The United States is planning to withdraw all of its 1,000 troops from Syria over the next two months, according to US media reports.Washington will end its presence in the country after the Syrian government extended its control over the country and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces once key to fighting Islamic State (IS) pledged to integrate into the state, the Wall Street Journal reported.Television network CBS also reported on the plan, citing unnamed US officials.The decision comes after US forces recently withdrew from some bases in Syria including Al-Tanf and Al-Shadadi, which were used in the US-led international coalition's fight against IS.Washington has drawn close to Syria's new authorities since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in late 2024, and has transferred thousands of IS fighters from prisons to secure facilities in Iraq.The US is also building up its military capabilities near Iran, where officials have vowed to respond to any attack by laying siege to American military outposts in the region.US media reported Wednesday that Washington will be ready to launch strikes against Iran as early as this weekend, though Trump has reportedly not made a final decision yet.The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.&nbsp;

The US is reportedly planning to withdraw all 1,000 troops from Syria within two months, according to American media. 

The United States is planning to withdraw all of its 1,000 troops from Syria over the next two months, according to US media reports. Washington will end its presence in the country after the Syrian government extended its control over the country and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces once key to fighting Islamic State (IS) pledged to integrate into the state, the Wall Street Journal reported. Television network CBS also reported on the plan, citing unnamed US officials. The decision comes after US forces recently withdrew from some bases in Syria including Al-Tanf and Al-Shadadi, which were used in the US-led international coalition's fight against IS. Washington has drawn close to Syria's new authorities since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in late 2024, and has transferred thousands of IS fighters from prisons to secure facilities in Iraq. The US is also building up its military capabilities near Iran, where officials have vowed to respond to any attack by laying siege to American military outposts in the region. US media reported Wednesday that Washington will be ready to launch strikes against Iran as early as this weekend, though Trump has reportedly not made a final decision yet. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The US is reportedly planning to withdraw all 1,000 troops from Syria within two months, according to American media.&nbsp;

US to withdraw 1,000 troops from Syria within two months: Reports

<div data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody">In a dramatic shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics, US President Donald Trump has announced the lifting of economic sanctions on Syria following his unexpected meeting with the country&rsquo;s new interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former militant leader with links to al-Qaeda.</div>
<div data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody"></div>
<div data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody">The decision marks a major turning point in the US-Syria relationship, which could have far-reaching consequences across the region.</div>
<h2>What happened in Syria?</h2>
<div>After over a decade of civil war and the near-total collapse of governance, President Bashar al-Assad&rsquo;s regime was toppled in December by Islamist militia Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The group, once affiliated with al-Qaeda, staged a surprise advance into Damascus, forcing Assad and his family to flee to Russia.</div>
<div></div>
<div>HTS, now rebranded as a political movement, formed an interim government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, who has attempted to present a moderate image and initiate the rebuilding of Syria. Street debates about democracy, governance, and civil liberties have emerged after decades of state repression.</div>
<div>However, Sharaa&rsquo;s administration is viewed with scepticism by many Syrians and global powers, due to the group&rsquo;s violent past. According to Human Rights Watch, HTS (previously the Nusra Front) was reportedly responsible for massacres of minority communities, including Alawites and Druze, during the conflict.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Sharaa now insists he is committed to safeguarding Syria&rsquo;s religious and ethnic diversity. &ldquo;There must be a legal framework that protects and ensures the rights of all,&rdquo; he told CNN.</div>
<h2>Why did Trump lift Syria sanctions?</h2>
<div>As per the Bloomberg report, Trump&rsquo;s decision came after weeks of lobbying from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, two of Sharaa&rsquo;s key regional backers. Meeting with Sharaa in Riyadh, Trump described him as a &ldquo;tough guy&rdquo; with &ldquo;potential&rdquo; and framed the move as giving Syria &ldquo;a chance at greatness.&rdquo;</div>
<div>Speaking at a major US-Saudi investment forum, Trump called the existing sanctions &ldquo;crippling&rdquo; and outdated. According to the White House summary, Trump urged Sharaa to normalise&nbsp;ties with Israel and &ldquo;expel all foreign terrorists&rdquo; from Syria.</div>
<div>Trump also criticised previous US administrations, claiming they were more interested in punishing leaders than negotiating change. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re not here to look into souls,&rdquo; he remarked. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re here to make deals.&rdquo;</div>
<h2>What were the US sanctions on Syria?</h2>
<div>US sanctions on Syria date back to 1979, when the country was designated a state sponsor of terrorism. The restrictions intensified after Syria&rsquo;s interference in Lebanon and support for Hezbollah.</div>
<div></div>
<div>In 2004, under President George W. Bush, the US further tightened sanctions, ending most exports to Syria. After Syria&rsquo;s brutal crackdown on Arab Spring protests in 2011, more sanctions followed under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, targeting Syrian government officials, businesses, and sectors linked to Assad&rsquo;s military campaign and human rights abuses.</div>
<div></div>
<div>According to the US Department of the Treasury, these sanctions froze assets, blocked US investments, and barred financial transactions, effectively cutting Syria off from the international banking system.</div>
<h2>How did sanctions affect the Syrian economy?</h2>
<div>Syria&rsquo;s economy was already bleeding from years of war. The World Bank downgraded it to low-income status in 2018. The country&rsquo;s GDP collapsed by over 50 per cent between 2010 and 2020, according to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).</div>
<div></div>
<div>By 2023, over 90 per cent of Syrians lived in poverty, reports the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Access to fuel, medicine, electricity, and food was critically low. Public institutions barely functioned, and foreign investment dried up. Meanwhile, Syria&rsquo;s once-thriving agriculture sector&mdash;famed for olives and pistachios&mdash;was decimated.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Sanctions also indirectly boosted Syria&rsquo;s illicit economy. With trade routes blocked, the country turned into a regional hub for Captagon, a powerful, amphetamine-type drug, according to Europol and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).</div>
<div></div>
<div>By cutting Syria off from global financial institutions, sanctions hampered reconstruction and even aid operations. Humanitarian agencies complained of delays and operational costs rising due to restrictions on banking transactions, despite technical exemptions.</div>
<h2>What&rsquo;s next for US-Syria relations?</h2>
<div>Trump&rsquo;s face-to-face with Sharaa was the first US-Syria leader-level meeting in 25 years. It signals a dramatic shift in US policy, especially given Sharaa&rsquo;s militant past.</div>
<div></div>
<div>But it&rsquo;s also fraught with risks. HTS remains on the US Foreign Terrorist Organization list, and Sharaa&rsquo;s past includes links to al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria. As recently as 2016, the US offered $10 million for his capture.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Critics fear Trump&rsquo;s engagement could legitimise extremist actors. But supporters argue this is a pragmatic step to stabilise the region, curb Iranian influence, and enable regional powers to shoulder Syria&rsquo;s reconstruction.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Whether lifting sanctions will bring lasting peace or empower a controversial leader remains uncertain. For now, Syrians are celebrating what many call their &ldquo;Liberation Day&rdquo; &mdash; hoping that relief from sanctions will translate into jobs, infrastructure, and dignity.</div>
<div></div>
<div>As the world watches, the road to Syria&rsquo;s recovery remains long, fragile, and deeply contested.</div>

Business & Economy: The move followed a landmark meeting with Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa during Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia.

In a dramatic shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics, US President Donald Trump has announced the lifting of economic sanctions on Syria following his unexpected meeting with the country’s new interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former militant leader with links to al-Qaeda. The decision marks a major turning point in the US-Syria relationship, which could have far-reaching consequences across the region. What happened in Syria? After over a decade of civil war and the near-total collapse of governance, President Bashar al-Assad’s regime was toppled in December by Islamist militia Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The group, once affiliated with al-Qaeda, staged a surprise advance into Damascus, forcing Assad and his family to flee to Russia. HTS, now rebranded as a political movement, formed an interim government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, who has attempted to present a moderate image and initiate the rebuilding of Syria. Street debates about democracy, governance, and civil liberties have emerged after decades of state repression. However, Sharaa’s administration is viewed with scepticism by many Syrians and global powers, due to the group’s violent past. According to Human Rights Watch, HTS (previously the Nusra Front) was reportedly responsible for massacres of minority communities, including Alawites and Druze, during the conflict. Sharaa now insists he is committed to safeguarding Syria’s religious and ethnic diversity. “There must be a legal framework that protects and ensures the rights of all,” he told CNN. Why did Trump lift Syria sanctions? As per the Bloomberg report, Trump’s decision came after weeks of lobbying from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, two of Sharaa’s key regional backers. Meeting with Sharaa in Riyadh, Trump described him as a “tough guy” with “potential” and framed the move as giving Syria “a chance at greatness.” Speaking at a major US-Saudi investment forum, Trump called the existing sanctions “crippling” and outdated. According to the White House summary, Trump urged Sharaa to normalise ties with Israel and “expel all foreign terrorists” from Syria. Trump also criticised previous US administrations, claiming they were more interested in punishing leaders than negotiating change. “We’re not here to look into souls,” he remarked. “We’re here to make deals.” What were the US sanctions on Syria? US sanctions on Syria date back to 1979, when the country was designated a state sponsor of terrorism. The restrictions intensified after Syria’s interference in Lebanon and support for Hezbollah. In 2004, under President George W. Bush, the US further tightened sanctions, ending most exports to Syria. After Syria’s brutal crackdown on Arab Spring protests in 2011, more sanctions followed under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, targeting Syrian government officials, businesses, and sectors linked to Assad’s military campaign and human rights abuses. According to the US Department of the Treasury, these sanctions froze assets, blocked US investments, and barred financial transactions, effectively cutting Syria off from the international banking system. How did sanctions affect the Syrian economy? Syria’s economy was already bleeding from years of war. The World Bank downgraded it to low-income status in 2018. The country’s GDP collapsed by over 50 per cent between 2010 and 2020, according to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). By 2023, over 90 per cent of Syrians lived in poverty, reports the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Access to fuel, medicine, electricity, and food was critically low. Public institutions barely functioned, and foreign investment dried up. Meanwhile, Syria’s once-thriving agriculture sector—famed for olives and pistachios—was decimated. Sanctions also indirectly boosted Syria’s illicit economy. With trade routes blocked, the country turned into a regional hub for Captagon, a powerful, amphetamine-type drug, according to Europol and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). By cutting Syria off from global financial institutions, sanctions hampered reconstruction and even aid operations. Humanitarian agencies complained of delays and operational costs rising due to restrictions on banking transactions, despite technical exemptions. What’s next for US-Syria relations? Trump’s face-to-face with Sharaa was the first US-Syria leader-level meeting in 25 years. It signals a dramatic shift in US policy, especially given Sharaa’s militant past. But it’s also fraught with risks. HTS remains on the US Foreign Terrorist Organization list, and Sharaa’s past includes links to al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria. As recently as 2016, the US offered $10 million for his capture. Critics fear Trump’s engagement could legitimise extremist actors. But supporters argue this is a pragmatic step to stabilise the region, curb Iranian influence, and enable regional powers to shoulder Syria’s reconstruction. Whether lifting sanctions will bring lasting peace or empower a controversial leader remains uncertain. For now, Syrians are celebrating what many call their “Liberation Day” — hoping that relief from sanctions will translate into jobs, infrastructure, and dignity. As the world watches, the road to Syria’s recovery remains long, fragile, and deeply contested.

Trump lifts sanctions on Syria: What happened and what it means for the war-torn nation

The United States on Wednesday slapped sanctions on Syria's central bank chief and 16 other people or institutions.

The United States ordered the freezing of any US assets of the central bank governor, Hazem Karfoul, and the other Syrians, with any financial transactions with them now punishable in US.

The US Treasury Department, which is widely targetting anyone affiliated with President Bashar al-Assad, did not allege specific crimes by Karfoul but pointed to reports he tried to shake down businesses to contribute to state coffers.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that sanctions against Syrian figures "will not cease until the Assad regime and&nbsp;its&nbsp;enablers take irreversible steps to end their&nbsp;campaign of violence against the Syrian people."

Among others designated by the Treasury Department are businessman Khodr Taher bin Ali and Husam Muhammad Louka, head of the General Intelligence Directorate, one of the country's spy agencies.

Taher was accused of being a key supplier for the army's Fourth Division including through the creation of a private security firm that has become the unit's "informal executive arm."

The Treasury Department said Taher also set up a telecommunications provider, Emma Tel LLC, in an apparent bid to counter Rami Makhlouf, a tycoon who has fallen out with his cousin Assad.

The State Department separately said it was designating three people or units over deadly air strikes three years ago in the town of Armanaz, in Idlib province near the Turkish border.

At least 34 Syrians died in the attack, according to the State Department's toll, as Russia backed Syria in operations against jihadists.

The United States on Wednesday slapped sanctions on Syria's central bank chief and 16 other people or institutions. The United States ordered the freezing of any US assets of the central bank governor, Hazem Karfoul, and the other Syrians, with any financial transactions with them now punishable in US.

The United States on Wednesday slapped sanctions on Syria's central bank chief and 16 other people or institutions. The United States ordered the freezing of any US assets of the central bank governor, Hazem Karfoul, and the other Syrians, with any financial transactions with them now punishable in US. The US Treasury Department, which is widely targetting anyone affiliated with President Bashar al-Assad, did not allege specific crimes by Karfoul but pointed to reports he tried to shake down businesses to contribute to state coffers. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that sanctions against Syrian figures "will not cease until the Assad regime and its enablers take irreversible steps to end their campaign of violence against the Syrian people." Among others designated by the Treasury Department are businessman Khodr Taher bin Ali and Husam Muhammad Louka, head of the General Intelligence Directorate, one of the country's spy agencies. Taher was accused of being a key supplier for the army's Fourth Division including through the creation of a private security firm that has become the unit's "informal executive arm." The Treasury Department said Taher also set up a telecommunications provider, Emma Tel LLC, in an apparent bid to counter Rami Makhlouf, a tycoon who has fallen out with his cousin Assad. The State Department separately said it was designating three people or units over deadly air strikes three years ago in the town of Armanaz, in Idlib province near the Turkish border. At least 34 Syrians died in the attack, according to the State Department's toll, as Russia backed Syria in operations against jihadists.

US slaps sanctions on Syrian central bank chief, businessman

Syrian and Turkish media reported that at least one airstrike was carried out by U.S. jets at Hasakah. A warplane flew over a village in northeast Syria on February 12.

US hits Syrian military bases in Hasakh

By Scott Lucas

The last adult in the Trump White House playground has gone – and the president is throwing his toys around.

James Mattis, as defence secretary, was one of three retired generals in the Trump administration whose hope was to contain an ill-informed, temperamental, and unpredictable president. Now they’re all gone: national security adviser HR McMaster, pushed out early this year; White House chief of staff John Kelly, giving up at the end of December; and now Mattis, who resigned after losing hope that Trump can be restrained from impulsive actions, defying his advisers, threatening US allies and even embracing American foes.

The catalyst for Mattis’s departure was Trump’s abrupt decision to withdraw all 2,000 US troops from Syria. But the list of his concerns about Trump is far longer. They include the president’s views on the American presence in Afghanistan and his hostility towards NATO allies, as well as Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin, even as Russia pursues an aggressive foreign policy and intervenes in US domestic affairs.

As Mattis put it in his resignation letter, a message of rebuke to Trump: "My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues."

With Trump willing to toss aside alliances and shred international arrangements, this could be the most serious challenge to US foreign policy and American partners since 1945. But what does it mean in specific areas?

Syria 
 
American policy has never been clear or decisive over Syria’s 93-month conflict. But Trump’s impulsive order for withdrawal threatens a new cycle of violence.

Since the autumn of 2015, Washington has worked with Kurdish groups to push back the Islamic State in northern and eastern Syria. Those groups, through the Syrian Democratic Forces, have reduced Islamic State to a pocket of territory near the Iraqi border. But Trump’s tweet that the battle against the group is “won” is simply wrong. IS could be resurgent if the opportunity presents itself.

Trump is also abandoning Syria’s Kurds to the predatory ambitions of others in the region. The Assad regime, propped up by Russia, has vowed to regain the one-third of the country controlled by Kurdish factions. Turkey has pledged offensives both west and east of the Euphrates River. Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has said “terrorists” – Kurdish fighters – will be erased.

US support for the Kurds was never a benevolent mission. Beyond the anti-IS campaign, the American presence was a buffer against the influence of Iran – a key ally of the Assad regime. Now that buffer disappears, and American policy against IS has been thrown into disarray.

Afghanistan 
 
The Pentagon was already planning to pull out half of&nbsp;the 14,000 US troops currently in Afghanistan, but Trump’s shift on Syria may have an even more unsettling effect.

Even with the full complement of American forces and international partners, defeat of the Taliban has been a mirage. The insurgents have rebuilt their influence to control almost half the fragmented country. The focus has shifted from military victory to negotiation for political resolution.

But Trump has complicated the tactics with his impulsive interventions – leading to his being called an “idiot” by both McMaster and Kelly, and a “moron” by the then-secretary of state Rex Tillerson. He has angered Pakistan, an essential part of the negotiating process, by slashing US military aid, and his declarations about a full withdrawal have emboldened the Taliban rather than brought them to the table.

Russia 
 
The loss of Mattis will likely deepen the split personality of the Trump administration towards Russia. Most of Trump’s advisers view Moscow with concern and favour a firm line that includes sanctions and opposition to Russian ventures in areas such as Ukraine and the Baltic States.

But Trump’s admiration for Putin has led to his foot-dragging over Russia and even undermining of the American position. He has held out against enforcing sanctions until a combination of Congress and US agencies forced his compliance. With Putin standing next to him at a press conference in July, Trump failed to make a statement on Russia’s annexation of Crimea and sided with the Russian leader over the American officials who concluded that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election.

Putin is already revelling in the chaos within the administration. Asked about Trump’s announcement on withdrawal from Syria, he said: “On this, Donald is right. I agree with him.”

NATO 
 
The US deployment in Afghanistan is part of a NATO-led mission to train, advise and assist Afghan security forces. But Trump’s threat to NATO is far more than an Afghan draw down.

The president has repeatedly bashed the alliance with his false insistence – the outcome of his lack of knowledge – that NATO “owes” money to the US. During his campaign, he labelled the organisation “obsolete” and at last July’s summit he was still threatening to withdraw the US from the bloc after 69 years. Meanwhile, Trump was casting insults at individual members, notably Germany.

Mattis was an assurance that the US institutional relationships with NATO and its members, the linchpin of the alliance, would continue despite the president. But the general’s departure, and the prospect that Trump will want a “yes man” to replace him, could renew uncertainties.

Into the void 
 
The replacement for Mattis is not yet apparent. But it is a marker of the decay of US policy that the question could be close to irrelevant, be the candidate former general and Fox TV pundit Jack Keane or Trump loyalist and defence hawk Senator Tom Cotton. For Trump is now beyond advice and guidance. US foreign policy rests on the whim of this man: angry and frustrated by investigations closing in on him, but bunkered in the self-confidence that he is smarter than anyone else in the room.

(Scott Lucas is Professor of International Politics, University of Birmingham)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/james-mattis-what-defence-secretarys-resignation-means-for-syria-afghanistan-and-nato-as-trump-leans-in-to-putin-109204">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Scott Lucas The last adult in the Trump White House playground has gone – and the president is throwing his toys around. James Mattis, as defence secretary, was one of three retired generals in the Trump administration whose hope was to contain an ill-informed, temperamental, and unpredictable president.

By Scott Lucas The last adult in the Trump White House playground has gone – and the president is throwing his toys around. James Mattis, as defence secretary, was one of three retired generals in the Trump administration whose hope was to contain an ill-informed, temperamental, and unpredictable president. Now they’re all gone: national security adviser HR McMaster, pushed out early this year; White House chief of staff John Kelly, giving up at the end of December; and now Mattis, who resigned after losing hope that Trump can be restrained from impulsive actions, defying his advisers, threatening US allies and even embracing American foes. The catalyst for Mattis’s departure was Trump’s abrupt decision to withdraw all 2,000 US troops from Syria. But the list of his concerns about Trump is far longer. They include the president’s views on the American presence in Afghanistan and his hostility towards NATO allies, as well as Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin, even as Russia pursues an aggressive foreign policy and intervenes in US domestic affairs. As Mattis put it in his resignation letter, a message of rebuke to Trump: "My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues." With Trump willing to toss aside alliances and shred international arrangements, this could be the most serious challenge to US foreign policy and American partners since 1945. But what does it mean in specific areas? Syria American policy has never been clear or decisive over Syria’s 93-month conflict. But Trump’s impulsive order for withdrawal threatens a new cycle of violence. Since the autumn of 2015, Washington has worked with Kurdish groups to push back the Islamic State in northern and eastern Syria. Those groups, through the Syrian Democratic Forces, have reduced Islamic State to a pocket of territory near the Iraqi border. But Trump’s tweet that the battle against the group is “won” is simply wrong. IS could be resurgent if the opportunity presents itself. Trump is also abandoning Syria’s Kurds to the predatory ambitions of others in the region. The Assad regime, propped up by Russia, has vowed to regain the one-third of the country controlled by Kurdish factions. Turkey has pledged offensives both west and east of the Euphrates River. Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has said “terrorists” – Kurdish fighters – will be erased. US support for the Kurds was never a benevolent mission. Beyond the anti-IS campaign, the American presence was a buffer against the influence of Iran – a key ally of the Assad regime. Now that buffer disappears, and American policy against IS has been thrown into disarray. Afghanistan The Pentagon was already planning to pull out half of the 14,000 US troops currently in Afghanistan, but Trump’s shift on Syria may have an even more unsettling effect. Even with the full complement of American forces and international partners, defeat of the Taliban has been a mirage. The insurgents have rebuilt their influence to control almost half the fragmented country. The focus has shifted from military victory to negotiation for political resolution. But Trump has complicated the tactics with his impulsive interventions – leading to his being called an “idiot” by both McMaster and Kelly, and a “moron” by the then-secretary of state Rex Tillerson. He has angered Pakistan, an essential part of the negotiating process, by slashing US military aid, and his declarations about a full withdrawal have emboldened the Taliban rather than brought them to the table. Russia The loss of Mattis will likely deepen the split personality of the Trump administration towards Russia. Most of Trump’s advisers view Moscow with concern and favour a firm line that includes sanctions and opposition to Russian ventures in areas such as Ukraine and the Baltic States. But Trump’s admiration for Putin has led to his foot-dragging over Russia and even undermining of the American position. He has held out against enforcing sanctions until a combination of Congress and US agencies forced his compliance. With Putin standing next to him at a press conference in July, Trump failed to make a statement on Russia’s annexation of Crimea and sided with the Russian leader over the American officials who concluded that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election. Putin is already revelling in the chaos within the administration. Asked about Trump’s announcement on withdrawal from Syria, he said: “On this, Donald is right. I agree with him.” NATO The US deployment in Afghanistan is part of a NATO-led mission to train, advise and assist Afghan security forces. But Trump’s threat to NATO is far more than an Afghan draw down. The president has repeatedly bashed the alliance with his false insistence – the outcome of his lack of knowledge – that NATO “owes” money to the US. During his campaign, he labelled the organisation “obsolete” and at last July’s summit he was still threatening to withdraw the US from the bloc after 69 years. Meanwhile, Trump was casting insults at individual members, notably Germany. Mattis was an assurance that the US institutional relationships with NATO and its members, the linchpin of the alliance, would continue despite the president. But the general’s departure, and the prospect that Trump will want a “yes man” to replace him, could renew uncertainties. Into the void The replacement for Mattis is not yet apparent. But it is a marker of the decay of US policy that the question could be close to irrelevant, be the candidate former general and Fox TV pundit Jack Keane or Trump loyalist and defence hawk Senator Tom Cotton. For Trump is now beyond advice and guidance. US foreign policy rests on the whim of this man: angry and frustrated by investigations closing in on him, but bunkered in the self-confidence that he is smarter than anyone else in the room. (Scott Lucas is Professor of International Politics, University of Birmingham) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

What James Mattis's resignation means for Syria, Afghanistan and NATO

The United States-led coalition carried out an air-strikes on Wednesday to block Islamic State group fighters evacuated from&nbsp;Lebanon&nbsp;from reaching eastern Syria, its spokesman told AFP.

Hundreds of IS fighters and civilians were evacuated on Monday from the border region between&nbsp;Lebanon&nbsp;and Syria under a ceasefire deal and were headed to an IS-held town near Syria&#39;s eastern frontier with Iraq.&nbsp;

&quot;To prevent the convoy from moving further east, we cratered the road and destroyed a small bridge,&quot; said coalition spokesman Colonel Ryan Dillon, without providing further details on the exact location.

&quot;IS is a global threat; relocating terrorists from one place to another for someone else to deal with is not a lasting solution,&quot; he added.

The evacuation deal was negotiated between IS and powerful Lebanese Shiite movement Hezbollah, which has intervened in the war in neighbouring Syria to prop up the Damascus government.

Hezbollah had fought a week-long offensive against IS on the Syrian side of the border with&nbsp;Lebanon, coinciding with a simultaneous assault by Lebanese troops on their side of the frontier.&nbsp;

The battles ended Sunday with the announcement of a deal that would see IS forces bussed hundreds of kilometres (miles) from Syria&#39;s western border with&nbsp;Lebanon&nbsp;to its eastern frontier with Iraq.

Jihadists and civilians, including children, left the border region two days ago, but on Wednesday their buses were still held up at the entrance to Deir Ezzor province.&nbsp;

&quot;We know and understand that there are civilians&quot; aboard the buses, Dillon said.

&quot;If we are able to strike them without harming civilians, then we will do so,&quot; he said, adding that the coalition was monitoring the convoy&#39;s movement in real time.

Asked whether the presence of civilians had prompted the coalition to bomb the road instead of the convoy itself, Dillon said that would be &#39;consistent&#39; with the protocol.

&#39;Killed on the battlefield&#39;

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights confirmed that there was a delay in the buses reaching Deir Ezzor province but did not specify why.&nbsp;

Syrian military sources reached by AFP declined to comment.

The evacuation agreement had sparked a furious reaction from the United States, which considers Hezbollah to be a &quot;terrorist&quot; organisation.&nbsp;

&quot;Irreconcilable ISIS terrorists should be killed on the battlefield, not bused across Syria to the Iraqi border without Iraq&#39;s consent,&quot; US presidential envoy to the anti-IS coalition Brett McGurk said Wednesday.&nbsp;

&quot;Our coalition will help ensure that these terrorists can never enter Iraq or escape from what remains of their dwindling &#39;caliphate&#39;,&quot; he wrote on Twitter.

It was also met with outrage in Iraq, with Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi describing it as &quot;unacceptable&quot; and an &quot;insult to the Iraqi people&quot;.&nbsp;

Iraqi forces, who reseized the second city Mosul from IS in July after a nine-month battle, are fighting the last pocket of jihadists in the northern province of Nineveh.

The deal was even controversial in&nbsp;Lebanon, where opponents were angry that IS fighters were travelling &quot;on air-conditioned buses&quot; after having been suspected of killing Lebanese troops.

On Wednesday,&nbsp;Lebanon&#39;s president and the chief of the army hailed the &quot;victory&quot; scored against IS in the campaign.

&quot;Today, we are announcing&nbsp;Lebanon&#39;s victory against terrorism. I dedicate this victory to all Lebanese, who can be proud of their army,&quot; President Michel Aoun said at the presidential palace in Baabda, east of Beirut.

After Sunday&#39;s deal, IS fighters who had surrendered led Lebanese authorities to human remains believed to belong to Lebanese soldiers kidnapped by IS in 2014.

The Lebanese army had called the fate of the soldiers a &quot;top concern&quot; in its weeklong offensive against IS.

IS fighters and civilians evacuated on Monday from the border region between?Lebanon?and Syria

The United States-led coalition carried out an air-strikes on Wednesday to block Islamic State group fighters evacuated from Lebanon from reaching eastern Syria, its spokesman told AFP. Hundreds of IS fighters and civilians were evacuated on Monday from the border region between Lebanon and Syria under a ceasefire deal and were headed to an IS-held town near Syria's eastern frontier with Iraq. "To prevent the convoy from moving further east, we cratered the road and destroyed a small bridge," said coalition spokesman Colonel Ryan Dillon, without providing further details on the exact location. "IS is a global threat; relocating terrorists from one place to another for someone else to deal with is not a lasting solution," he added. The evacuation deal was negotiated between IS and powerful Lebanese Shiite movement Hezbollah, which has intervened in the war in neighbouring Syria to prop up the Damascus government. Hezbollah had fought a week-long offensive against IS on the Syrian side of the border with Lebanon, coinciding with a simultaneous assault by Lebanese troops on their side of the frontier. The battles ended Sunday with the announcement of a deal that would see IS forces bussed hundreds of kilometres (miles) from Syria's western border with Lebanon to its eastern frontier with Iraq. Jihadists and civilians, including children, left the border region two days ago, but on Wednesday their buses were still held up at the entrance to Deir Ezzor province. "We know and understand that there are civilians" aboard the buses, Dillon said. "If we are able to strike them without harming civilians, then we will do so," he said, adding that the coalition was monitoring the convoy's movement in real time. Asked whether the presence of civilians had prompted the coalition to bomb the road instead of the convoy itself, Dillon said that would be 'consistent' with the protocol. 'Killed on the battlefield' The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights confirmed that there was a delay in the buses reaching Deir Ezzor province but did not specify why. Syrian military sources reached by AFP declined to comment. The evacuation agreement had sparked a furious reaction from the United States, which considers Hezbollah to be a "terrorist" organisation. "Irreconcilable ISIS terrorists should be killed on the battlefield, not bused across Syria to the Iraqi border without Iraq's consent," US presidential envoy to the anti-IS coalition Brett McGurk said Wednesday. "Our coalition will help ensure that these terrorists can never enter Iraq or escape from what remains of their dwindling 'caliphate'," he wrote on Twitter. It was also met with outrage in Iraq, with Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi describing it as "unacceptable" and an "insult to the Iraqi people". Iraqi forces, who reseized the second city Mosul from IS in July after a nine-month battle, are fighting the last pocket of jihadists in the northern province of Nineveh. The deal was even controversial in Lebanon, where opponents were angry that IS fighters were travelling "on air-conditioned buses" after having been suspected of killing Lebanese troops. On Wednesday, Lebanon's president and the chief of the army hailed the "victory" scored against IS in the campaign. "Today, we are announcing Lebanon's victory against terrorism. I dedicate this victory to all Lebanese, who can be proud of their army," President Michel Aoun said at the presidential palace in Baabda, east of Beirut. After Sunday's deal, IS fighters who had surrendered led Lebanese authorities to human remains believed to belong to Lebanese soldiers kidnapped by IS in 2014. The Lebanese army had called the fate of the soldiers a "top concern" in its weeklong offensive against IS.

Lebanon: US-led coalition carry out air-strikes to block Islamic State fighters

Syria&#39;s President Bashar al-Assad said a suspected chemical weapons attack was a &quot;fabrication&quot; to justify a US strike on his forces, in an exclusive interview with AFP in Damascus.

The embattled leader, whose country has been ravaged by six years of war, said his firepower had not been affected by the attack ordered by US President Donald Trump, but acknowledged further strikes were possible.

Assad insisted his forces had turned over all their chemical weapons stocks years ago and would never use the banned arms.

The interview on Wednesday was his first since a suspected chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhun.

&quot;Definitely, 100 percent for us, it&#39;s fabrication,&quot; he said of the incident.

&quot;Our impression is that the West, mainly the United States, is hand-in-glove with the terrorists. They fabricated the whole story in order to have a pretext for the attack,&quot; added Assad, who has been in power for 17 years.

At least 87 people, including 31 children, were killed in the alleged attack, according to the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitor.

But Assad said evidence came only from &quot;a branch of Al-Qaeda,&quot; referring to a former jihadist affiliate that is among the groups that control Idlib province, where Khan Sheikhun is located.

Images of the aftermath, showing victims convulsing and foaming at the mouth, sent shockwaves around the world.

But Assad insisted it was &quot;not clear whether it happened or not, because how can you verify a video? You have a lot of fake videos now.&quot;

&quot;We don&#39;t know whether those dead children were killed in Khan Sheikhun. Were they dead at all?&quot;

He said Khan Sheikhun had no strategic value and was not currently a battle front.

&quot;This story is not convincing by any means.&quot;

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has begun an investigation into the alleged attack, but Russia on Wednesday blocked a UN Security Council resolution demanding Syria cooperate with the probe.

And Assad said he could &quot;only allow any investigation when it&#39;s impartial, when we make sure that unbiased countries will participate in this delegation in order to make sure that they won&#39;t use it for politicised purposes.&quot;

He insisted several times that his forces had turned over all chemical weapons stockpiles in 2013, under a deal brokered by Russia to avoid threatened US military action.

&quot;There was no order to make any attack, we don&#39;t have any chemical weapons, we gave up our arsenal a few years ago,&quot; he said.

&quot;Even if we have them, we wouldn&#39;t use them, and we have never used our chemical arsenal in our history.&quot;

The OPCW has blamed Assad&#39;s government for at least two attacks in 2014 and 2015 involving the use of chlorine.

The Khan Sheikhun incident prompted the first direct US military action against Assad&#39;s government since the war began, with 59 cruise missiles hitting the Shayrat airbase three days after the suspected chemical attack.

Assad said more US attacks &quot;could happen anytime, anywhere, not only in Syria.&quot;

But he said his forces had not been diminished by the US strike.

&quot;Our firepower, our ability to attack the terrorists hasn&#39;t been affected by this strike.&quot;

(AFP)

President Bashar al-Assad said Syria had turned over all their chemical weapons stocks years ago and would never use them

Syria's President Bashar al-Assad said a suspected chemical weapons attack was a "fabrication" to justify a US strike on his forces, in an exclusive interview with AFP in Damascus. The embattled leader, whose country has been ravaged by six years of war, said his firepower had not been affected by the attack ordered by US President Donald Trump, but acknowledged further strikes were possible. Assad insisted his forces had turned over all their chemical weapons stocks years ago and would never use the banned arms. The interview on Wednesday was his first since a suspected chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhun. "Definitely, 100 percent for us, it's fabrication," he said of the incident. "Our impression is that the West, mainly the United States, is hand-in-glove with the terrorists. They fabricated the whole story in order to have a pretext for the attack," added Assad, who has been in power for 17 years. At least 87 people, including 31 children, were killed in the alleged attack, according to the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitor. But Assad said evidence came only from "a branch of Al-Qaeda," referring to a former jihadist affiliate that is among the groups that control Idlib province, where Khan Sheikhun is located. Images of the aftermath, showing victims convulsing and foaming at the mouth, sent shockwaves around the world. But Assad insisted it was "not clear whether it happened or not, because how can you verify a video? You have a lot of fake videos now." "We don't know whether those dead children were killed in Khan Sheikhun. Were they dead at all?" He said Khan Sheikhun had no strategic value and was not currently a battle front. "This story is not convincing by any means." The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has begun an investigation into the alleged attack, but Russia on Wednesday blocked a UN Security Council resolution demanding Syria cooperate with the probe. And Assad said he could "only allow any investigation when it's impartial, when we make sure that unbiased countries will participate in this delegation in order to make sure that they won't use it for politicised purposes." He insisted several times that his forces had turned over all chemical weapons stockpiles in 2013, under a deal brokered by Russia to avoid threatened US military action. "There was no order to make any attack, we don't have any chemical weapons, we gave up our arsenal a few years ago," he said. "Even if we have them, we wouldn't use them, and we have never used our chemical arsenal in our history." The OPCW has blamed Assad's government for at least two attacks in 2014 and 2015 involving the use of chlorine. The Khan Sheikhun incident prompted the first direct US military action against Assad's government since the war began, with 59 cruise missiles hitting the Shayrat airbase three days after the suspected chemical attack. Assad said more US attacks "could happen anytime, anywhere, not only in Syria." But he said his forces had not been diminished by the US strike. "Our firepower, our ability to attack the terrorists hasn't been affected by this strike." (AFP)

Gas attack a 'fabrication' for US to attack us, says Syria's Assad

After a period of enigmatic statements, US President Donald Trump&rsquo;s approach to the complicated West Asia region&nbsp;has now become totally clear: Deliver more bombs, send more men, fight more wars. This is perfectly in line with&nbsp;President Trump&#39;s need to present himself as capable of resolving all the problems that, according to him, the previous administration left behind.&nbsp;

In the first US military&nbsp;action clearly directed against Syria&rsquo;s President Bashar al-Assad&#39;s forces, the US army attacked the al-Shayrat air base on Thursday night with more than 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles. According to Russian sources, six Syrian fighter jets&nbsp;have been destroyed.&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump said that his decision to clear the attack came because, according to his staff, the recent chemical attack which occurred in&nbsp;Khan Sheikhun was conducted by air forces which took off&nbsp;from al-Shayrat.

The details&nbsp;of this&nbsp;chemical attack, which killed at least 70 people, are&nbsp;still unclear, and while&nbsp;it seems likely to have been carried out by&nbsp;the Syrian Air Force, an investigation is still ongoing. The US-led coalition forces, the UN and several NGOs believe that Assad&rsquo;s Air Force delivered bombs containing chemical agents. Russia has an alternative version, which states&nbsp;that Syrian forces bombed a warehouse where anti-Assad fighters were storing chemical weapons. &nbsp; &nbsp;

The al-Shayrat bombing is just the last action of a US strategy which has been in place since at least a month.

The US military had already scaled up the presence of its elite forces in northern Syria, where the Arab/Kurds Syrian Democratic Forces are now very close to Raqqa, the Islamic State&#39;s capital city.&nbsp;

In Mosul, despite the hundreds of thousands of civilians still living in the western part of the city, the US-led coalition increased the intensity and frequency of its airstrikes. This choice has already had&nbsp;deadly consequences. On March 17,&nbsp;more than one hundred people&nbsp;who were hiding inside some houses were killed.&nbsp;

Many countries supported Trump&rsquo;s increased military action. Right after the missile strike against&nbsp;al-Sharyat, the UK, Japan, Australia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel openly backed the US decision. Later on, so did Canada and Jordan. Full support also came from Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, who said in a statement that,&nbsp;&ldquo;He understands efforts to deter further attacks. There is a clear distinction between airstrikes on military targets and the use of chemical weapons against civilians&rdquo;.

The General Command of the Syrian Army characterised the attack as&nbsp;&ldquo;blatant aggression&rdquo;, and said that this action makes the United States a &ldquo;partner&rdquo; of the Islamic State and other terrorist organisations. The Syrian news agency SANA reported that the army command said that the strike &ldquo;sends wrong messages to the terrorist organisations that would embolden them further to use chemical weapons in the future every time they suffer heavy losses in the battlefield&rdquo;.

After an initial silence, the Syrian presidency issued a statement defining the US strike as &ldquo;an unjust and arrogant aggression&rdquo;.

The American attack is a prominent obstacle on the path of a possible positive development of US-Russia relations. Moscow did not appreciate the fact that they were not informed, and has already declared&nbsp;willingness to take the issue to the UN Security Council. (A Pentagon spokesman said Russian troops in the air base were informed, but US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the Russian government itself was not informed prior to the attack.

Russia is the main and major ally of President Assad in the Syrian conflict, and finds itself now forced to find a way to respond to the&nbsp;US decision.&nbsp;

Russian President Vladimir Putin called a meeting of his security council and, according to spokesman Dmitry Peskov, all the participants expressed &ldquo;deep concern at the inevitable negative consequences of these aggressive actions for the joint effort to fight terrorism&rdquo;.&nbsp;

Russian defence ministry spokesman Gen&nbsp;Igor Konashenkow said&nbsp;that his country will continue to support President Assad, and will shortly strengthen Syrian air defences in order to better protect their ally&rsquo;s military infrastructure.&nbsp;

The Russian foreign ministry also declared&nbsp;that from now on&nbsp;they consider the agreement made with the US in order to respectively&nbsp;ensure flight&nbsp;safety during operations in Syria null and void.

It is not only about Russia, but also about US-Iran relations, which are currently very bad. Tehran is sending thousands of militiamen and weapons into Syria to support Assad, and US Secretary of Defence James Mattis has long thought that Iran is the major threat to any peace process in West Asia. During his confirmation hearing, Mattis clearly said that it was time for the US to re-establish the effectiveness of their deterrent power.

The US, and their regional allies - including Turkey - see Iranian involvement in both Iraq and Syria as an expansionist game that the country is playing in order to establish their hegemony in West Asia. On the other hand, this is exactly what Tehran thinks about the US intervention in the region.&nbsp;

This attack also opens a new front for the US which was, at least according to their UN ambassador&nbsp;Nikki Haley, focused only on fighting the Islamic State. Bombing Syrian air forces&nbsp;openly contradicts&nbsp;this line, and also is an open act of war against President Assad, and therefore against Iran, Lebanese Hezbollah and Moscow.

The US has&nbsp;never been neutral in their wars in West Asia, used as a way to secure their presence in a strategic area very close to the world&#39;s major oil resources. They have done it in Iraq, where they have been present since 2003,&nbsp;and it seems they are ready to do it also in Syria.

The US missile&nbsp;strike against the al-Sharyat airbase is neither resolutive nor truly effective in destroying the overall military capability of the Syrian army. It is more of a show of strength, a way to continue to push the specious narrative of the US as the guarantor of international law, a sort of neutral actor fighting against terrorism and for democracy. The now irritated Russia has been playing the same game since&nbsp;deciding&nbsp;to enter the battlefield alongside&nbsp;Assad.

The willingness to again push&nbsp;this old and creaky narrative is creating a further diplomatic impasse, which hinders an already faraway solution to&nbsp;the Syrian conflict.

(WION)

American missiles may have struck Syria, but a message was sent to both Russia and Iran

After a period of enigmatic statements, US President Donald Trump’s approach to the complicated West Asia region has now become totally clear: Deliver more bombs, send more men, fight more wars. This is perfectly in line with President Trump's need to present himself as capable of resolving all the problems that, according to him, the previous administration left behind. In the first US military action clearly directed against Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad's forces, the US army attacked the al-Shayrat air base on Thursday night with more than 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles. According to Russian sources, six Syrian fighter jets have been destroyed. US President Donald Trump said that his decision to clear the attack came because, according to his staff, the recent chemical attack which occurred in Khan Sheikhun was conducted by air forces which took off from al-Shayrat. The details of this chemical attack, which killed at least 70 people, are still unclear, and while it seems likely to have been carried out by the Syrian Air Force, an investigation is still ongoing. The US-led coalition forces, the UN and several NGOs believe that Assad’s Air Force delivered bombs containing chemical agents. Russia has an alternative version, which states that Syrian forces bombed a warehouse where anti-Assad fighters were storing chemical weapons. The al-Shayrat bombing is just the last action of a US strategy which has been in place since at least a month. The US military had already scaled up the presence of its elite forces in northern Syria, where the Arab/Kurds Syrian Democratic Forces are now very close to Raqqa, the Islamic State's capital city. In Mosul, despite the hundreds of thousands of civilians still living in the western part of the city, the US-led coalition increased the intensity and frequency of its airstrikes. This choice has already had deadly consequences. On March 17, more than one hundred people who were hiding inside some houses were killed. Many countries supported Trump’s increased military action. Right after the missile strike against al-Sharyat, the UK, Japan, Australia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel openly backed the US decision. Later on, so did Canada and Jordan. Full support also came from Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, who said in a statement that, “He understands efforts to deter further attacks. There is a clear distinction between airstrikes on military targets and the use of chemical weapons against civilians”. The General Command of the Syrian Army characterised the attack as “blatant aggression”, and said that this action makes the United States a “partner” of the Islamic State and other terrorist organisations. The Syrian news agency SANA reported that the army command said that the strike “sends wrong messages to the terrorist organisations that would embolden them further to use chemical weapons in the future every time they suffer heavy losses in the battlefield”. After an initial silence, the Syrian presidency issued a statement defining the US strike as “an unjust and arrogant aggression”. The American attack is a prominent obstacle on the path of a possible positive development of US-Russia relations. Moscow did not appreciate the fact that they were not informed, and has already declared willingness to take the issue to the UN Security Council. (A Pentagon spokesman said Russian troops in the air base were informed, but US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the Russian government itself was not informed prior to the attack. Russia is the main and major ally of President Assad in the Syrian conflict, and finds itself now forced to find a way to respond to the US decision. Russian President Vladimir Putin called a meeting of his security council and, according to spokesman Dmitry Peskov, all the participants expressed “deep concern at the inevitable negative consequences of these aggressive actions for the joint effort to fight terrorism”. Russian defence ministry spokesman Gen Igor Konashenkow said that his country will continue to support President Assad, and will shortly strengthen Syrian air defences in order to better protect their ally’s military infrastructure. The Russian foreign ministry also declared that from now on they consider the agreement made with the US in order to respectively ensure flight safety during operations in Syria null and void. It is not only about Russia, but also about US-Iran relations, which are currently very bad. Tehran is sending thousands of militiamen and weapons into Syria to support Assad, and US Secretary of Defence James Mattis has long thought that Iran is the major threat to any peace process in West Asia. During his confirmation hearing, Mattis clearly said that it was time for the US to re-establish the effectiveness of their deterrent power. The US, and their regional allies - including Turkey - see Iranian involvement in both Iraq and Syria as an expansionist game that the country is playing in order to establish their hegemony in West Asia. On the other hand, this is exactly what Tehran thinks about the US intervention in the region. This attack also opens a new front for the US which was, at least according to their UN ambassador Nikki Haley, focused only on fighting the Islamic State. Bombing Syrian air forces openly contradicts this line, and also is an open act of war against President Assad, and therefore against Iran, Lebanese Hezbollah and Moscow. The US has never been neutral in their wars in West Asia, used as a way to secure their presence in a strategic area very close to the world's major oil resources. They have done it in Iraq, where they have been present since 2003, and it seems they are ready to do it also in Syria. The US missile strike against the al-Sharyat airbase is neither resolutive nor truly effective in destroying the overall military capability of the Syrian army. It is more of a show of strength, a way to continue to push the specious narrative of the US as the guarantor of international law, a sort of neutral actor fighting against terrorism and for democracy. The now irritated Russia has been playing the same game since deciding to enter the battlefield alongside Assad. The willingness to again push this old and creaky narrative is creating a further diplomatic impasse, which hinders an already faraway solution to the Syrian conflict. (WION)

ANALYSIS: Uncovering Trump's Syria policy

Britain, France and the United States on Wednesday held off calling a vote at the UN Security Council on a resolution demanding an investigation of the suspected chemical attack in&nbsp;Syria.&nbsp;

The western trio called off talks Wednesday as they need more time to negotiate with Russia over the content of the draft resolution.

While the west blames the Syrian regime for the chemical attack in Syria&#39;s Idlib province, Syria and its partner Russia have stoutly denied the accusations.

Moscow, which launched a military intervention in support of the Syrian regime in 2015, has suggested that toxic agents were released after an air strike by the US coalition hit a rebel arsenal.&nbsp;

The Kremlin also rejected the draft resolution framed by the west, saying it was &quot;categorically unacceptable&quot; and &quot;pre-empts the results of an investigation&quot;.

They also threatened to veto the resolution demanding the United Nations to probe the suspected attack.&nbsp;

Moscow came with a contending draft resolution&nbsp;that did not mention any need for Syria to cooperate&nbsp;with a UN inquiry, unnamed diplomats told AFP.

However, French Ambassador Francois Delattre told reporters that negotiations were being held &quot;in a good spirit&quot; and that &quot;there is a chance&quot; for agreement.&nbsp;

&quot;It&#39;s time for action -- no doubt about it,&quot; he added.

But other diplomats sounded more pessimistic.

Some felt there was an increasing chance of Moscow vetoing the draft resolution.

&quot;It&#39;s not going well,&quot; a council diplomat said.

The draft resolution backs a probe by the Organization of the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and demands that the Syrian government cooperate to provide information about its military operations on the day of the assault.

But diplomats believe that a vote on the draft text presented by the west could be held as early as Thursday.

British Ambassador Matthew Rycroft said he did &quot;not anticipate them (talks) coming to a conclusion today&quot;. But he informed that they would continue negotiating with Russia in the Security Council.

At least 86 people died, including 30 children, in a rebel-held town in Syria&#39;s northwestern Idlib province.&nbsp;

Dozens more were left gasping for air, convulsing and foaming at the mouth, doctors said.

It is thought to be the worst chemical weapons attack in Syria since 2013, when sarin gas was used.

The deadlock arrives on a day when the US threatened to take action against Syria on their own if the UN did not respond to the threat.

&quot;When the United Nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action,&quot; US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley said.

The deadly attack has also seemingly pivoted the US administration&#39;s Syria agenda.

US President Donald Trump earlier viewed the defeat of Islamic State as being more important than ousting Syria President Bashar al-Assad.

But the Tuesday attack was condemned by Trump as a &quot;terrible affront to humanity&quot;. He also said that the Syrian regime had &quot;crossed a lot of lines&quot; and that his &quot;attitude towards Assad has changed very much&quot;.

(WION with inputs from AFP)

The US, Britain and France postpone talks as they need more time to negotiate with Russia over probe into suspected gas attack in Syria

Britain, France and the United States on Wednesday held off calling a vote at the UN Security Council on a resolution demanding an investigation of the suspected chemical attack in Syria. The western trio called off talks Wednesday as they need more time to negotiate with Russia over the content of the draft resolution. While the west blames the Syrian regime for the chemical attack in Syria's Idlib province, Syria and its partner Russia have stoutly denied the accusations. Moscow, which launched a military intervention in support of the Syrian regime in 2015, has suggested that toxic agents were released after an air strike by the US coalition hit a rebel arsenal. The Kremlin also rejected the draft resolution framed by the west, saying it was "categorically unacceptable" and "pre-empts the results of an investigation". They also threatened to veto the resolution demanding the United Nations to probe the suspected attack. Moscow came with a contending draft resolution that did not mention any need for Syria to cooperate with a UN inquiry, unnamed diplomats told AFP. However, French Ambassador Francois Delattre told reporters that negotiations were being held "in a good spirit" and that "there is a chance" for agreement. "It's time for action -- no doubt about it," he added. But other diplomats sounded more pessimistic. Some felt there was an increasing chance of Moscow vetoing the draft resolution. "It's not going well," a council diplomat said. The draft resolution backs a probe by the Organization of the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and demands that the Syrian government cooperate to provide information about its military operations on the day of the assault. But diplomats believe that a vote on the draft text presented by the west could be held as early as Thursday. British Ambassador Matthew Rycroft said he did "not anticipate them (talks) coming to a conclusion today". But he informed that they would continue negotiating with Russia in the Security Council. At least 86 people died, including 30 children, in a rebel-held town in Syria's northwestern Idlib province. Dozens more were left gasping for air, convulsing and foaming at the mouth, doctors said. It is thought to be the worst chemical weapons attack in Syria since 2013, when sarin gas was used. The deadlock arrives on a day when the US threatened to take action against Syria on their own if the UN did not respond to the threat. "When the United Nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action," US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley said. The deadly attack has also seemingly pivoted the US administration's Syria agenda. US President Donald Trump earlier viewed the defeat of Islamic State as being more important than ousting Syria President Bashar al-Assad. But the Tuesday attack was condemned by Trump as a "terrible affront to humanity". He also said that the Syrian regime had "crossed a lot of lines" and that his "attitude towards Assad has changed very much". (WION with inputs from AFP)

Syria chemical attack: UN council vote delayed as talks hit impasse

The United States deployed additional troops to drive out Islamist State from their stronghold Raqa, Syria.

The US-led coalition announced they had deployed another 400 troops on the ground in Syria.

At the moment, the US have 500 troops fighting in Raqa, as Iraqi forces advanced on the IS group in west Mosul on Thursday.

US-led coalition spokesperson&nbsp;Colonel John Dorrian said the reinforcements &quot;are temporary forces&quot;, adding that the long-term strength would remain at 500.

The additional deployment comes as the US announced they&nbsp;would host a meeting of the 68 members of the coalition fighting IS on March 22.

The American military buildup comes amid calls by President Donald Trump for new plans to accelerate the pace of the war against the Sunni Muslim extremists.

IS jihadists are facing simultaneous offensives in northern Syria by government forces, Turkish-backed rebels, and a US-supported alliance of Kurdish and Arab fighters.

In the latest sign they are feeling the squeeze, their chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was reported to have abandoned Mosul, leaving local commanders behind to fight the Iraqi forces.

&quot;He was in Mosul at some point before the offensive.... He left before we isolated Mosul and Tal Afar,&quot; a town to the west, said a US defence official.

&quot;He probably gave broad strategic guidance&nbsp;and has left it to battlefield commanders.&quot;

Baghdadi, who declared IS&#39;s cross-border &quot;caliphate&quot; at a Mosul mosque in 2014, in an audio message in November urged supporters to make a stand in the city rather than &quot;retreating in shame&quot;.

Meanwhile, Iraqi forces launched an offensive to retake west of Mosul, after having regained the eastern part of the city last October.

In recent days Iraqi forces have retaken a series of neighbourhoods and a museum where IS militants filmed themselves destroying priceless artefacts.

Iraq&#39;s Joint Operations Command announced Thursday the elite Counter-Terrorism Service recaptured the Mualemeen neighbourhood in west Mosul.

(WION with inputs from AFP)

The reinforcement means the US now have 900 of its troops on the ground in Syria

The United States deployed additional troops to drive out Islamist State from their stronghold Raqa, Syria. The US-led coalition announced they had deployed another 400 troops on the ground in Syria. At the moment, the US have 500 troops fighting in Raqa, as Iraqi forces advanced on the IS group in west Mosul on Thursday. US-led coalition spokesperson Colonel John Dorrian said the reinforcements "are temporary forces", adding that the long-term strength would remain at 500. The additional deployment comes as the US announced they would host a meeting of the 68 members of the coalition fighting IS on March 22. The American military buildup comes amid calls by President Donald Trump for new plans to accelerate the pace of the war against the Sunni Muslim extremists. IS jihadists are facing simultaneous offensives in northern Syria by government forces, Turkish-backed rebels, and a US-supported alliance of Kurdish and Arab fighters. In the latest sign they are feeling the squeeze, their chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was reported to have abandoned Mosul, leaving local commanders behind to fight the Iraqi forces. "He was in Mosul at some point before the offensive.... He left before we isolated Mosul and Tal Afar," a town to the west, said a US defence official. "He probably gave broad strategic guidance and has left it to battlefield commanders." Baghdadi, who declared IS's cross-border "caliphate" at a Mosul mosque in 2014, in an audio message in November urged supporters to make a stand in the city rather than "retreating in shame". Meanwhile, Iraqi forces launched an offensive to retake west of Mosul, after having regained the eastern part of the city last October. In recent days Iraqi forces have retaken a series of neighbourhoods and a museum where IS militants filmed themselves destroying priceless artefacts. Iraq's Joint Operations Command announced Thursday the elite Counter-Terrorism Service recaptured the Mualemeen neighbourhood in west Mosul. (WION with inputs from AFP)

US deploys 400 additional troops to oust IS from stronghold Raqa

The top brass of Turkey, Russia and the United States military met Tuesday to increase their coordination in Syria in their fight against Islamic State.

The unprecenedented meeting between&nbsp;Turkish Chief of Staff Hulusi Akar, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford and Russian Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov in the southern Turkish city of Antalya comes asthe US-led coalition makes its push to oust IS out of Syria.

Although Russia, Turkey and the US are fighting on the same side, there are doubts and tensions that remain over the involvement of Kurdish militia forces.

Though it ultimately stepped back from its claim, Turkey had threatened to strike Manbij, a former IS bastion, unless the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) deployed there pulled back.

The SDF, seen by the Washington as the most effective anti-jihadist fighting force in Syria, is dominated by Kurdish fighters condemned by Ankara as &quot;terrorists.&quot;

Both Moscow and Washington confirmed the three-way talks in Antalya, with spokesman for the US joint staff Greg Hicks saying in a statement discussions were about &quot;additional measures&quot; for an effective fight against jihadist groups in Syria and Iraq.

&quot;During the meeting the parties discussed regional security matters in Syria and Iraq ... with an effort to wage a more effective fight against all terrorist organisations in the future and the importance of additional measures for de-conflicting operations,&quot; he added.

The Antalya talks are aimed at ensuring better coordination to avoid &quot;the risk of unwanted clashes&quot; as many countries are involved in Syria, Turkish premier Binali Yildirim said.

Speaking in Ankara, Yildirim said Syria needed to be rid of &quot;all terrorist groups&quot; -- including Syrian Kurdish militia and IS jihadists.

&quot;The objective of the meetings today and tomorrow (Wednesday) is how to provide coordination in the best way possible and prevent parties from interfering with each other&#39;s operations and causing unpleasant developments while fighting against terror,&quot; Yildirim said.&nbsp;

The meeting comes a day after Turkey stepped back from threats to unilaterally strike Kurdish militia deployed in Manbij.

&quot;It makes no sense to launch an operation in Manbij without the cooperation of Russia and the United States,&quot; Yildirim said Monday.

His announcement stood in stark contrast to previous threats from Ankara that it would strike the Syrian Kurdish People&#39;s Protection Units (YPG) unless they withdrew from Manbij.

It came after Russian and Syrian regime forces started to move &quot;humanitarian&quot; convoys into Manbij, making it more difficult for Turkish troops to launch the offensive they had threatened.

The YPG is a key fighting force in the SDF, which spearheaded the victories against IS in the flashpoint towns of Kobane and Manbij.

Ankara believes it is linked to the outlawed Kurdistan Workers&#39; Party (PKK), which seeks greater rights and autonomy for Turkey&#39;s Kurdish minority and has waged a bloody campaign against the Turkish state since 1984.

In a thinly veiled criticism of Washington, the Turkish premier on Tuesday lashed out at &quot;some allies&#39; unfortunate&quot; choice of Syrian Kurdish militia forces as partners in the fight against IS.

Turkey has said it wants to work with its allies to capture the IS de facto capital of Raqa, but has ruled out any operation alongside the Kurdish militia.

(WION with inputs from AFP)

Although Russia, Turkey and US are fighting on the same side, there are doubts that remain over the involvement of Kurdish forces

The top brass of Turkey, Russia and the United States military met Tuesday to increase their coordination in Syria in their fight against Islamic State. The unprecenedented meeting between Turkish Chief of Staff Hulusi Akar, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford and Russian Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov in the southern Turkish city of Antalya comes asthe US-led coalition makes its push to oust IS out of Syria. Although Russia, Turkey and the US are fighting on the same side, there are doubts and tensions that remain over the involvement of Kurdish militia forces. Though it ultimately stepped back from its claim, Turkey had threatened to strike Manbij, a former IS bastion, unless the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) deployed there pulled back. The SDF, seen by the Washington as the most effective anti-jihadist fighting force in Syria, is dominated by Kurdish fighters condemned by Ankara as "terrorists." Both Moscow and Washington confirmed the three-way talks in Antalya, with spokesman for the US joint staff Greg Hicks saying in a statement discussions were about "additional measures" for an effective fight against jihadist groups in Syria and Iraq. "During the meeting the parties discussed regional security matters in Syria and Iraq ... with an effort to wage a more effective fight against all terrorist organisations in the future and the importance of additional measures for de-conflicting operations," he added. The Antalya talks are aimed at ensuring better coordination to avoid "the risk of unwanted clashes" as many countries are involved in Syria, Turkish premier Binali Yildirim said. Speaking in Ankara, Yildirim said Syria needed to be rid of "all terrorist groups" -- including Syrian Kurdish militia and IS jihadists. "The objective of the meetings today and tomorrow (Wednesday) is how to provide coordination in the best way possible and prevent parties from interfering with each other's operations and causing unpleasant developments while fighting against terror," Yildirim said. The meeting comes a day after Turkey stepped back from threats to unilaterally strike Kurdish militia deployed in Manbij. "It makes no sense to launch an operation in Manbij without the cooperation of Russia and the United States," Yildirim said Monday. His announcement stood in stark contrast to previous threats from Ankara that it would strike the Syrian Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) unless they withdrew from Manbij. It came after Russian and Syrian regime forces started to move "humanitarian" convoys into Manbij, making it more difficult for Turkish troops to launch the offensive they had threatened. The YPG is a key fighting force in the SDF, which spearheaded the victories against IS in the flashpoint towns of Kobane and Manbij. Ankara believes it is linked to the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), which seeks greater rights and autonomy for Turkey's Kurdish minority and has waged a bloody campaign against the Turkish state since 1984. In a thinly veiled criticism of Washington, the Turkish premier on Tuesday lashed out at "some allies' unfortunate" choice of Syrian Kurdish militia forces as partners in the fight against IS. Turkey has said it wants to work with its allies to capture the IS de facto capital of Raqa, but has ruled out any operation alongside the Kurdish militia. (WION with inputs from AFP)

Turkey, Russia, and US draw chart to oust IS out of Syria

us-syria

Us Syria, News on Us Syria, stories on Us Syria, articles on Us Syria, Us Syria stories at Wion, Us Syria news, Us Syria latest news

us syria