US Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, the leader of the US military forces in Iraq and Syria, today announced that Kurdish YPG forces will participate in the invasion of the ISIS capital city of Raqqa, despite Turkish government demands that the Kurds not be allowed to take part.
Townsend was a bit vague on the details of Kurdish involvement, saying the US are “going to take this in steps,” and that Turkey has to realize the only way that the US is going to have enough force to take over Raqqa any time soon is with a significant portion of the YPG involved.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu reiterated that his government wants only “local forces” involved in the Raqqa battle, and that the YPG, who Turkey considers a terrorist organization, must not be allowed to take part in any way.
Turkey’s military has been attacking the YPG in several locations around Syria over the past week, including heavy airstrikes which killed an estimated 200 YPG fighters who were engaged in an offensive against ISIS around Afrin. The Turkish government has repeatedly complained the YPG is gaining too much territory in Syria, and that they must abandon much of it.
Yes, the pattern that emerged since Manbij is clear. ISIS is only a placeholder for preferred solutions. In Syria, it is to create Kosovo-style Kurdish state by ethnically cleansing non-Kurdish population. Most of the maps we see of Syria, and the distribution of forces, are grossly inaccurate. Example, Kurdish territory. It shows a large swath of Syria as — Kurdish. While Kurds are majority in only two larger and several smaller villages/townships. Those areas are NOT contiguous. If you go town by town, village by village in this so called Kurdish area — one will see that majority are Arabs, Syrians or Assyrians. Many are Turkmen, or Druzi. The ethnic cleansing of Manbij was the last straw for Turkey. Turkey does not advocate dividing Syria, and advocates territorial integrity. Meaning, Kurdish ambitions to spread and control contiguous areas has been already checked by Turkish incursion into Yarabulus, and further.
Now, the game is on — Turkey has been sending mixed messages on the path of their offensive. On one hand, they are threatening YPG in Manbij — and are threatening the assault in order to dislodge them from there. But Turkey is also eying Al-Bab, a critical intersection leading directly to Raqqa. This may be just to divert YPG military resources to defend both. ISIS is curiously in Al-Bab — another placeholder — and Kurds are creeping to Al-Bab to prevent Turkey from getting there. Thus — preventing Turkey to liberate Raqqa and the region from ISIS. Yes, US is determined to keep Kurds happy, as whatever version of Kurdish mini state or “autonomy” is carved out of post-war Syria — it will be the place like Kosovo, where US base now reigns supreme, and NATO decision in Kosovo is higher authority then Kosovo “constitution”.
This one is by no means over. I do not think that US really wants to alienate Turkey to that extent. Kurds will not be enough — even with the Special Forces that apparently have boots that do not touch ground — and the help of Turkey will be needed. This will give Turkey place at the table, and will prevent chopping up Syria — and separating Turkey from its Middle East neighbors by the wall of Kurdish mini-states. It sounds like Sinjar. Oh, what tears were shed by our media over the fate of poor Yazidis. So, the very first operation was conducted against ISIS in Iraq — to liberate the village. And then what happened? Blaring of media went silent, and US gifted Sinjar to — Iraqi PKK! Kurdish regional authority, or Peshmerga, that participated were told to stay out, and PKK to go in. They were stunned! Until today, Iraqi PKK — that is not on friendly terms with Kurdish Regional Authority — is still in Sinjar. So much for poor Yazidis. The reason Sinjar is important — its proximity to Syria. And another reason for Turkey to be concerned about the anti-Turkey and anti-regional objectives of presumably anti-ISIS operations.
Turkey has changed its politics fundamentally. It is no longer going to wait for the terrorist and secessionists get to them from the wreckage of Iraq and Syria, but it is going to reorient its focus on external threats and act as a regional power. It is expecting a place at the table whatever future discussion of post-war region is going to be shaped. It will be impossible to dismiss it. Announcing that Kurds will be the partners in Raqqa — is telling Turkey a great deal. All Turkish media has interpreted it this way: US telling regional states to shut up, and let outsiders — US and EU decide again, and again — the borders, the security — or lack thereof — and the fate of Middle East. Many articles in Turkish media have focused on the questionable right by US and EU former colonial powers to continuously redraw maps of Middle East since WWI. And if this is the case — Turkey wants back its own regions lost after WWI. This is deliberately provocative, but it serves the purpose. First, to draw attention to Western powers that there are other claims on their map making, and second, to get domestic support.
Curiously, a theory has arisen in Turkish academia, that Western powers are coming up with a new strategy — a strategy of building city-states in the Middle East under “international” that is, their management. And abandoning the rest of the countryside to low level violence, to be managed by the titular “central” authority without any powers and deprived of the revenue collection from cities-states. Many even compare it with the globalist strategy within US. The destruction of family farms hit Mid West, followed by deindustrialization — was in tandem with the rise and prosperity of US coastal mega-cities. Mid West populace is fleeing to large cities, and becoming less aware of the national issues — such as trade or global interventions. Large cities do tend to vote democrat — and have shown to be less concerned for the national issues, and more concerned with their group-identity issues.
I have to say that globalism has one great advantage — not necessarily the one neocons would be happy with. The advantage is the availability of media in English all over the political landscape and all over the globe. Agree or not, that is not the question. Having access to the vast variety of perspectives is certainly different.