President Trump is considering an executive order that would give the State Department and Pentagon 90 days to give him a plan to establish safe zones in Syria. Trump has insisted that the US will “absolutely do safe zones in Syria for the people.”
Syrian rebels expressed some general support for the idea of a safe zone, but also appeared skeptical anything would come of the announcement, insisting that they are still waiting for the US to take action, after years of being disappointed expecting US measures in their favor.
The Syrian government hasn’t commented at all on the matter, but Russian officials were critical of the idea, saying it would “exacerbate the situation” in Syria, and that the US needs to weigh all the potential consequences before taking such actions.
Russian officials insisted they were never consulted on the idea of a safe zone, though that may reflect how early in the planning stages this is, since Trump is only seeking plans for doing so, and not actually announcing the safe zones yet, beyond vague intentions to eventually do so.
Previous discussion of safe zones under the Obama Administration were largely rejected over concerns about the large military force the US would need to commit to defend such zones, as well as the risk of starting wars with a limited no-fly zone.
Safe zones in Syria with Russia and Assad enforcing Trumps no fly zone over the safe Zones . I think there are Chinese and Russian forces already there So the blue helmets or Assad could police the safe zones where weapons are not aloud .. I think Turkey Germany and the EU should fork over the money because most of the displaced Syrians would end up as refugees in there countries with out safe zones anyway . Very few of the moderate rebels want to continue the war with the ALNusra , ISIS , head chopping partners they have ended up with . Most Syrians Would love to get out of this war and have been trying to escape to Assad’s side for much of the past year . The Terrorists are going to be hard to separate from the moderates . only Syria can do it .
Like Qaddafi did in Libya? Oh wait. Please don’t sugarcoat a stupid idea because it’s Trump’s.
there would be NO displaced persons if it wasn’t for US funds in the first place, the US started this regime change action and they used Al Qaeda to do it, Rebels Insurgents actually TERRORISTS! The United States of America is a STATE SPONSOR OF TERRORISM! by the way erc there are NO Moderates there, they are Terrorists all of them!
What rebels? The terrorists like the idea, certainly. Safe spaces are growing thin for them.
Trump may or may not understand but he needs to be briefed on the fact that the US is not interested in keeping the Syrian people safe.
That’s the reason why your message is so right on mr. Mir.
It’s most likely that Trump has been advised that this is the right thing to do by the hawks with which he’s surrounding himself.
The biggest fear is that they will maneuver Trump into a position in which he will have no option other than a show of great strength.
To imagine that Trump is aware of what he’s doing or of what he needs to do on foreign policy is a big mistake. We’re even beginning to see now that he isn’t even aware of how to handle domestic issues. Quite amazing considering that he is supposed to be a selfmade billionaire!
This is a man who is obviously a corporate psychopath who is propelled by his vanity more than any other factor.
How did he fool so many people? He was able to fool people such as Raimondo who is no amateur to this kind of fakery; no wonder he fooled the lowlife in America so easily.
All water under the bridge. Now we have to get through 4 years (max) without a nuclear war.
He didn’t need to fool anybody to get elected. The alternative was a raving, rabid lunatic bitch in heat for war.
In the first place America has no right proposing any action in Syria, Haven’t we done enough damage already?
“Previous discussion of safe zones under the Obama Administration were
largely rejected over concerns about the large military force the US
would need to commit to defend such zones, as well as the risk of
starting wars with a limited no-fly zone.”
Obama wanted safe zones for the rebels (‘terrorists’) that the US government has been supplying. Obama also wanted to dismember Syria and the ‘safe zones’ would become new alNusra- or ISIS-run caliphates. Let’s hope this is not what Trump is talking about.
Not sure if evil or stupid.
Both.
What is with overreading everything Trump does. So far, requested that Secretaries of State and Defence provide a plan for safe areas for refugee return in 90 days.
The official reaction from Moscow was — this is US sovereign decision. Translate, do not read a colusion in this, please. And yes, there could be problems if not properly prepared.
This is separate from war on ISIS — as ISIS is not in control of many regions of both countries. However, being back to using word “rebels” is not helpful. At least now we have two broad groups after Astana. One that participated and signed on to formalized ceasefire and started work on principles of Constitution, while others are out of it: Al-Nusra and allies, and ISIS. Neither of them are “rebels”. The first group consists of mostly warlord run groups, chiefly based on loyalties by clans. All of them are converts to Salafi teaching, and as far as I know, they were inspired by Saudi preachers, food supplies, money and arms. Those groups had fierce loyalties of their own villages, but hated and despised in other neighboring villages. This is a direct outcome of the Western delegitimizing of Syria state institutions, and the expectations that these institutions will eventually fall. But at the same time, there are by far more towns and villages that are loyal to Syria — especially in their. army. After Russian intervention, many of the smaller Salafi groups were faced with the decision. To reconcile with neighboring clans and the Government using inducements of the Russia run Reconcilistion Center, or keep fighting. And their choice was –either Al-Qaeda/Nusra or another large warlord based group that received funding from many sources. In most cases, warlords of Ahrar Al-Sham or Jaish Al -Islam were chosen. But those — be that for the same of funding or arms, more often then not worked with Al-Nusra. US, being strong supporter of Al-Nusra kept on pointing to warlord groups — to indicate the impossibility of separation. But for as long as there groups were tied to Al-Nusra by the umbillical cord of money and arms, yes, it was getting impossible. After the defeat in Aleppo, Al-Nusra foreign advisors were captured and their names and countries of origin read in Security Council. With the loss — Ahrar Al-Sham, Jaish Al-Islam and many free lancing Free Syria Army, started abandoning the Al-Nusra ship in Idlib. FSA split –some joined Turkish Army, others went to Astana, some stayed with Al-Nusra. This prompted Al-Nusra to attack Ahrar Al-Sham and FSA, in order to control Idlib. This has left Al-Nusra without a fig leaf of cooperation with “opposition”.
It is important to stress that the warord run groups committed unspeakable crimes against civilians — some for their cult intolerance of Shia or Christians, and others for their animosity towards other Sunni clans and competing warlords. But — in all cases, they were Syrians, with high percentage of Iraqi refugees that came to Syria following the fall of Sadam Hussein.
Al-Nusra, like ISIS, are heavy internationalized. And they not only get their money and arms from their sponsors, but their political, military and intelligence from a murkey array of sponsors.
So — if one can explain WHICH of the two groups is optimistic about Trump’s proposal? Is Al-Nusra still hoping Theresa May eill make their day, and let Al-Nusra in Idlib be the saint protector of refugees? Or are Kurds hoping theyvwill be honored with a state of their own in the name of refugee resettlement by the border? Or any of the two big warlords?
To listen to Trump deniers — he will swoop into Turkey and Jordan, take refugees, and irrespective of the current battlefields in Syria — take a chunk of territory, create safe camps, place refugees, and tell Syria, Russia and Turkey, to back off. Then he will surround the places by US soldiers, and defend them, feed them, provide employment, health care and education in perpetuity. Somehow, I do not think it will be this unilateral.
Two reasons for that — one, Democratic Congresswoman Gabbard from Hawaii has for years been advocating that US stops arming militants of all stripes in Syria using CIA. After Trump got elected, he met with her. A week ago she visited Syria, travelled, talked to people, met with Assad, and gave interviews. She said flatly that regime change is not in US interest. And that she could not find any evidence of “moderate” rebels. Second reason, Trump will have a phone call with Putin this Saturday. So, coordination is already under way.
Another sign of open alliances in Syria was yesterday’s bombing of ISIS positions at Al-Bab between Turkish and Russian airforce, “approved by Syrian government”. At the same time, Syrian Army is pushing ISIS in the countryside around Al-Bab. All the speculations about the role of Turkey military have been put quiey to rest.
Why are units of Free Syrian Army that joined Turkish Army to fight ISIS now suddenly being labeled as “mercenaries”, while those in Al-Nusra dominared Idlib are still being given the dignity of being called “rebels”. And those that are actually working for Al-Nusra — are promoted to “opposition”.
In fact, we could simplify the vocabulary by calling them all mercenaries, since all armed groups regardless of the ideological bent — serve at the mercy of one or more foreign government.
Al Nusra is and always was the US preferred Insurgents the so called MODERATE INSURGENTS but Al Nusra front used to be called Al Qaeda in Iraq, and that is the group that Killed US Marines Soldiers sailors Airmen and others in Iraq! Al Nusra is also where ISIS was spawned from! Rebels would denote that they were in fact Syrians and they are not they are foreign fighters and Terrorists!
Of course the rebels want safe zones they want to use them as a base of operations! Simple if the United States had not decided that firstly it had the right to fund regime change there would not be a problem in the first instance secondly to actually be STUPID enough to use AL QAEDA IN IRAQ as their regime change agent albeit with a quick name change to Al Nusra front so the US public didn’t realize this and then use the even more stupid argument of bringing democracy to Syria and then use a group that BELIEVES in the antithesis of democracy a theocratic dictatorship just beggars belief! Best way to fix this problem is for the US to leave Syria including their funding efforts of Terrorist groups because believe me they ARE terrorists.