Turkey has long sought an internationally-imposed series of “safe zones” in northern Syria to house refugees, as a way to limit the number of refugees who actually end up crossing into Turkey. The White House resisted, fearing it would be too complicated, and President Trump’s intention to shift Syria policy toward fighting ISIS made it seem like the idea was very unlikely.
Instead, President Trump made a surprise move, and is expected to order the State Department and Pentagon to prepare for the establishment of safe zones in Syria, giving them 90 days to provide a full blueprint for how they would go about it.
Arguments over the theoretical viability of such safe zones centered on the question of airspace control, with Turkey arguing the zones would be meaningless without a no fly zone, and Pentagon officials warning at the time that would mean war with both Syria and Russia.
During the campaign, Trump had endorsed the idea of safe zones on humanitarian grounds, but also scorned Hillary Clinton for supporting the no-fly zone aspect, citing the concerns about starting such huge new wars.
Trump has made clear repeatedly that he doesn’t want to go to war with Russia, though so far it is unclear how this will work with the safe zones order. Another complicating factor is that Turkey has conquered a significant chunk of northern Syria in the past few months, and presumably will be loathe to demilitarize parts of its territory if the US stops short of the no-fly zone declaration.
It is possible that the Trump Administration is underestimating the difficulty of this move, and that the blueprints, once delivered, will sufficiently scare them away from the idea. That the plan was put into an executive order, however, suggests it is more than just an attempt at quietly collecting potential options.
This could be a disaster in the making.
It’s hard to imagine that the US could produce a bigger disaster in Syria but with the US you seldom go wrong expecting the worst.
Syria wants the safe zones.
Russia probably would not allow a safe zone where militants could run to and be safe The UN established a safe zone in Bosnia where the Muslim Army would be protected by the blue helmets and than sneak out on raids and kill Serb civilians around the safe zone .The Serb Army under the command of general Mladlic got tired of this and finally attacked Serbrenica and executed about a 1000 military age men from the city . General Mlandic has been on trail this past year as a war criminal for executing 7000 Muslims . Muslims always lie to gain sympathy and likely added as many bodies they could find to claim their holocaust like Israel has .
The bodies that they added were people who died of natural causes either during the war, and some before. Relatives until today are trying to have their names removed from the monument. Then, they added the names of Bosnian war dead, covering the period of over three years, and hundreds of miles away from Srebrenica. Then, Serb bodies were counted, if the ID was not available. One can easily know that those were Serbs, because their heads could not be found. Then, the forces that pulled out of Srebrenica before Serb entry, and those encountered battles on the way to the town of Tuzla. And, also, there are many people who are today alive and well, and their names are on the monument. I do not know of any other such example in history where the truth has been so perverted, as to not even care if anyone can point out the problem.
“I do not know of any other such example in history where the truth has been so perverted” – there are lot of such examples. The whole world history before 16th century was fabricated. Or even closer: you can find in library the British encyclopaedia 1771 year edition and learn that the biggest country in the World at the time was Great Tartary with the capital Tobolsk. Now they pretend it never existed.
Yes, they pretend it never existed. Tartary and Tobolsk only return a million hits plus each on Google.
The names are there, but the meaning is different. History of Toblsk is fabricated.
People were fed with different story. So blue helmets looked as cowards because they failed to protect Albanians. The true reason was different – they had no enthusiasm to protect Albanian terrorists.
Meet the new boss.
Worse than the old boss.
It will be interesting just where will such a zone be created. Refugees however, are not crossing in Syria now. After Aleppo was recovered, people are actually going back home. There are two potential areas: one is Raqqa region. After ISIS is removed, those are predominantly Arab towns and villages, and have been badly depopulated due to ISIS. Another area could be the area where Turkey has already done a great deal of fighting ISIS, and this area along border, has been really depopulated — and Turkey would not mind this area to be repopulated by refugees. It will require massive humanitarian support, but it is doable. This would make Turkey actually the administrator of the area, which is what was happening anyway. Syrian Army is doing some helping around Eastern Aleppo.
The third area is actually Idlib. Now, occupied by Al-Nusra, with some other groups. Some of those groups went on to accept cease fire — but not Al-Nusra. Well, that would mean taking on Al-Nusra, and defeating it. But Trump always talked only of ISIS, so it is logical that he would not like to be planning any safe zones for refugees in areas not controlled by ISIS.
Trump can’t do whatever he might wish (even if he wish). Al-Nusra has full support of all those who want topple Assad.
You are 100 % correct . But Al Nusra does not have the support of Russia , Iran , Trump , Assad or even the majority of the Syrian people .. Now that Obama is gone and Hillary did not win Al Nusra has less support I believe their days are numbered .along withb ISIS and 100s Islamic terrorist organizations
I am sure that Trump does not intend to have US military administer safe zones. On humanitarian grounds — it is doable, provided that Turkey stays to administer, and US helps remove ISIS from the area, The problem is, will they be secure for as long as the border with Iraq is not secure, and Al-Nusra sitting pretty in Idlib.
I hope, but I’m not “sure” because even Trump does not know the plan yet. It has not been written, options not even presented. That is all that he ordered.
Oh I think Assad will have to help administer them , I think Germany Turkey and the E,U will be more than happy to help out with the cost of supporting safe zones . It might be a lot cheaper to help people in their own country than move them to a new country with another language completely foreign to them
Apparently neither the author nor the commentators have heard the news: Donald J. Trump is the President of the US, not of Syria. It happens that Syria is a sovereign nation with an internationally recognized government with the power and duty to govern all lands within the territorial boundaries of Syria. Turkey has not “conquered” any Syrian territory and has not (at least thus far) claimed any right to annex Syrian lands. Under the UN Charter and other relevant sources of international law, there is no legal basis for the US, Turkey or any other nation to establish a “safe zone” on Syrian territory; to the contrary, for the US or Turkey to do so (without the invitation or consent of the Syrian government) would be an act of aggressive war — a direct violation of the UN Charter’s central collective-security provisions and “the supreme war crime” under the Nuremburg Principles. But who cares about little details like our President’s violation of our Constitution (which makes treaties such as the UN Charter “the Supreme Law of the Land”), right? Only myself and a few million other US veterans who took the same oath as our President, “to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic.” And so it goes, here in the land of the ignorant and the home of the craven..
Last quarter of century US establishment, with full support of the corporate mass media, was very much persistent in it’s efforts to destroy the international law. So now people don’t take the international law seriously, both in US and abroad. Who profited from all this activity outside of the military-industrial complex and the establishment itself, difficult to say. May be only the oil corporations which made good contracts in Iraq and Libya and all those minor players who are on the payroll of the fat cats.
And the irony is that the international law regime we know today – like other institutions about to be dumped by Trump, such as the UN- was largely invented by Americans, designed by Americans, built up by Americans, and have largely served American interests for seventy years. The rule of law has been good for America- in spite of those major instances where America has flouted it.
Throwing it all out will not be good at all.
Trump isn’t listening to himself anymore – he’s listening to the Generals who destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan and they still want to destroy Syria. Dumb move Trump
Such a novel way of defending Trump!
Is that your way of saying that you’re leaving Trump’s side because he’s not listening to himself? LOL
It’s very unlikely the Generals are keen on this. It would require just about the entire US air force and all of their existing bomb inventory, wreck any rebuild or training they might have in mind, and would strip resources they currently need in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. They would not expect it to be free of casualties, either. Men would die.
To paraphrase John Kerry: how do you ask a man to be the first person to die for a mistake?
And it just might not work, depending on how much the Syrians and Russians decide to push back.
Wrong Trump wants to really support Syria with safe zones so the refugees don’t move here .. Justin is in good shape supporting Trump as a libertarian . I support Libertarians too both Gary and Ron Paul . Trump will be a big winner in Syria and it won’t cost us much at all. Trump will get Turkey , Germany and every body in Europe to pay for his safe zones And Russia and Syria will help enforce his no fly zones . Won’t cost much at all . Things go a lot better when your smart .
And we were afraid Hillary would escalate conflicts in the Middle East. Jeez, no hope…
Hillary would have done at least this much, and said so often.
Hillary had an established track record of listening to the Generals. Trump says he’s smarter than any of the Generals. If the Generals say this is a very, very bad idea- and they have- Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford said it would mean war with Russia- which one would you prefer to have in charge?
https://www.rt.com/usa/360317-carter-dunford-syria-russia-senate/
They have no idea who are rebels, terrorists or civilians but feel they have the right to create safe zones for them.
We may not have to create safe zones for them in the Mid east . But I think it maybe is also creating safe zones for us by keeping the Islamic terrorists in the mid east . So they do not have to cross oceans and move in with us .
Trump did not order it done.
He orders plans. Those would be subject to review.
He has said he won’t do no-fly zones. Will he now? If not, will that make such planning fail, so he does not do safe zones at all?
That will come out in the final review of plans presented, plans not yet even made.
It is not the same as ordering an action.
SAFE zones are not the same as no fly zones , Safe zones are to protect people and of course it could be a no fly zone too . The No fly zone we put over Libya was designed to stop Gaddafy using planes to protect his troops . The safe zones in Syria would be designed to protect people that don’t want to fight They are supposed to be weapon free too . Not like the one in Bosnia where terrorist Muslims felt safe while they rested in peace before their next attack .
Thomas L. Knapp, you said: “This site does not support Trump. One of its writers does. There’s a difference.”
You said that on Raimondo’s comment board and I would personally like to thank you for setting the record straight.
I’ve maintained for months that Raimondo actually did support Trump through at least the last 6 months of the election campaign and it probably was one of the major reasons why I was banned from commenting on his articles. You said I was lying.
In fairness, this is after the election and not during and so that distinction is relevant. i guess?
Otherwise, you are exactly right that this site does not support Trump and likely never has, even though several of the regulars definitely do support him. I too see it as admirable to allow them to voice their opinion. That is a libertarian principle that should be upheld. Are you going to continue to faithfully uphold that principle?
“it probably was one of the major reasons why I was banned from commenting on his articles”
Don’t flatter yourself. You were banned for being an asshole, not for your political opinions.
Perfect answer Thomas! Just perfect.
It has to be that not subscribing to the libertarian pie in the sky agenda makes me an as-hole.
luv from Canada.
Nope. Your downfall was insulting someone over something that had nothing whatsoever to do with politics and did have to do with race, color, creed, sexual orientation, etc.. As disgusting as I found that — and it permanently ended any chance that I would ever consider anything you have to say worthwhile again — I declined to ban you for it because I didn’t see that it violated our guidelines. I was overruled.
Libertarians don’t believe in freedom of speech on private property (which they consider the internet to be). They also tend to be thin-skinned (like Raimondo).
1) No, libertarians don’t consider the Internet to be private property. They consider it what it is: A network of networks linking various nodes, some of which are private property.
2) Antiwar.com is an antiwar web site that happens to have been started by libertarians and which continues to have a heavy libertarian presence on its staff. It is not a libertarian web site. There’s a difference.
3) The idea that Raimondo is still a libertarian is eminently debatable.
Whatever. I am surprised at how thin-skinned most people are, regardless of their politics.
Your statement is wrong. I tried to explain why, but two my comments were deleted.
No, they weren’t. They were automatically held in moderation until I rescued one and deleted the duplicate. Do you really have a persecution complex, or do you just play someone who does on the Internet?
I have no clue how your system works. Some comments automatically hold, others not. Some comments disappeared and never appeared again.
Huffpost does have a story about Gabbard:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tulsi-gabbard-met-with-assad_us_58891f5ce4b0737fd5cb6d29
I didn’t find it on Huffpost because they must have it buried pretty deep but I found it by googling ‘Gabbard’. Nothing very committed in the story though, other than a hint of demonizing. Definitely no bouquets of flowers.
So at least it’s hit the mainstream today. We’ll see if any t.v. media picks it up.
This is what I mean by fake news Her meeting Assad is not even mentioned . And I think her meeting is the most important meeting United States has been involved in Syria for several years .. If you don’t listen to the news you are uninformed If you do listen to the news you are misinformed . Maybe with Trump we can win
Can’t wait to see how Justin tries to dig his way out of this one.
Interfering in Syria is a mistake for the USA at this point.
Not if we join the right side , and truly do humanitarian things , It sounds like Assad would welcome safe zones . Iam sure Syria needs a lot of help after the Hell we helped put them through .
So much for Trump not getting us into imperial wars like that dangerous and unstable Hillary Clinton. Who was it on this site who has been saying repeatedly that Trump is the second coming of Robert Taft? Looking less likely all the time.
Safe zones in Syria require the destruction of the Syrian air defense system- and the Russian air defenses as well.
War with China and Russia both, at the same time. Wonderful.
I think Trump will establish a safe zone in Syria .Now you say Assad agrees with a safe zone . Even doctor Ben Carson suggested a safe zone in Syria .. At the time Syrians were flooding into the United States as refugees , Where if these refugees could turn out be Islamic terrorist we would rather not have them here . The only reason that I did not want safe zones Is a faulty dishonest safe zones could turn into protected areas for the Syrian terrorists to operate out of ..
I thought that in the old old days everyone that lived around Palestine, eventually intermarried and did the anthropology thing. The Khazars were from – well close to where I live now but they are a different breed altogether. Just my limited observations. I have problems posting to – I live RU/Kryme