We already wrote that the scandalously well-known American base of Et-Tanf in Syria may soon be closed. And it’s not that someone decided to aggression against the US armed forces in the region, but in the conditions that created Damascus and Russia in the south of Syria.
Initially, this base was created with the purpose of training troops of the radical Syrian opposition on it. Initially, most of the citizens of the Arab Republic studied here, but then all those who wanted to carry out a coup d’etat in Syria began to admit to training. The sole purpose of these people was the liquidation or, at worst, the displacement of Bashar Assad. For the time being, American-trained militants were a rather formidable intrasyrian force. They attacked government forces, sometimes won, and sometimes did not hesitate to smash a couple of detachments of their fellow opposition members, if the Americans or immediate commanders gave the appropriate orders.
In general, it was advisable for Washington to keep Et-Tanf and to spend decent money on training from head to toe of pro-American opposition militants. But everything has changed.
In the SAR, Asad became the dominant force, who invited the Russian military in time. Together with them, the Syrian president achieved fantastic results – he reconquered almost all previously lost provinces and managed to gain a foothold in each of them. This includes, among other things, the governorate of Homs, where it is located at Tanf. As the power of Damascus became more and more widespread, the American base gradually turned into a kind of poultry farm where militants were nurtured solely to be sent to slaughter. All the detachments, absolutely everything, sent from here to the front were completely destroyed. They could not oppose anything to the Syrian Arab Army, which was recreated with the assistance of Russian specialists.
Today, for the Americans, the situation has become even more difficult – At-Tanf is surrounded on all sides. Various Arab sources say that the militants are no longer being transported through the Jordanian and Iraqi borders. The same groupings, which have long been considered loyal allies of the United States, are preparing to leave Et-Tanf and go to the Kurds, to the north. At the same time, the Syrian newspaper “al-Huatan” writes that the leaders of local formations participate in negotiations with Damascus and the Russian military about the surrender of weapons and the creation of a safe corridor to the destination. From all this, it can be concluded that the base of El Tanf will soon be completely eliminated. In any case, it can no longer be a base for training terrorists. Then why should Americans keep her in this lifeless desert?
Russian military expert Alexei Leonkov believes that the US plan for the training of terrorists has completely failed, and now, at-Tanf is really hardly suitable for the preparation of armed opposition. But it’s not worth waiting for the complete elimination of the base.
The NATO summit was recently held, after which the participants made a joint statement. In this statement, there are points in which the role of states such as Iraq, Jordan and Turkey is separately discussed. The essence is that the US will continue to develop cooperation with these countries in their struggle against ISIS, Jebhat an-Nusra and other terrorists, who in Syria are almost gone. This statement should be interpreted as follows: the US indicated that they would not leave the region under any circumstances, including Syria. They will not withdraw their forces from the SAR, their military will continue to conduct their activities here. Whether it will be the base of Et-Tanf, the base in Hasaka or somewhere else – there is no difference, but the main thing is that they will not disappear anywhere. History has shown that Americans go anywhere, Americans leave only with complete national shame. For example, as in Somalia or in Vietnam. We need a big failure.
Well, what about this Tanfa? Did not the US plan fail? The base has ceased to supply the opposition with trained fighters, and the meaning of its content is now plainly unclear. It is much more profitable for Americans to support projects in the north, where all the Kurds are running.
Yes, the Americans’ plan has failed, in all of Syria it has failed, but there is not that deafening failure, as in the case of the campaigns that I named. Yes, indeed this small plot in the south of Syria is practically useless, it lost its significance. Kurdistan is a much more promising project, because, firstly, there are many oil fields here, and secondly, for the ame
Its location is very important. In addition to the fact that it is possible to control the nearest states due to it, it is possible to place certain missile weapons, which, if necessary, will be able to hit targets even in China or India. Does not this mean that the US will be forced to Soon we will close our base? We need some more conditions for this. For example, Damascus, together with Russia, can block the supply of air from Tanfang. This will greatly complicate the lives of their military. But voluntarily Americans, as a rule, never close their bases, if there is an opportunity to prolong their existence.