Syrians' preferences in the US elections

With the US presidential elections approaching and the competition between the Republican and Democratic candidates, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, intensifying, the world is eagerly awaiting to see who the new occupant of the White House will be, and the impact of this on US foreign policy and international relations. Russia, for example, prefers Trump, even if it claims otherwise, while Iran is leaning towards Harris, and so is Europe. The Arabs are divided; while China does not see much difference, given both agree on the need to besiege it.  The Syrians also have their preferences, although neither candidate mentioned Syria, even in passing, in their election campaign. Part of the Syrian opposition prefers Trump and, ironically, they agree with the regime, each for their own reasons.

Some Syrian opposition members’ position on Trump is based on the prevalent belief that he will be more assertive towards Iran and its allies in the region, especially since he ordered the killing of the military Commander, Qassem Soleimani, at Baghdad airport in early 2020. However, anyone who closely examines Trump’s policies and positions, including those he adopted during his first term, will notice that Syria does not interest him at all, as he once described the country as “sand and death”. His firmness towards Iran does not indicate any desire to limit its influence in Syria or the region as a whole, but rather is a personal vendetta against his predecessor, former President Barack Obama, and an attempt to completely erase the latter’s legacy, including in foreign policy. Trump’s decision to withdraw from the 2015 nuclear agreement, re-impose sanctions on Iran, and intensify them as part of his “maximum pressure” policy is nothing more than an attempt to reach a new agreement bearing his name.Tthis is a goal that Trump sought to achieve by all means, including his desperate attempt to take a photo with senior Iranian officials (Rouhani and Zarif, in particular) on the sidelines of the 2020 UN General Assembly meetings.

READ: Saudi Arabia reopens embassy in Syria, completing reconciliation with Assad regime

We must also recall that Trump avoided responding to Iran on at least two occasions when the interests of America and its allies in the region were attacked: the first was when he cancelled, at the last minute, an order to attack Iranian military facilities in response to the downing of an American Global Hawk reconnaissance plane, which is the most expensive plane, over international waters in the Gulf in June 2019. The second was when Trump considered his administration not concerned with Iran’s attack, three months later, on Aramco facilities in eastern Saudi Arabia. This indicates, contrary to what many believe that Trump is not interested in a confrontation with Iran. He is ultimately a businessman and should be evaluated from this perspective. He approaches foreign policy with the logic of deals, putting pressure to reach a deal, which is likely what he will do with Iran if he is elected for a second term.

Moreover, as a businessman, Trump views the US military presence in north-eastern Syria as a burden that should be relieved, just like the US defence burdens associated with crises or commitments to allies. Hence, if elected, Trump is likely to finish what he started in 2019 regarding the withdrawal of US forces from areas east of the Euphrates. This explains the regime’s preference for him, as the continued presence of US forces and their support for Kurdish militias in the resource-rich Jazira region prevents their return to Damascus’s authority. At the same time, their continued presence strengthens the Kurds’ position towards the regime’s attempts to impose its conditions in any potential future negotiations. Unlike the Biden-Harris administration, which includes officials who are considered friendly with the Kurds, Trump shows no interest in the fate of the Kurds, who played the role of ground forces in the US campaign against the Islamic State (ISIS)/Daesh. He is, therefore, likely to abandon them quickly, if elected. Although most predictions indicate that most of the foreign and security policy team in the Biden administration will leave if Harris wins, out of revenge for marginalising her during the time before her candidacy for the presidency, all signs suggest that Harris’ policies towards Syria will not differ much from those of Biden and Obama, which is another bad option that the regime and the opposition agree on rejecting.

This article appeared in Arabic in Al-Araby on 18 September, 2024.

READ: Syria receives thousands of Russia language books, in accelerated drive to teach Russian countrywide

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.