Syria

The Turks better stay away from the Kurds. Or else the Yanks will kick their asses.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ival-syria-intensifies-struggle-for-influence
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ival-syria-intensifies-struggle-for-influence


5760.jpg
 
Last edited:
LooseCannon said:
To be fair, who knows who the Americans will attack now.
Click to expand...
This statement from March rings even more true now with the development in Iraq.

To elaborate: With the US supported government in Iraq using military means to take control over Kirkuk, it is at least clear that there is no guarantee that the Kurds (who also have had massive support from the US) will be able to do whatever they want in Iraq.

The picture is even more complicated in Syria, where the one thing that seems clear is that everyone is against ISIL. With the last major stronghold of ISIL taken, will the war fizzle out? Or will other actors in the conflict turn on each other with new strength? The different powers of the region have so many different agendas it is hard to keep track.

  • Bashar Al Assad obviously wants to get back to status quo para bellum, with his own government in control of Syria.
  • The various rebel groups are probably too scattered and too divided to continue that part of the war, especially if Russia keeps backing Assad.
  • The Kurds would probably not want to give up any of their territorial gains in Syria - the question is whether the US will back them.
  • Turkey does not want a strong Kurdish entity in Syria. The US is allied with Turkey through NATO and I'll be very surprised if the US tries to force Erdogan to accept something like it.
  • Russia would obviously love to see a deepened divide between Turkey and NATO as it would open the possibility of stronger Russian influence, but their ambitions are not obvious.
  • Iran and Israel have differing interests as well.
An ideal solution does not exist, I wish the involved parties (great powers included) could sit down and find the least bad one.
 
Last edited:
Guys... I guess you will not disagree with me when I say that the situation has gotten more complicated than it already was. The parties who have not farted in most other direction are rare.

Syria + Russia vs Rebels (and bombing/killing lots of civilians in the process)
Syria + Russia vs IS
Kurds and America vs IS
America vs Syria
Turkey vs Kurds

Most recent additions:
America vs Russians
(this was admitted today by the Kremlin)
Turkey vs Kurds AND Syria!

Then, there's Iran, Israel....
 
Last edited:
Forostar said:
Syria + Russia vs Rebels (and bombing/killing lots of civilians in the process)
Click to expand...

Not to mention rebels vs rebels.

I don't have any hope that this conflict is going to be resolved any time soon. Nobody seems to have anything resembling a realistic plan or strategy.
 
It's one hell of a mess, always has been. I wish there was better popular understanding (in the West) of the sitution. There's still too much attempting to identify good and bad guys.
 
The Flash said:
Resolution seems improbable. It either turns into frozen conflict or drags out for a long time.
Click to expand...

Probably both in different areas. I guess we will be speaking of a "pacified" Syria west of the Damascus-Aleppo line and all kinds of frozen and open conflicts in the rest of the country, possibly with a quasi-independent "Rojava" in the north that will be able to detach itself from the conflicts in the rest of the country in the same way as Iraqi-Kurdistan or Somaliland.
 
A few western countries dared to question (criticize) Turkey's moves. Now they have Syria (!) giving them a "helping" hand.
 
This is turning into a real Mexican soap opera, plus death and despair.
 
I don't expect Turkey's motives to be understood by people unfamiliar with the territory and the inner-workings of the forces that make up the Syrian Democratic Forces. It is what it is. It is no surprise to anyone that's been familiar with the groups in Syrian Democratic Forces that they were willing to ally themselves with Assad. By their very nature these groups are willing to do whatever it takes to achieve their goals; be it allying themselves with a murderous dictator, displacing Arab families in the regions that they've taken control of, funneling arms to an organization that bombs public hospitals and public schools in Turkey or wave American flags in their base camps even though they started out as Marxist-Leninist revolutionary groups.

What is surprising, and equally discouraging, to see is the amount of supporters of Kurds' self-determination rights turning a blind eye to the actions of these groups. It's as if the final goal has completely rendered the means by which you get there irrelevant. Such machiavelist stances should have no place in a peaceful person's mindset.

Brigantium said:
There's still too much attempting to identify good and bad guys.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Everybody in the region has their own agenda and their actions are driven by their own motives. Nobody has clean hands in that region. Nobody. Not Assad, not the opposition, not the SDF, not Turkey, not the U.S., not Russia and certainly not the Islamic extremists.
 
This is going to make a great COIN game in 10-15 years, if it ever stops being a thing.

The Flash said:
What is surprising, and equally discouraging, to see is the amount of supporters of Kurds' self-determination rights turning a blind eye to the actions of these groups. It's as if the final goal has completely rendered the means by which you get there irrelevant. Such machiavelist stances should have no place in a peaceful person's mindset.
Click to expand...

I've been thinking about this for a long time, and I think the reason lies in emulation of the Zionist movement, which many local people consider was ultimately successful. Peaceful attempts to secede have rarely been successful.
 
LooseCannon said:
I've been thinking about this for a long time, and I think the reason lies in emulation of the Zionist movement, which many local people consider was ultimately successful. Peaceful attempts to secede have rarely been successful.
Click to expand...

Sure, but that also brings upon the question regarding secession is actually the desired outcome for the well-being of people as a whole. There have been cases where people chose to secede, in most cases being influenced by a nationalist or culture preservationist rhetoric, and that ultimately didn't turn out great. I'm pro self-determination myself, however at the same time, I think preserving unions is more favorable to seperatism. The establishment of an independent Kurdish state sounds like a dream goal to many, but if it does happen, it'll come with massive issues. Kurds are still a very feudal society, they have inner-conflicts all around. The Kurdish-majority region is landlocked and is not rich with natural resources. It'd also be surrounded by states that it seceded from, possibly creating continous tension.

In Zionism's case, what Israelis consider to be successful is also the demise of millions of Palestinians. So there's also that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top