US plans ‘stabilizing force’ for Syria
Graham, who also serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has long been prominently concerned about the fate of the Kurds, both in Syria and in Iraq. Among other things, Graham played a key role in getting Trump to modify his original decision to withdraw all US forces from Syria.
“Do you agree,” Graham continued, as he addressed Pompeo at Tuesday’s hearing, that “a stabilizing force in northeastern Syria” will prevent Iran from “taking over the oil” there?
“It is an important part of our overall Middle East strategy,” Pompeo replied, “including our counter-Iran strategy.”
Stressing that point, Graham continued, “So containing Iran would include having a policy in Syria that would keep them from benefitting from our withdrawal?”
“That’s right,” Pompeo said, as he also affirmed that the US would maintain a contingent of troops at al-Tanf, further south on Syria’s border with Iraq, which sits astride the main highway from Baghdad to Damascus and Beirut.
By remaining in al-Tanf, the US will continue to block a route that would otherwise become a key part of the “land-bridge” to the Mediterranean that Tehran seeks.
The exchange between Graham and Pompeo over the “stabilization force” marked the first clarification of the future US posture in eastern Syria since late March, when US officials ceased to speak about a “safe zone,” but did not explain what else they had in mind.
Graham also raised the issue of US relations with Turkey, which have become particularly troubled over Ankara’s repeatedly stated intent to purchase the S-400, Russia’s most advanced air defense system.
Graham asked, “Have you told Turkey, that if they deploy the S-400, they can’t be part of the F-35 program,” America’s latest, most sophisticated jet-fighter?
“Yes,” was Pompeo’s terse, one-word reply.
Editing by Nadia Riva