To read the mainstream media, you would think that American foreign policy has collapsed into a heap following President Trump's decisions regarding US troops in Syria. Actually, though, the old adage of making a mountain our of a mole hill comes to mind. Let's start with the actual facts:
1. Prior to any moves by Trump in the last week, American forces inside Syria numbered just under 1000. Almost all of them are special operators assigned to training and coordination missions. Fighting against ISIS or its remnants ended many months ago. The bulk of US forces are located along the borders of Syria with Iraq and with Jordan. The presence of US forces at those locations act as a deterrent to stop Iranian shipments of weapons to Hezbollah forces located inside Syria close to Damascus.
2. The area which was the subject of Trump's latest moves is a strip of land along the border between Syria and Turkey. As of two weeks ago, this region is largely under the control of a Kurdish militia. America had 50 troops in the region. In other words, the USA had at most a very minor presence in the region.
3. The Turks and the Kurds are not friends, but this is much more complicated that one would think. About one-quarter of the population of Turkey itself is Kurdish. The Turkish government is very concerned about any move to incite that population to push for an independent Kurdish state which would take a large chunk of Turkish territory. There are also substantial Kurdish populations in Iraq, Iran and Syria. The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the Middle East without its own state.
4. Not all the Kurdish groups get along with each other. The Kurds in Iraq come the closest to having their own government. It is in the form of the provincial government in the Kurdish area of Iraq. That government does not have warm relations with the Kurdish militia forces inside Syria, although the relationship is certainly better than that with the Turks. For example, the Kurds in Syria have warm relations with Iran while the Kurds in Iraq are aligned against the Iranians.
5. Turkey is the formal NATO ally of the USA. We have no treaties with the Kurds. The Iraqi Kurds, however, have fought alongside US forces during the Iraq War and the Syrian and Iraqi Kurds both fought ISIS. The Turks fought ISIS in a rather half hearted manner. During the early days of ISIS taking power, the Turks stood back in the hopes that ISIS would destroy the Kurdish militia.
That brings us to the moves made by President Trump. Here's what he did. He ordered the 50 US troops in the relevant region along the Syria/Turkey border to relocate. That's it. He took that action in the face of news that the Turks were going to try to clear that region of the Kurdish militia.
To the Turks, the Kurdish forces are "terrorists" because they try to push for an independent Kurdish state inside Turkey. In the past, the US State Department had designated these same Kurdish militias as terrorist groups. That was wrong in my opinion, but it remains a fact.
The Turkish move left the President with a choice: he could keep US forces in the region and tell the Turks that were they to move in, the USA would consider it an attack on American forces. That would put the USA on a course to go to war with our ally the Turks. It was not a good choice. Trump could also sign some sort of pact with the Kurds to indicate our support for them. That's a variation of the first choice, but not much different. Trump could also send weapons to the Kurds so that they could better defend themselves against the Turks. That just incites a bloodier conflict between the Kurds and Turks, but it resolves nothing. Trump could have done what he did. Finally, Trump could have just pulled all American forces out of Syria. That would have opened the borders to the Iranians to supply the Hezbollah terrorists.
There is no good choice. The USA should be recognizing the Kurds for their cooperation during the various wars in the region. Just how that gets done, however, is a conundrum.
1. Prior to any moves by Trump in the last week, American forces inside Syria numbered just under 1000. Almost all of them are special operators assigned to training and coordination missions. Fighting against ISIS or its remnants ended many months ago. The bulk of US forces are located along the borders of Syria with Iraq and with Jordan. The presence of US forces at those locations act as a deterrent to stop Iranian shipments of weapons to Hezbollah forces located inside Syria close to Damascus.
2. The area which was the subject of Trump's latest moves is a strip of land along the border between Syria and Turkey. As of two weeks ago, this region is largely under the control of a Kurdish militia. America had 50 troops in the region. In other words, the USA had at most a very minor presence in the region.
3. The Turks and the Kurds are not friends, but this is much more complicated that one would think. About one-quarter of the population of Turkey itself is Kurdish. The Turkish government is very concerned about any move to incite that population to push for an independent Kurdish state which would take a large chunk of Turkish territory. There are also substantial Kurdish populations in Iraq, Iran and Syria. The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the Middle East without its own state.
4. Not all the Kurdish groups get along with each other. The Kurds in Iraq come the closest to having their own government. It is in the form of the provincial government in the Kurdish area of Iraq. That government does not have warm relations with the Kurdish militia forces inside Syria, although the relationship is certainly better than that with the Turks. For example, the Kurds in Syria have warm relations with Iran while the Kurds in Iraq are aligned against the Iranians.
5. Turkey is the formal NATO ally of the USA. We have no treaties with the Kurds. The Iraqi Kurds, however, have fought alongside US forces during the Iraq War and the Syrian and Iraqi Kurds both fought ISIS. The Turks fought ISIS in a rather half hearted manner. During the early days of ISIS taking power, the Turks stood back in the hopes that ISIS would destroy the Kurdish militia.
That brings us to the moves made by President Trump. Here's what he did. He ordered the 50 US troops in the relevant region along the Syria/Turkey border to relocate. That's it. He took that action in the face of news that the Turks were going to try to clear that region of the Kurdish militia.
To the Turks, the Kurdish forces are "terrorists" because they try to push for an independent Kurdish state inside Turkey. In the past, the US State Department had designated these same Kurdish militias as terrorist groups. That was wrong in my opinion, but it remains a fact.
The Turkish move left the President with a choice: he could keep US forces in the region and tell the Turks that were they to move in, the USA would consider it an attack on American forces. That would put the USA on a course to go to war with our ally the Turks. It was not a good choice. Trump could also sign some sort of pact with the Kurds to indicate our support for them. That's a variation of the first choice, but not much different. Trump could also send weapons to the Kurds so that they could better defend themselves against the Turks. That just incites a bloodier conflict between the Kurds and Turks, but it resolves nothing. Trump could have done what he did. Finally, Trump could have just pulled all American forces out of Syria. That would have opened the borders to the Iranians to supply the Hezbollah terrorists.
There is no good choice. The USA should be recognizing the Kurds for their cooperation during the various wars in the region. Just how that gets done, however, is a conundrum.
No comments:
Post a Comment