B or C and also very very short about that I think that's what we see but I think that other net losers we haven't talked about in Israel the fact that Turkey, Syria, Russia, Iran Iraq are all coming to some kind of an agreement would really mean that Israel's role being able to bully one or the other country make threats against any of the countries is going to be increasingly difficult the only place right now we have to watch is Lebanon which as you know is undergoing a number of street protests Hezbollah has appealed for peace to return not to give demands which completely destabilize Lebanon's existence government but try to extract within this framework a certain set of concessions we have to see how that pans out whether the US is at the moment willing to sacrifice Lebanon so that they can get at Hezbollah is that the game we'll have to see so these are the further flash points and we can see a similar thing in Iraq so are they really the US playing spoiler or is it really something which is more indigenous and more local this is something we have yet to observe and there is no question that the US is always willing to fish in troubled waters and of course Israel is very much a part of this fishing so we'll have to see how this plays out again Thank you Prabir That's all we have time for today Keep watching NewsClick