With ISIS all but eliminated from Syria, the US has been trying to transition its strategy into an open-ended military presence, with an eye toward picking a fight with Iran, and imposing regime change on the Assad government at some point.
That strategy looks to be in tatters today, as Turkey’s invasion of northern Syria seems to be changing the situation on the ground in such a way as the US military presence may no longer be sustainable.
Turkey’s invasion as threatening to overrun all of the Kurdish YPG’s territory, and all of America’s deployments in Syria are within YPG territory, often embedded with YPG forces. This is setting the stage for a US clash with Turkey, as Turkey demands the US withdraw from Manbij, a YPG-held city.
Manbij is the demand right now because it’s the next target, but with Turkey telegraphing attacks on everywhere else in the country, the US is going to be ordered out of all that territory eventually, and with Turkey still seething over US support for the Kurds, they’re probably not going to let them keep their troops deployed in the territory.
Where this ends up is anyone’s guess, as Turkey seems to be betting the US will withdraw rather than risk a clash with another NATO member, and the US seems to be struggling to figure out what to do next. Either way, the US just keeping its troops stationed there and waiting for a chance to go after Iran and/or Assad is no longer an option, and if they want to stay in Syria at all the US is likely going to have to figure out something Turkey will accept, at the expense of the Kurdish alliance.
The disarming Kurds option will not work. If Kurds were to take over the space US has delineated, then — Kurds being just a small minirity in most places, other then Kobane core, they will need to be armed to keep unfriendly Arabs under occupation. So, what can US offer? I have no idea. Turkey must now clear the border and establish control, as otherwise it will be business as usual — arms and wealons flowing between Kurds on both sides of border. Nobody wants it. Neither Turkey nor Iran. They all need a period of peace, end of violence to start talking rationally about Kurdish regions real needs. This will not happen for as long as there is foreign interference that keeps ghe region in constant warfare. It is hard to imagine what US can do to appease Turkey. There can be a face saving model — US withdrawing and NATO member Turkey taking over peacekeeping in the region across Euphrates, with Kurds having local autonomy in Kobane, while Turkey takes iver border control. Turkey can over time turn over the Arab areas to Damascus control, arrange border controls with Iraq and Syria. US needs good working relationship eith all actors in the region to remain relevant and consulted. At the same time, fhings are unravelling in South Yemen, hopefully they divide it back ghe way it was before unification that never worked for anyone.
I agree those are the options the US is trying to keep open. However “transition its strategy” begs the question of “what strategy” or rather “which.” The US has been all over the place, on all sides of fighting, killing its own allies just across the border. It has been totally nuts for many years. It is almost a war between the various US agencies, CIA, Special Forces, regular Army, State Dept, and more.
The US militants goal, is to destroy any and all (save one) functioning middle east societies, that is what is observed. Oh, and profiting from it any way possible.
I don’t know why the United States wanted to fight ISIS ? while Al Qaida ,Al Nusra , the moderate rebels and even Turkey all have much the same goals .
Could Turkey possibly win a fight with U.S. forces in the region? If there is a fight, how far would American military defend their position? lf they are determined to keep it, I don’t see an outcome for Turkey other than a very bloody nose (translate, lots of Turkish bodies). Or is our military really that weak, with the trillions of $$ pried from taxpayers’ wallets?
No; the U.S. would retaliate with hybrid war and Turkey would be crippled by terrorist attacks, internet hacks, economic instability, popular unrest, trade and diplomatic slights and global media smears.
Putin makes resisting the U.S. look easy, but it hasn’t been for Russia. Russia wasn’t blind when U.S. special forces crossed onto north Syria. They had to let it go.
IS is not eliminated; where they’re not in enclaves they’ve gone underground or embedded with other DAESH groups. That the U.S. is using their return as a pretext to remain should affirm that IS ratlines are still running.
All those IS troops seen voluntarily leaving Raqqa and elsewhere unmolested by SDF troops is nowhere the same as reconciliation deals Syria and Russia cut with indigenous rebels.
U.S. strategy is far from doomed. They’re playing the Kurdistan card, as the Kurds are the best replacement for the IS. Kurds are organic to every state in the region including Iran.
If Sykes-Picot left out Kurdistan for a reason; this is it.
What can “stationed troops” do? They can be…given orders, recalled at any time, asked to share all their equipment, attack the enemy, only do biz with “allies”, provide security, say the right things, don’t say the wrong things, & look good on a map. If they were, say, the US Congress, they can vote spending & laws the way you want it to go. If they were the courts, they probably rule in your favor, and they don’t order an investigation of you.