After a weekend of artillery strikes against both Kurdish and Syrian military targets, the Turkish government today threatened its “harshest response” yet against the Kurdish YPG if they dare get any closer to the Syria-Turkey border.
The threat comes amid a Kurdish offensive against ISIS, which controls much of the Syrian side of the border in Aleppo Province, and is under growing pressure from several fronts. The YPG seized the town of Tal Rifaat today, just a few miles out of the ISIS territory.
The Kurds blocked the road between Tal Rifaat, held by an Islamist rebel faction, and the border town of Azaz, which Turkey uses to supply various rebel forces with weapons. Reports suggest they took the town with relative ease, as they have other rebel territory in the area.
The YPG and ISIS have fought some protracted campaigns over several key territories across northern Syria, with both sides engaging in some massive offensives against the other. The YPG has been backed by US and Russian airstrikes in different areas, with the US tending to shy away in areas Turkey opposes the Kurds having.
Though Turkish officials denied weekend reports that a handful of soldiers had crossed the border at Azaz to fight the Kurds, they don’t seem to be rejecting the idea of a ground offensive into Syria out of hand, and have recently been in consultation with Saudi Arabia on a joint invasion of the nation.
If the Kurds station on the Syrian border and fight ISIS there,not on the territory of Turkey, what is Turkey’s justification to attack the Kurds. Are they protecting ISIS.
Well isn’t it obvious?
More generally, Turkey (or, rather, Erdogan’s AKP) is protecting its interests: increase regional influence and prestige through ousting Assad as well as silencing Kurdish opposition. To this end, Daesh (ISIS) is a helpful “enemy” for Turkey. They’ve killed many Kurds and are also effectively curbing Shi’ite Iran’s influence in Iraq.
Turkey is protecting the Sunni Arabs from becoming refugees.
The Kurdish YPG commits ethnic cleansing against Sunni Arabs. The YPG displaced Sunni Arabs and burned down entire villages. The YPG has threatened to order coalition airstrikes against Arab houses if the Arabs don’t leave. Over 10,000 Arabs have fled their homes in response of YPG advances.
http://news.antiwar.com/2015/06/01/reports-kurdish-troops-burn-arab-villages-in-northern-syria/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Protection_Units#War_crimes_allegat
So yes the YPG is displacing Arabs and is creating refugees.
Turkey has promised to the EU to take in more refugees and block more refugees from reaching Europe.
The YPG are displacing Sunni Arabs so they are creating more refugees. Turkey is protecting the Sunni Arabs from the Kurds. In this way they won’t become refugees.
Here’s a quote:
If your point here is to emphasise the obvious — namely, that there are no clean hands in this conflict — then you’ve succeeded in that otherwise easy task.
However, how would your respond to, say, Turkey’s role in facilitating ethnic cleansing in the period well before PYD’s militias rose to prominence? Remember, it was not until late 2014 that AKP leadership referred to Daesh as a terrorist group. Remember also the ample evidence that underscores a policy of tolerance, if not outright support, towards Daesh by Turkey — all in the name of regime change in Damascus.
If you’ve been following this conflict for a few years now, I trust that maybe, just maybe, you may be aware of how patently obvious Erdogan’s motivations are. Otherwise I find it quite sad to see how someone as well informed as you is seemingly unwilling (or unable) to read AKP policy towards Syria as being in any way beneficial for Europe, let alone the Middle East.
Many of the allegations of genocide by the Islamic State <a href=" is untrue or exaggerated. There is no clear evidence that there was a “Sinjar massacre” by the Islamic State.
Ok then. So I take it that the Yezidi claims of sex slavery and ethnic cleansing are all instances of opportunistic imperialist propaganda.
All those videos showing, sans remorse, the torture and execution of captured people. Are those too part and parcel of exaggerated allegations of human rights abuses?
Your credibility leaves much to be desired, at least that’s how it looks like to me. After all, you are quick to label the YPG as a party to ethnic cleansing, even as you attempt to tone down the same allegations when they are levelled against Daesh.
Yes, the YPG has engaged in ethnic cleansing, and they’ve had spokespeople confirm that even. They’ve even allowed HRW into their areas, even as HRW has written very critical pieces on PYD policy.
Can you imagine HRW getting the same treatment by Daesh, or Turkey?
If you at least want your commentary to be effective, try to know your audience and adjust your message accordingly, as your current commentary cannot but come across as thinly veiled Sunni Arab/Turkish propaganda.
I didn’t deny that Yazidi sex slavery exist. I think it does exist and there are hundreds or thousands of Yazidi sex slaves.
The Islamic State executes captured soldiers, but so does the Assad government. The Iraqi government and Iran-backed Shiite militias probably do the same too with some of its captured soldiers.
Of course you didn’t deny that Yezidi sex slavery exists, or that Daesh engages in other human rights abuses, but the framing of your comments is highly suspect. That is my principle issue in replying to your commentary.
With regards to what you have to say about Assad, I cannot agree more. He has been subjecting medical staff and facilities to bombing even before the Russian air campaign.
Drones, too, are another sad and sorry example of the US’ morally bankrupt approach towards civilians throughout the Middle East.
But through all your posts, I’ve yet to see you so much as raise a single, minute critique of AKP policy in the region, this despite ample evidence that their regime change drive has had a number of unintended consequences. Hence my suspicion regarding your commentary: yes, the YPG has committed human rights abuses; yes, Assad has killed more civilians than Daesh has; yes, the Iraqi government continues to suffer from the bloody sectarianism of Maliki’s reign; yes, Hezbollah and Shi’ite groups have been known to torture and murder and rape Sunni civilians; no, Daesh is not the only evil party in Syria, nor the sole culprit of genocide there… But throughout all this, you are deafeningly silent on Turkey — hence my serious suspicion you really see the Sultan in Ankara as a man well above reproach — lest you end up in a Turkish jail for “offending” the president.
And it is supremely laughable to see you make apartheid comparisons with the Kurds viz-a-viz their treatment of Sunni Arabs. Perhaps you’ve conveniently forgotten why Turkey has a Kurdish problem? That could have something to do with a long history of state repression, going as far as banning Kurdish language, style of dress, music, and even the letters x, q and w. Even Israel didn’t go that far.
The difference: YPG created 10.000 refugees, turkey’s jihadist allies in Syria 10.000.000. That said, it’s correct to note that there’s no ‘good’ side and everybody pursues his or her own agenda.
“and have recently been in consultation with Saudi Arabia on a joint invasion of the nation.” Well isn’t that something. Surely a prelude to their joint invasion of Iran.
It would be a horrible thing if Turkey and Saudi Arabia went to war against Iran, but it could take out the world’s most obnoxious theocracies (KSA and Iran) and the biggest sponsor of radical mosques and madrasas and terrorist groups (KSA). If the ruling regimes were replaced by secular autocrats (of the kind the US has seen fit to remove in Iraq, Libya and Syria) it would be a great step forward.
Yeah but lets start with Saudi Arabia and Turkey, since you mention obnoxious, nay, terrorist theocracies.
Turkey isn’t a theocracy yet. Erdogan is working hard to dismantle the secular state that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk put into place, but it’s still a constitutional democracy and a fairly moderate Muslim majority country. If Erdogan and his party were out, Turkey could be salvaged. KSA is the worst, and has pretty much the same human rights record as ISIS, just more disguised and endorsed by the US, de facto.
That would be the end of Erdogans rule…which might be just what NATO wants, as he’s gotten too unpredictable.
How much evidence do you need and how obvious does it have to be that Turkey is behind ISIS and NATO is behind Turkey along with the Israeli’s, Saudi’s and gulf states, and this is against Iran, Assad and a Shia controlled Iraq??
Turkey and Saudi Arabia are totally out of control.
They are both IMO backing ISIS, and get upset with groups like the Kurds and Houthis, along with the Iranians, Russians and Syrian governments who are kicking ISIS butt.
“Kicking ISIS butt” means destroying entire cities making them uninhabitable. See here: https://redpill.me/articles/footage-of-victory-and-liberation-of-rebel-held-cities/
What is the other alternative? I doubt diplomacy and reason works with ISIS.
Do nothing. Let ISIS collapse by itself.
Many of the allegations of genocide by the Islamic State <a href="no clear evidence is untrue or exaggerated. There is no clear evidence that there was a “Sinjar massacre” by the Islamic State.
The Iraqi government is corrupt and brutal. ISIS is a resistance group against the Iraqi government and Iran-backed Shiite militias. The Iraqi government shoots peaceful protesters, shells and bombs residential areas. The Iraqi government detains Sunni Arabs. Its prisons have 30,000 to 50,000 detainees and 20% of those are killed by torture. The Iraqi government has lost its legitimacy to hundreds of thousands of Sunni Arabs; hundreds of thousands protest against the Iraqi government each week.
A lot of Sunni Arabs tolerate the Islamic State more than the Iraqi
government in Baghdad. They are willing to passively accept the Islamic State and even ally with them to fight the Iraqi government. The Iraqi government is so brutal that the secular former Ba’ath party members and Sunni Arab tribesman would ally with the Islamic State rather than the Iraqi government.
The solution is to stop funding the official Iraqi government. In this way it could compromise and grant more rights to Sunni Arabs.
I agree we (U.S) should do nothing. But the Iraqis, Syrians and Iranians have to fight ISIS.
It’s not a good idea to let Iranians do that. Iranians are highly prejudiced against Sunni Arabs in Iraq. Iranians think Sunni Iraqis are terrorists. Iranians will commit hate crimes against Sunni Iraqis. Inviting Iranians will only create sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shias.
In 2004-2005 Sunnis and Shias in Iraq were friendlier toward each other, intermarriage was common, but in the 2010s they had became more sectarian.
Iraqi Shiites are still friendlier toward Iraqi Sunnis though. But ISIS is no threat to eastern Iraqi provinces because it’s Shia-dominant (Shias are not as oppressed in Iraq) so ISIS is unable to establish legitimacy there.
The best strategy is to establish a truce, telling both sides to stop fighting. I know it’s not going to happen. But it’s a good idea. A lot of the fighters and commanders within ISIS are secular ex-Ba’ath Party members. ISIS is also allied with neo-Ba’athist militias and Sunni Arab tribesman who previously fought against al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) in 2006-2007. Previously they were enemies against al-Qaeda but they became allies in their fight against U.S. occupation and the corrupt Iraqi government. There is speculation that the secular factions of the Islamic State is using the Mujahideen fighters in ISIS to first conquer territory, and its long-term goal is to instigate a coup d’etat against the Islamic State turning it into a secular organization. Just like how Saddam Hussein came into power through a coup d’etat.
But the whole concept of ISIS was created as a proxy war against Iran by Saudi Arabia and some of its buddy Sunni despots. ISIS is mainly attacking Iranian interests. Their target is Iranian interests.
Saudi hands are dirty. Iran is lesser of the two evils.
ISIS is no threat to eastern Iraq and Iran, why do they have to fight when it will only create sectarian violence?
ISIS is in Iraq and no threat to the eastern part of Iraq? The only reason they are not able to advance into the eastern part is because of the Iranian involvement against the Saudi mercenaries.
Agree in principle, apart from the cluster bombs, would like to see proof first. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s Turkey’s (et al) support for islamists that created the conflict in the first place and prevents it from being solved. As Kujat put it, there’s a chance for peace only now thanks to the Russian engagement.