Why the West is Standing by Amid Russia's Campaign in Syria

Why the West is Standing by Amid Russia's Campaign in Syria by Howard LaFranchi, Christian Science Monitor

… The West’s inaction in the face of the recent Russian onslaught in Syria – which is in support of the army of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad – has several explanations, regional experts say. Those range from a desire to keep Moscow on board the sputtering Syria peace process to the emphasis by the United States and France, since the Paris and San Bernardino terrorist attacks, on the effort to degrade the so-called Islamic State.

But the key reason appears to be that no one in the West has the appetite to confront Russia as it pursues its interests in the Middle East.

“Russia has very clear intentions and is using military means to accomplish them,” says Heather Conley, director of the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington. “At the same time our aims are not so clear, and we are using soft means to try to accomplish those unclear goals.”…

Read on.

Comments

First of all, anything sourced only from social media has to be treated as unverified and suspect. Lots of exaggeration, distortion, and downright invention on social media.

I don't know why you keep invoking the US mainstream media. They know their market and they aren't going to bother with stories that their market isn't concerned with.

The question of whether such things are or are not "ethnic cleansing", and the extent to which they are an issue for the EU and NATO, have to be taken up by the EU and NATO. The US can participate in that process, but the US must not under any circumstances be forced or manipulated into he role of unilateral enforcer of international law. That is a very bad place to be and it is hard to imagine how such a role could serve the interests of the US.

The frequent misbehavior of groups that have received US support ("US proxy" is a huge exaggeration) just illustrates the risks involved in supporting any of these actors. All of them are pursuing their own perceived interests, none of those interests coincide with US interests, and none of the groups can be reliably controlled, or in many cases even significantly influenced, by the US. No real logic in handing out assistance in an environment like that.

Dayuhan and Bill....this is being carried by social media and where is the counter US MSM reporting of YPG ethnic cleansing of Arab Sunni towns and villages being taken by them and supported by the US as their proxy....

Again reread to the posted comment the Kurdish info and then go back a reread the HRW and AI reports of YPG ethnic cleansing of Arab Sunni territory under their control.....

You do realize that the areas around Aleppo have been basically Arab and Sunni since 1104 BUT the Kurds claim it for themselves because they held it in 1103.....

SDF arrested 100s of boys(15-18) in #alHano_UmJarn & #alFarhany villages and warned #alTayna village of new arrests & destruction of the villages will happen as well if they "try something" against #SDF
#Hasakah #Syria FEB 20

If ethnic cleansing is not a problem for you.....it is a "political/military problem" now for the EU and NATO....

SDF stealing houses, cars, goods, personal objects of civilians houses in #Tel_Refaat & taking w/ convoy to #Efrin
#Aleppo cs #Syria FEN 20

For NATO/EU this simply means more refugees does it not....?

And never tell me there is right now not a serious right wing threat to both NATO and the EU from within ...if you had been following the Ukrainian thread you would have known about the neo Nazi and right wing party meeting sponsored by Russia in St. Petersburg 2015 ....AND you would have known that Le Pen has asked Putin this week for 27M Euros for the French elections and then this....

THEN tell me that the EU and NATO are not internally unravelling being driven by a Russian supported anti immigrate info war directed straight at them...AND driven by a refugee flow being created daily by the RuAF.....AND has this particular cause and effect been addressed by the US...not really they even supported it at Munich 1938.

European hard Right meet in Poland to discuss how to destroy EU, with Russian help
https://twitter.com/gazeta_wyborcza/status/700848753557663744 …

BY THE WAY you do know the old rule of the intel world....80% of all intelligence comes from "open source".....and you better now fully understand what is flowing on social media because 85% of it is not being reported by MSM...question is why.

If you had followed the Syrian thread one poster indicated that yes the US had indeed been bombing in places not being mentioned in the US and his editor of a well known aviation journal killed the story and a follow up on another bombing story...why is that??

Right now I hate to tell you far more information is flowing on Ukraine and Syria on the social media side than you are absolutely not reading about in MSM.....

Bill...two part answer and it is rather easy...NATO members are largely also EU members and with both organizations it takes a full majority MEANING all members must support any decision made..THIS is the exact weakness inside both NATO and the EU as we saw yesterday with the Brits.....

Refugee difficulties within EU is an automatic problem to be solved by NATO and as we have seen with Putin....the EU is waffling now on sanctions and it is harder to keep them in place...the same goes for NATO....while all claim to be onboard with pushing Russia back NOT all are investing in their defense costs ie UK, Germany and France which have basically cut their militaries to virtually nothing since 1991.

Example....I watched NATO take 4.5 years to make doctrinal word changes to exactly THREE words in a doctrinal manual.....

NOW for the Kurds and much here will be news to Americans reading and or not reading US MSM....

Bill….yes I fully understand the Kurds far more than many in the US do…worked in Diyala and whoever worked there ran into the Kurds and their actions there mirror those as to what theYPG is doing today in Arab territory taken by YPG.

Melodrama..interesting mainly someone sitting far closer to the current Syrian problems that where many sit right now in the US…and now in a city with 80K Syrian refugees……with more coming daily and one who sits an eight hour drive to Kyiv.......

Taken from the Syrian thread….

Syrian Kurds have a huge problem. This is that there is a giant gap between impressons their lobbyists in the West have created in the public - and reality.

In the public, they're presented as a sort of monolithic block, in which all Kurds think the same way, are 'pro-democracy', 'pluralist', 'tollerant', and - most importantly - 'anti-Daesh'.

In reality, this is simply BS. Nothing else.

There are at least three blocks of Syrian Kurds:
- one centred around that PYD
- one centred around remnants of about 14-15 different Kurdish parties, groupped within the Kurdish National Council (KNC), which in turn is closely tied to the KRG (Kurdish government in northern Iraq)
- and one that can't care less about the PYD and the KNC, and is fighting against Assad (see that Liwa Sallahaddin of the FSyA).

Problem: PYD is in complete dominance of politics of Syrian Kurds, but it is impossible to gauge which group enjoys greater popularity because neither the PYD nor the KNC ever cared to organize any kind of free elections (and are unlikely to do that in foreseeable future).

Essence of this problem is that calling the PYD an 'offshot' of the PKK (declared terrorist organization not only by Turkey, but NATO and USA at least since 1997) is an understatement. It is actually the 'Syrian branch of the PKK'. And it's not only as violent, militant and as intollerant as the PKK, but also maintaining as close links to the Assad regime (i.e. its intel agencies) as the PKK does. The PYD is smashing all sorts of dissent and protest against it, assassinating or forcing into exile any members of the KNC it can put its hands upon. And if not, then the Assadist intel agencies are doing that for it.

Theoretically, this should mean that the PYD should not have plenty of supporters within Syrian Kurds. However, thanks to the regime letting the PYD to take over a number of its garrisons in NE Syria, back in 2012, it had it easy to take over most of different Kurdish militias, and thus impose itself in control of that YPG. So, YPG is now de-facto PYD's military wing.

And now I'll come to the actual point of this post:

Because the PYD is actually 'Syrian branch' of the PKK, and the PKK remains primarily concerned with fighting Turkey, the PYD is primarily concerned with countering Turkish interests in Syria through establishing itself in power and consolidating control over Kurdish areas of Syria. A bi-product of this effort is creation of that 'Rojava' - a 'Kurdish state' inside Syria.

Make no mistakes: these two issues are centre-pieces of PYD's activity.

On the contrary, for the West the PYD is 'great news' - because it's said to be 'fighitng Daesh'. This is actually BS. The PYD didn't move small finger against Daesh before this assaulted the Ayn al-Arab ('Kobane') area, in 2014. Even ever since, it's actually remained extremely reluctant to launch a counter-offensive - supposedly 'for lack of weapons' (pure bollocks, considering how much arms they've got from Assadists). Their counteroffensive in NE Syria of 2015 was launched only after plenty of pressure from the DC. As soon as it reached the verge of areas predominantly populated by Kurds, that operation was stopped (and gains consolidated through ethnic cleansings of surviving local Arab population).

Even then, the PYD/YPG continued refusing to advance against the Daesh before Washington forced them to enter alliance with local Arab insurgents (FSyA), which resulted in creation of the SDF. The FSyA then suggested an advance on Raqqa - and nearly everybody bought this story: remember collossal announcements (particularly from Moscow) of a corresponding advance from back in December.

What happened instead?

Well, why should Kurds go shedding own blood for Syrian Arabs, right?

The PYD is perfectly happy by having created a tactical advantage for PKK's operations against Turkey. There's no doubt they've made this perfectly clear in Washington too (i.e. that they've said: we're not going to attack Daesh before we have connected Afrin enclave with YPG-controlled territory east of Euphrates).

Correspondingly, instead of ordering the SDF to attack Daesh, Oblabla ordered its re-deployment - via Turkey - to Afrin enclave, and attack on Azaz corridor (now pocket), back in November. Back then, hardly anybody paid attention; but since early February and these attacks on Menngh, Azaz and Tel Rifaat, we see what's actually going on.

Of course, there's no need to worry about image of the PYD, i.e. Syrian Kurds in the Western public: this is babbled that the reason for their attack on Azaz is presence of 'JAN, al-Qaida and Daesh' - although so far it didn't move small finger against all of these....

That fourth block is Daesh.

Kurds friendly to Daesh?

'Impossible'. Kurds are so pluralistic, and demoractic, and tollerant, and non-religious, and so lovely...

Actually, it is so that thousands of Kurds have joined. At the time the Daesh overrun Tabqa AB, back in summer 2014, certain assessments indicated that up to one third of the Daesh in Syria consists of Kurds. It's long since I've lost the count on how many of videos released by Daesh after they overrun Tabqa one could hear people either speaking one of Kurdish languages, or Turkish with strong Kurdish accent - or Farsi with strong Kurdish accent.

Sure, most of the Daesh-Kurds in question were subsequently exterminated by US air power during the 'YPG'- counteroffensive that removed the Daesh from all of NE Syria (together with two 'American' battalions of the Daesh, BTW).

But ask people: 'nah, this is impossible'. At best, 'no story'. And it remains 'impossible' even after Vice published its report about Iraqi Kurds that joined the Daesh; after FT and few other MSM-outlets have published report citing Kurds being the party that's buying most of oil from the Daesh (only to sell most of that to Israel); that Kurdish 'middlemen' are heavily involved in Daesh's slave trade; and when 'YPG Commander' Sipan Hemo (who is actually from the PKK) speaks out, then all that matters is that he declared the Daesh for 'defeated'.

Why should anybody care that he also mentioned 1,200 Iranians joining the Daesh...? - in turn confirming that handfull of reports about Iranian authorities arresting people underway to Iraq/Syria to join the Daesh...

Nothing in your reply suggests a credible reason for US involvement.

NATO doesn't need a response to "non linear warfare". It needs to assess the nature and severity of the specific threat, without buzzwords, and decide what response is called for.

The urge to pull triggers should be constrained as much as possible. Once a trigger is pulled it can't be un-pulled, and it is not something you want done easily or impulsively.

Also suggest you read the article from John that I linked to below...a view not often heard in US MSM.......

Suggest you read my response closely...and then read up on the internal decision making processes inside NATO...THERE was a recent complaint that yes NATO is shifting around and trying to develop a response to non linear warfare...BUT the main complaint remains...if Russia moved on the Baltics...yes NATO could militarily respond BUT in order to get all 28 to make the decision YES to do it....could actually take a full year after the Russians arrived ....

That is what you missed......the urge to pull the trigger in Article 5 is far harder than you and or many in the US really want to believe...THUS their push back on the Turks yesterday WHEN in fact Turkey has fulfilled exactly all steps necessary to pull the trigger and it has provided all intel needed for that decision.

They all ran for cover....Russian SS21s a TBM are flying all over Syrian and often landing extremely close to the Turkish border and the US/NATO pulled out their Patriots recently if you remembered......any connection...certainly as the Patriots would have been forced to fire in the defense of NATO air space.....

AND we do not want that to happen do we....??

There will always be disagreement and division within NATO, that is inevitable in any grouping of democratic governments. That should nor be interpreted as weakness or inability to act if needed. Is is actually a sign of strength and health.

It's easy to say "engage smartly and decisively" but there is a serious shortage of practical suggestions on how this can be done. I'm not sure how the US could have meaningfully enforced the red line on chemical weapons use, which I think was a huge mistake to draw in the first place.

Again, at the risk of repetition, clarity of purpose is critical. If we are going to engage we need a clear and consistent assessment of the national interests involved, we need specific, practical goals, and we need a realistic strategy that has a real chance of achieving those goals. I don't see any of those on the table at the moment.

Some of the points were valid, others melodramatic. NATO's original members are now focused on defending Europe again, but disagree on the threat. If Russia oversteps, then the countries will quickly unite. If Russia can avoid provoking a unified response they may weaken NATO, but that will likely be a condition. As for the EU, this is just one of many problems they have, but I agree the Russians are skillfully leveraging the refugee situation to create deeper fissures within the EU. I don't think that is a minor issue.

As for Turkey the comments were somewhat melodramatic. The article stated that if Turkey started a war then many countries will not support a response. If Turkey is attacked then Turkey could provoke article 5 and that would be problematic for NATO. Turkey is strategically located, so it would be problematic if their relationship with NATO becomes strained.

Outlaw refers to the Kurds as though they are one political entity, which is far from reality. He knows this, but other readers may not. There are several different political/identity groups within the Kurdish ethnic group. Some are violently opposed to each other. I don't know what groups we are working with, but the assumption some make that all Kurds are good, and all Arabs are bad is not only simplistic, it is wrong. I think that is Outlaw's point.

Overall the situation is serious and it has been poorly handled. I was against intervention to begin with based on my assumption we didn't understand the players and we would act in ways that simply prolonged the crisis and result in a larger humanitarian crisis. Now that apparently happened, I think we need to engage smartly and decisively to resolve this crisis before it results in a much larger crisis. I wonder where we would be today if we enforced the red line drawn with chemical weapons use? Would Assad have been convinced he was in a no win situation if we committed conventional forces to target his security forces? We seem to be completely lost at the moment, and we're resorting to simpleton counterterrorism rhetoric to describe a much larger problem.

Don't dive into melodrama, NATO is not falling apart, far from it. Actually Russia has given NATO a newly relevant raison d'etre, and that keeps NATO and US/EU relations stronger. Without an external security challenge NATO would eventually collapse into irrelevance. Russia is not achieving anything beyond driving itself further into bankruptcy and isolation.

You seriously need to step back, shut off Twitter for a while, and stop seeing Syria and the Ukraine as the totality of the world or of US interests. In fact the US has only the most peripheral interest in either, and has little or no reason to go to war in either... certainly not directly, and not by proxy either, given the lack of viable proxies.

Saudi Arabia and Turkey may be US allies, but that does not mean that they deserve or can demand automatic, reflexive US support for everything they choose to do, especially when their strategic goals diverge from those of the US. That would be subservience, not alliance, and the US should not do subservience. Alliance also does not mean that the US can or should try to control everything these nations do. They don't do subservience either, and we shouldn't try to force it on them.

So was NATO basically lying .........

Yes, there is real issue of Kurdish determination, but the latest developments is a part of hybrid war. NATO said it was ready for such war.

APPEARS they were not believing that it was a true non linear war...??

John Schindler @20committee

As Hollande is 1st Western leader to publicly admit a Russo-Turkish war over #Syria is a real possibility, I remind:
http://observer.com/2016/02/mounting...-ignite-wwiii/ …

Russia introduced to UNSC draft of resolution on protection of sovereignty of Syria
https://twitter.com/ru_rbc/status/700775137797214208 …

BUT WAIT...did not Putin violate the territorial sovereignty of Ukrainian Crimea and eastern Ukraine....AND the West never called the UNSC for a similar resolution for Ukraine...why not?

Nothing like Russian double standards hard at work.....or better yet non linear warfare.....

These are the most oblivious results of the Obama "standing by".....

The three core Putin geo political goals of his non linear war against the West are slowly being fulfilled and the West does not see it coming.......

1. damaging and discrediting of NATO

Putin has now has succeeded as NATO fully supported Paris in bombing terrorists after the Paris attack BUT tells another NATO country equally threatened and attacked by terrorists this response......because of the Russia/Iranian loudly threatened war if Turkey crosses over.

Breaking: (expected) #NATO will NOT help #Turkey if war breaks out with #Russia -
http://m.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/...www.google.it/ …

NATO evidently does not realize the central value of a NATO member sitting on the Black Sea entrance and controlling a vital portion of the Med. and fielding the largest military force inside the currently very weak military wise NATO....right now Ukraine has more tanks and IFVs than five of the larger NATO members.....

What NATO does not seem to fully understand is that the key to the refugee flow sits in Turkey who has 2.5M Syrian refugees right now with another 150K sitting on their border and could if they wanted to flood the EU just as Greece has done.

What NATO does not realize is that by turning their back on Turkey it will nudge it far closer to the KSA and the two regional powers wll often in the future clash with NATO planning if it does not fit their geo political views for their region....AND Turkey has contributed far more troops to NATO missions over the last 20 years than 15 of the other NATO members combined.....Turkey can now pass on NATO missions if asked....

NOTE: Turkey will be rethinking their position inside NATO after this rejection and the US should not be surprised nor the rest of NATO.

2. damaging and discrediting EU

Putin has succeeded as the EU has absolutely just about unraveled due to the massive flow of Syrian refugees.....and more are coming after the deliberate Russia attack on civilians further driving more into refugee status.....

Refugees being manipulated by cynical #Russian strategy, says #Lithuania ForMin
http://en.delfi.lt/lithuania/foreign....d?id=70445206 …
pic.twitter.com/24MN4R7ta8

NOTE: Turkey has largely supported the 2.5M Syrian refugees on their own dime and the EU had promised 3B Euros to assist BUT has now not even provided a single Euro. Merkel realizes this and is urgently trying to weave Turkey into a coherent EU answer to the refugees...and the EU is dragging it's feet as usual.

NOTE: Turkey has defined for EU/NATO/US a clear and concise statement concerning what they view as a serious threat to their national security and neither US/NATO/EU has even responded to this declaration......even now NATO is shying away

AFP news agency 
‏@AFP
BREAKING Kurdish militant group warns foreign tourists not to visit Turkey: statement

What has been NATO/EU/US response to this threat....do not attack the source of the terrorists BUT we want you to attack IS not the Kurds....BUT WAIT it is the Kurds attacking Turkey...AND Russia is providing them open support..

3. disconnecting the US from NATO and EU..

He is half way there with this NATO decision as the decision was largely driven by the US....as well as the US adamantly holding onto their support of a grouping that are in the eyes of a NATO member...terrorists.....

Anyone want to argue Putin is not "winning" his non linear war against the West.....?????

As I have a number of other US actions that indicate they have been disconnected from the ME and have largely allowed the EU to unravel over the refugee crisis as the refugee crisis is in reality easy to stop ...kick Assad out and stop the bombing...but the US has largely accepted the Russian positions and are following Putin's led now so that is out of the question.......

Further indicators that Turkey is moving into Syria and a 1.2 hour Obama telephone call to Erdogan is not going to stop it as Turkey fully feels the US has sided against both Turkey and Sunni's in their support of the Russian bombing and relentless killing of Syrians BECAUSE Kerry refused to counter the Russian demands to continue their bombing and their unabashed support for the YPG.....

Latest: Russia asks Security Council meeting "urgently." Russia deeply concerned with stated plans by Turkey to send troops in Syria.

NOTE: Appears that Russia does not understand the UN....under the UN Charter any member state that defines a serious national security threat has the inherent right to defend itself...nothing the UNSC says and or does cannot revoke the Charter rights...

US State dept spox once again refutes Turkish official, this time Turkish FM Cavusoglu, saying "US trusts YPG until otherwise proven"

Does the US simply not care any more about NATO falling apart?

Erdogan live: I'm disappointed w/ West, we've provided documents. Why don't they designate YPG as terrorists.

Dayuhan...it is not so far fetched when the exact same YPG is now being accused in areas they have taken over in and around Aleppo of stealing virtually anything belonging to the Arab Sunni's that were driven out not nailed not and transporting it to Afrin Canton...Kurdish region if you know Syria.

If US "advisors" are aware of this and do nothing then under international humanitarian law they can be hauled into court for "ethnic cleansing" and a President should be careful he is not associated to the "cleansing" on his or her watch.

No so far fetched is it?

No President should ever answer a social media comment. Ever. That's a ridiculous idea.

Obama needs an urgent answer to this posted social media comment....

American special forces participate in the YPG ethnic cleansing operations in northern Syria .......

There were in fact clear photos of either CIA or US SOF personnel standing near YPG personnel of one particular unit that has been often accused of ethnic cleansing by the HWR and AI.....will not link to the photos due to OPSEC reasons but they are out on the net for all to see...but it is a serious accusation if US military/CIA personnel are in and around proven ethnic cleansing and or have direct knowledge of that and do not report it..

Does in fact Obama support the YPG's ethnic cleansing of Sunni Arabs from areas that are being taken over by YPG in the name of fighting IS??

Am assuming that this was not posted by any member of YPG as the photos are very clear and close to the US personnel in question.

This was clearly stated to the German media outlet Der Spiegel thus fact checked....either the US has "allowed it" which I doubt as it has been the standard Obama policy to block delivery for over 4 years of MANPADs even though certain groups were in fact vetted similar to the TOWs...WHICH have flowed fast and heavy after the US stopped them...again probably w/o US approval.

OR what I am assuming...the Saudi's are no longer listening to the US as they view Obama weak and a failure and they are moving to defend their national security that they stated they would do.....just as Turkey has stated they will defend their national security with or without the US.

Saudi FM al-Jubeir to Der Spiegel: We will provide the moderate oppo in Syria with surface-to-air missiles to deter Assad jets & helicopters

When an American President is constantly "standing by" and constantly only talking "soft power" with no leverage...at some point this failure gets you this....

Where will Vova strike next?
“It is now a strategy of geopolitical confrontation..It could be anywhere in the world"
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/19/vladimir-putin-syria-campa… …

Turkey can close #Incirlik airbase to US jets, says #Erdogan advisor
http://www.yenisafak.com/gundem/seref-malkoc-incirlik-ussu-abdye-kapati… …

And the negative reporting just keeps coming in on this failure...what many in the US do not understand is that a private US/Erdogan agreement was in place ......the YPG would not advance beyond a certain point in Syria...for that agreement in place then Turkey allowed the USAF the use of Incirlik AB....now that private agreement has been badly violated by both the US and their proxy YPG..thus the threat which is not a threat BUT rather a statement of fact.

This is exactly what the Turks were warning the US on their support and still their support to YPG....

YPG:

“We’ll abolish rotten borders.. make Erdogan drown in his blood.. fight of [Syria] is the fight of [#Turkey]”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqM20tkzOK0 …

This is what led to the Turkish blunt warning to the US...choose either Turkey or the YPG but choose wisely......

Appears Obama, CIA and CENTCOM choose unwisely????????

AND YPG is not a terrorist organization?...and since when does the US actively feed, arm and funded terrorist activities?????

Well that highly touted Obama Syrian strategy is now totally in shambles it appears and that great anti IS force that Obama, CIA and CENTCOM trained, feed, funded and armed is doing exactly what now.....fighting for Assad and Putin?

Who would have ever stated a US President spent US taxpayers money in training Russian para military units...would have been declared "crazy" by US MSM...?????

Assad’s adviser Bouthaina Shaaban says YPG has partnered w/ regime forces to liberate #Syria from “terrorism” I.e. Anyone who is anti-Assad

Obama is simply "standing by" as he is now out of whatever very limited ideas he had.......BEGS though a core question...has Obama played the US civil society in that he has actually been supporting all along Putin's expansionism efforts in Ukraine and now Syria...it is a valid question now that one can evaluate his actual moves in both areas...which fit nicely into Putin's efforts of damaging NATO, EU and yes even the US.

Worth reading.....long read on just how bad Obama, CIA and CENTCOM "got it"....and goes to the heart of Obama's "standing by"....and it virtually shreds any pretense that Obama is interested in attacking and defeating IS which goes against all the statements to the contrary coming out of this WH....that they are attacking and defeating IS to protect the US.

http://mme.cm/JWAW00

Kyle Orton

Published: 17/02/2016 07:32 PM

America picked the wrong allies against the Islamic State

Quote:

Over the last six weeks the regime of Bashar al-Assad—which by this point means in most areas Iranian-run ground forces and Russian air power—have made territorial gains in northern Syria that threaten the existence of the armed opposition in the area. This threat has been compounded by the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) and allies, which have also drawn on Russian airstrikes to attack the rebellion in the same areas. The US-led coalition against the Islamic State (ISIS) has made the PYD its main proxy inside Syria—the only force that can call in coalition airstrikes. This policy was obviously flawed given the view of the PYD by necessary anti-ISIS allies like Turkey and the demographic realities of ISIS, which require Sunni Arabs to be able to police their area and ensure that ISIS begins to look like a protector of Sunnis if Kurds occupy Arab areas; the PYD now attacking the crucial anti-ISIS demographic in alliance with the regime underlines that fact.

The Rebellion Surrounded in Aleppo

On January 12, an important rebel stronghold in north-eastern Latakia, on the Syrian coast, fell to an ideologically diverse pro-Assad coalition: the Syrian Arab Army, the National Defence Force (the largely-Alawite, Iran-built sectarian militia that has overshadowed the SAA), Mihrac Ural's al-Muqawama as-Suriya (ostensibly Communist), the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (the irredentist outfit descended from, as its party symbol attests, European fascism), and Iraqi Shiite jihadists under the control of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The Latakia offensive was heavily directed by Russian military advisers and possibly included Russian troops. The offensive was carried into Aleppo, where the IRGC-led pro-Assad forces, backed by Russian airstrikes, set their sights on the narrow corridor in the north of the province around Marea and Azaz that kept supplies coming in from Turkey to the rebel enclave in eastern Aleppo city that rules over more than half-a-million people.

The rebels had been struggling to hold the Azaz corridor since the second week of Russia's intervention, which began on September 30, when Moscow killed hundreds of rebels in Aleppo, clearing the way for ISIS to sweep into areas the rebels had held them out of for years. ISIS's territorial advances in Aleppo in October 2015 were the largest since their capture of Ramadi and Palmyra five months earlier. This brought the pro-Assad and ISIS frontlines into contact; they made no move against one-another as the Assadists advanced on Azaz.

Meanwhile, the PYD was bearing down on the rebellion from the east. On January 2, the PYD pushed the rebels out of Tanab, a demarcation point between the PYD-held Efrin canton and the rebel-held corridor. The PYD claimed to have defeated Jabhat al-Nusra (al-Qaeda in Syria). The rebels were in fact al-Jabhat al-Shamiya (The Levant Front), Ahrar al-Sham, and three Free Syrian Army (FSA)-branded groups: The First Regiment, Division 13, and Division 16. The PYD would often use the Nusra pretext when attacking rebels, where they didn't outright deny their involvement and claim it was an intra-Arab dispute between PYD-aligned Arab militias like Jaysh al-Thuwar and jihadist-Salafists.

A Deniable Ally

Jaysh al-Thuwar has been flagged as part of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), an American-orchestrated conglomeration into which the PYD folded its armed wing, the People's Protection Units (YPG). The YPG was to give the PYD some deniability—originally the YPG was intended to be a broad-based armed formation of all Kurdish factions—but the PYD is undoubtedly still the leader of the YPG and now the SDF, both of which are "front groups for the Kurdistan Workers' Party or PKK," which has waged an insurgency against the Turkish state since 1984. That the PYD—in any of its iterations—is synonymous with the PKK is currently being denied by both the naïve and those with an agenda to push because the PKK is a registered terrorist organization.

Those with an agenda include the US State Department. After saving the Kurdish city of Kobane in northern Syria went from non-strategic to imperative in the space of two weeks in October 2014, the US fell into an alliance with the PYD, which became the only force in Syria able to call in US airstrikes. By the summer of 2015, the Obama administration preferred the PYD over its own trained rebel groups. The terrorism laws thus have to be circumvented—in this case, by flat denial. Just last week, the State Department said it remains "very firm" in opposing the PKK, but continues to regard the PYD as an asset.

Despite the denials, the PYD/YPG's own fighters don't make a secret of their organization's subservience to the PKK's command structure. When the US's envoy to the anti-ISIS coalition, Brett McGurk, journeyed to Kobane he met with one of the PYD's founders, Polat Can, who just happens to be a veteran officer of the PKK. In late January 2016, with Turkey and the PKK back at war, an English-speaking foreign fighter for the YPG was featured in a video calling for more foreign volunteers to either join the YPG or at least carry out terrorist attacks against Turkey. The YPG does not just take orders from the PKK's leadership in the Qandil Mountains, however. The extent of the PKK's dominance over the YPG can be seen in the YPG's self-reported casualty figures: between January 2013 and January 2016, half of the Kurds killed fighting for the YPG came from Turkey.

Peace Talks as Cover for a Military Escalation

On February 3, the pro-Assad coalition succeeded in cutting the rebels' supply line into Turkey, severing it south of Tel Rifaat, and connecting up with the pro-regime villages of Nubl and Zahra, which had been under incomplete sieges by insurgents essentially since the regime was forced out of northern Rif of Aleppo in July 2012. As the Iranian-led pro-Assad coalition moved toward tightening a siege on eastern Aleppo city on the ground, Russia bombarded it from the air. Within days, 70,000 people had fled from Aleppo, many toward Turkey.

In a masterly piece of maskirovka, the Russians announced their agreement to a ceasefire on Friday, which contained a loophole for continued strikes on terrorists big enough to permit Russia to bomb anyone they liked and claim to be adhering to the ceasefire, and which would allow Russia a week of internationally-sanctioned time to make its gains in Aleppo and then blame the rebels for breaking the ceasefire when they refused to be bound by the lines Russia would try to freeze in place after its aggression.

The proximate cause of this catastrophe was the Geneva III negotiations. It was obvious before the negotiations started that the Assad regime was too strong for negotiations to be meaningful and that swiftly the US was going to be faced with the choice of allowing the collapse of a process it was invested in, or forcing its own side to accept the edicts of the other side.

The US gave a strong indication of which track it was taking when it deliberately weakened the rebel hand in the run-up to these talks—stopping the shipment of TOW anti-tank missiles, among other things—ostensibly on the premise that it would make peace more likely. But—even on the best reading, where the intention was not to help defeat the rebels altogether—this was folly. The US cannot calibrate something like this with any delicacy: it either means to supply enough pressure to force Assad out, or it doesn't. But more than that: a strategy of weakening what is purportedly your own side would rely on the patrons of the other side doing the same, and they didn't and never claimed they would. To the contrary: they saw an opening and took it—obviating the need for talks at all, if they succeed. As one Western diplomat put it: "It'll be easy to get a ceasefire soon because the opposition will all be dead."

One view is that this is bad negotiating; another view—already prevalent in Syria—is that this is deliberate. If the US allows the destruction of the moderate rebels and lets the pro-Assad coalition make this a binary choice—the dictator or the terrorists—as they have wanted to all along, it won't matter if the US deliberately ran out the clock on those it claimed to be supporting or is engaged in post-facto rationalization. Everyone saw the US's pro-Iran tilt, symbolized most acutely by not punishing Assad for the chemical weapons attack, and every Sunni will believe it was a conspiracy—as ISIS has continuously told them.

The pro-regime coalition crushing the rebels in Aleppo City—either killing them or driving them from the battlefield—will not just be a propaganda (i.e. recruitment) victory for ISIS, but will open an immediate military opportunity. The spearheading of the offensive by foreign Shiite militias strongly indicates that the regime's chronic shortage of manpower is getting no better, so while an aerially-delivered and ground-supported round of massacre and expulsion is possible, actually holding new terrain is likely to prove impossible. If the pro-regime forces clear the rebels from Aleppo, it will be ISIS that fills the vacuum.

Continued...long read....

AND you certainly do not hear this from the Obama WH nor the US MSM......

Quote:

Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post

CrowBat......anything on your end on this development..........

Jund al-Aqsa has been virtually decapitated by a mass defection of its senior leadership to Jabhat al-Nusra.
Have only seen the leaflet announcement.....

Jund al-Aqsa is divided along three views: some want to join ISIS, some to Nusra & others to keep JaA

10 days after Nusra sources said Jund is infiltrated by Isis in rural Idlib. All clerical leadership has defected.

Jund is recently kicked around by nearly everybody. Like JAN, it's under immense pressure to withdraw its pledge of loyalty to al-Qaida.

It's physically in trouble too: Chechens in Idlib are de-facto swimming in a sea of what they consider 'Syrian infidels', cut off from supplies by the Ahrar and others because everybody knows many of them would prefer to join the Daesh. But, in Idlib they're cut off from Daesh and too far away from it but to defect.

Quote:

CrowBat.....appears from the battle reports flowing in the so called shia regime troops have hit a wall and or being nickeled and dimed to death and the YPG is slipping and fading.

Appears they can take territory but then cannot hold it for long and lose troops in the whip lashing back and forth....

Appears FSA has gained some traction after a massive Russia air bombardment and strong ground offensive with everything except literally the kitchen sink....and TOWs appear to be flowing again....

It's a mix of of all that, plus such important facts like typical IRGC's weaknesses, but also plenty of delusion.

And it's also this consistent PRBS-bombardment by all possible Assad/IRGC/Russia-fans on the internet - which is creating hosts of entirely wrong impressions. Indeed, a kind of parallel reality.

Namely, typical IRGC's weaknesses are that all they do at war is over dependent on 'light infantry', 'infiltration tactics', etc., and that - no matter if 'genuine' (i.e. Iranian) IRGC, Hezbollah/Lebanon, Hezbollah/Iraq, Hezbollah/Syria, or any other sort of IRGC-run units deployed in Syria - its units are led by officers recruited and advanced per recommendation, very seldom by merit (if at all, then primarily because they were lucky enough to survive for long enough). So, while they've surely got few 'brilliant heads', plenty of courageous people too, they're making a mass of mistakes - and that all the time.

Their operational planning is nearly always at least 50% overenthusiastic (I often get to hear - sure: usually, it's weeks or months later - what was planned and what was eventually achieved, and never stop wondering why they never learn any kind of lessons about this). Their troops have a bare minimum of training; sure, they move fast in attack, are good in infiltration business, some even in nocturnal ops; but they're lightly armed and carrying very little supplies with them. Result: they depend on surprise and shock for early advance, but have a very limited range; they rapidly run out of steam, and have immense problems with overcoming and kind of serious obstacles. They easily 'get lost' when encountering any 'defence in depth'; are easy to ambush too; and they tend to stop and start suffering (heavy) casualties whenever there's something unexpected ahead of them.

Nobody in Tehran, Baghad or Damascus (and even less so in Moscow) is keen to boast about how many casualties the IRGC-run units are suffering in Syria. Sure, Tehran is regularly airing TV-shows from burials of different martyrs from Qom, but exact lists of casualties - especially those of Iraqi Shi'a Jihadists - are never released.

Similarly, whenever Assadists - whether RGD, NDF, SSNP, BPM, PFLP-GC or Arab Legion - suffer casualties, that's 'swept under carpet'. A week ago I posted reports (videos and photos) of an entire company of the RGD that was smashed by the IF in Eastern Ghouta. But, have you heard a single report about relatives of the people in question launching protests in Banias, and regime smashing this in force (as usually)? Nope. That's never mentioned.

So, precise figures are unknown, but cross-examination of a myriad of reports is that they - whether IRGC or any other 'regime' troops - are suffering up to 500 casualties for capture of any 'bigger village', up to 1,500-2,000 for any 'minor town' on average. At that rate, plus for reasons above, it's on hand that they're winning one pyrrhic victory after the other. Their units are melting away at a rate of something of one of their 'brigades' per every 10km of advance. No surprise I'm having my hands full trying to identify another three new units of Iraqi Shi'a jihadists deployed in Syria since early January... (and, I guess, these are only three I've managed to recognize so far; i.e. who knows how many other new units they've brought in).

But, who to hell cares how many Afghan Hazaras or Iraqi Shi'a get killed - if Damascus, Moscow and all sorts of Assad/Putler-fans can boast with 'advances' and 'victories' on the internet? Everything is fine, they're 'winning', every ####in farm, hill, village they capture is 'strategic', and Assad meanwhile does as if he now wants to win a clear-cut victory in this war - although he's no closer to this objective than, say, in July 2012.

...not to talk about Russians-related delusions: 'every bomb is a hit', indeed, every bomb is killing at least 10, if not 20 'terrorists', 'not a single civilian killed' etc. they're 'winning' this war, all the time, hands down...

99% of average people have not even the slightest trace of clue about such basics like influence of physical laws, wind etc. on dumb bombs dropped from 2,000-6,000m altitude - which is what Russians are doing 99% of time. Therefore, everybody is convinced Russians are speaking truth, and their super-turbo-wunderwaffen air power 'decisive'. If nothing else, they boast with figures; like 'VKS flew more sorties in one month than CENTCOM in entire year' - as if number of sorties would really mean that much on modern-day battlefield. Nobody ever comes to the idea to think at least about the following: all the Russian videos are showing their Sukhois carrying 2-4 small dumb bombs (usually 250kg). But, Su-34 is claimed to have been rated to carry 10,000kg. So, why they never carry more than 1,000kg? Why are they next to never sending Su-24s, Su-30s and/or Su-34s over 'distant' targets in eastern Syria - but carpet bomb there with Tu-22M3s? Indeed, why they always haul in old and tired Tu-22M-3s all the way from Russia - if they want to plaster something with a carpet of 10,000kg bombs...?

It's simply so that PRBS is much more important nowadays than ever before. Reality is then 'revealed' only in 'history books', 'years later', and - hand at heart - who to hell cares about these?

CrowBat is offline Report Post

Dayuhan..taking you back to our previous discussion of "what a moderate Syria anti Assad group is"...which is the Obama smokescreen for "standing by"..

Taken from yesterday's Syrian thread.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post

CrowBat........

Thanks...nice to see you back....so are we in the true sectarian war...

Thanks, and sorry to 'interrupt' you here.

'Sectarian war' - from the standpoint of regime: no doubt.

They've got their Alawites-only PMCs (i.e. RGD, 4th Division etc.); they've got the Ba'ath Party Phalanga, their Christian Nazis (SSNP), all sorts of IRGC's Shi'a Jihadists from Hezbollah (whether from Lebanon, Iraq, or Syria), Iraqi PMUs etc. In essence, from regime's standpoint it's 'Syrian minorities' (reinfroced by Iraqi and Iranian majorities) vs 'Syrian majority'.

However, on the insurgent side it's the other way around: they're abandoning the split down ideological lines, joining and cooperating with each other better than ever before.

Azaz pocket is 'just the best example' for this: the HNC is at the top, the local Operation Room is under FSyA officers, while four 'coalitions' (or 'divisions') of insurgents there are led by Ahrar's power-brokers, but largely (60-70%) consisting of FSyA units.

BTW, one of FSyA units in Azaz pocket is Liwa Sallahaddin, which is entirely Kurdish. That means: thanks Oblabla, his YPG/SDF/JAT conglomerate is now not only fighting against US-vetted FSyA units of the JAS, JAM etc., but also US-supported FSyA units of Kurds...

Thanks to Ahrar, there is a similar process going on in Idlib and southern Aleppo too. But, especially because of the JAN, it's going to take a while longer to reorganize everything there in similar fashion. From that POV, defection of Jund's leadership to the JAN is something like 'encouraging signal': it shows that Ahrar's pressure upon Jihadists is starting to work.

That Dayuhan is not being carried by US MSM and not being acknowledged by this Obama WH when they use the "who is a moderate Syrian smokescreen"....

Dayuhan...yesterday I linked you to the US Daily Press Briefing where Mr. Tone is briefed you would think on all possible questions ...was in fact asked about the social media reporting of "alleged Russia CAS support for both IS and YPG"....go back and dig out his somewhat of a badly done tap dance......

But "optics" sometimes trumps actual proven facts........

FSA repel #Isis attempt to advance into #Marea, but before it, #Russia was bombing the exact FSA positions where IS attacked. Look the pattern.. Coordination.
#Aleppo cs #Syria

Here it comes.....and no one in the West/Obama can complain nor can Putin as Erdogan is "claiming the exact right" used by Putin for his grand entrance into Syria and the Obama declared war on IS via his AF coalition......Assad and Putin will loudly argue it is in violation of international territorial boundaries BUT WAIT...did not Putin cross the Crimean and eastern Ukrainian territorial borders in the "defense of ethnic Russian speakers from Nazi's and the Nazi junta in Kyiv"?

Hypocrisy is a mean thing when it comes back to haunt you...in this case Putin's own arguments are being thrown back at him backed up by someone willing and able to use equal force and this is important...not afraid to use it......

Erdogan is stating just as does Obama "I am protecting the entire Turkish nation state from terrorism"....and it is for all to see on my borders being backed by Russia and Assad.

euronews ✔ @euronews

Erdogan claims Turkey's "right to retaliate" after Ankara bombing http://bit.ly/20FRAdz
pic.twitter.com/pitPSa7oGq

AND Obama reactions yesterday and today..."standing by"......

NOW the Turkish PM is "messaging as well for those that did not get it the first time?

ANADOLU AGENCY (ENG) ‏@anadoluagency · 1h1 hour ago

Davutoglu: YPG is a pawn of Syrian regime and regime is directly responsible for Ankara attack

 ANADOLU AGENCY (ENG) ‏@anadoluagency · 1h1 hour ago

Davutoglu: Turkey reserves the right to take any measure against Syrian regime

Serious question is will Turkey pull the NATO Article 5 trigger?????????

Basically all the Turkish government statements are actually the correct "legal" words a NATO member must use when defining the use of Article 5.....

Dayuhan...you ready for this...the US/Obama supported so called Kurdish/Arab YPG/SDF is now working together with IS...????

How can that be when the declared Obama FP is to defeat IS...THEN why is the US working together to defeat a US sponsored moderate Syrian opposition group FSA......little wonder there are no US bombers in the area as Russia is flying CAs for IS and YPG.....

Awaiting you detailed explanation of this move by Obama and Kerry...so is in reality is the Obama FP exactly that of Putin...might actually be..? But no one wants to go that far in DC and state that publicly do they??

Now #ISIS and the #YPG attack #Marea simultaneously.

NOW we have the reason for the Turkish border crossing into Syria....clear as a bell.....AND Obama and Kerry have not been supplying much effort in trying to defuse this development....maybe they no longer have any creditability with the Turks.....

CNN Trk ENG ‏@CNNTURK_ENG 1m1 minute ago

#BREAKING Turkish PM says YPG member Salih Neccer of Syrian origin is responsible for the terrorist attack in Ankara

1. Turkish views YPG a terrorist organization in Syria and is part and parcel of PKK even a US declared terrorist group
2. Syrian resident
3. Kurdish and member of YPG

AND with Russia claiming the "right to defend itself from terrorists" although a long way from Russia Turkey will claim the "same rights" when it is on their border by a group they view as being both terrorist and fully supported now by Russia which has been acting "barbaric" in their killing of Sunni civilians and which they use the term "terrorist state" when referring to Russia.

Putin and his ROC declared their adventure into Syria as a "Holy War".......he might just get one....

AND Obama is still "standing by".......

Dayuhan...you do I assume understand the US doublespeak in Orwellian terms right.....

Obama ..."we are fighting the heck out of the IS in order to defend the motherland...and I am protecting all Americans"...that is the standard tenor out of this WH.....

So what do we get for this talk...US AF and it's coalition have basically bombed their way through approximately 25,000 IS members...approximately as there is no definitive BDA, used drones to kill a lot of middle and higher IS management and some basically Iraqi and FSA supporting Kurdish forces have reduced the IS held areas by roughly 11% AND still IS very much alive and well and growing as we speak.

BUT in the end it will take ground troops as the final solution and Obama is doing everything possible to convince you they are not needed...especially US troops BUT WAIT did we not have 9/11?

BUT when he has three separate Arab Sunni armies sitting on the ground in Syria already fighting for over three years IS and usually winning when IS is not being CAS supported by both the US and Russia.

Right now IS has launched a serious attack on a FSA held town and behold..not a single Russian or US bomber in the immediate area.....why is that IF the President's mantra is.."I am defending the homeland against IS"??? You would think......heck let's bomb them..... there are at least a lot of IS targets in one small location......

So is it just all "words" as even Khamenei stated???? Afraid so....

Hey @CJTFOIR, Marea, held by US-supported rebels, is under assault by ISIS. Maybe you could, I don't know, actually do your ostensible job?

It is only 100 air miles from where you sit in Turkey to Marea?????????

Dayuhan....this is the voice of the Syrian Revolution that has physically been fighting IS daily for the last two years WHILE and this is provocative for you...WHILE the US has really only talked about the need to physically attack IS on the ground.....

THIS is what is not being carried by the US MSM nor reflected at all in the Obama WH......

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/17/fighting-for-aleppo-abandoned-by-th…

Ideologies cannot be destroyed with military force. President Barack Obama said as much when speaking about America’s fight against the Islamic State (IS), warning, “Ideologies are not defeated with guns. They are defeated by better ideas.” Unfortunately, the United States has been loath to apply this principle to its treatment of the Syrian opposition. As a consequence, the menace of IS has spread across the world, and worse may yet come if U.S. policy is not changed.

The hour is very late. The deadline for the so-called “ceasefire” agreed upon by the United States and Russia in Munich last Thursday is fast approaching, but pro-regime forces continue their attacks on civilians, most recently with the capture of the northern Syrian town of Tal Rifaat on Monday by Kurdish PYD forces, backed by fierce Russian airstrikes. This town was one of the first in the country to protest against IS and expel them, only to be thoroughly destroyed and depopulated in a Russian-PYD offensive. This is not a recipe for achieving peace or fighting terrorism in Syria.

Before IS slaughtered over 100 innocents in Paris, before they besieged the Yazidis on Mount Sinjar, and before they shocked the world by sweeping through Mosul, its main short-term goal was to eliminate the group to which I belong: the Levant Front, a coalition of moderate rebels in northern Syria.

The rebel groups within the Levant Front were the first in the world to sound the alarm on the unique danger posed by the Islamic State. Our component groups began operations against IS in September 2013, almost a year before the international community. In early 2014, we formed a broad rebel coalition against IS and routed them from Aleppo, Syria’s largest city and its pre-war commercial capital.

The expulsion of the Islamic State from Aleppo also constitutes the group’s worst-ever defeat in Syria until today. IS has not returned to the city of Aleppo since that time, because roughly 2,000 of our fighters have sacrificed their lives to keep it out.

Why was the Levant Front able to deliver IS fierce blows that the combined might of the United States and its allies has not matched? We lacked the firepower and resources of the anti-IS coalition. The odds were against us, as we were fighting a multi-front war against Bashar al-Assad’s regime, IS, and Iran-backed foreign militias. But we had a key ingredient necessary to defeat IS: a viable rival ideology, consisting of just governance and rule of law for every Syrian, that was embraced by the local population. This served as a force-multiplier for our very limited supplies and basic weapons.

The Levant Front is a product of the Syrian revolution. Like our compatriots across Syria, we protested peacefully for democracy in 2011, then took up arms with our personal weapons to defend protesters from a vicious regime crackdown. As the conflict developed, the Levant Front emerged as the leading rebel coalition in the Aleppo area. We are currently deployed on over 80 percent of the front lines in Aleppo and its suburbs, where we regularly battle both Assad and IS.

We will continue to do so, not to please the international community, but because Syrians who have cast off the yoke of Assad do not wish to kneel before a new criminal dictator who pretends to follow Islam. The Russian air force, Iranian sectarian mercenaries, and the Kurdish PYD have also now joined the assault against us to prop up Bashar al-Assad’s decrepit mafia system. The Levant Front has been Russia’s main target in Syria for at least a month, but for the sake of the Syrian people, we will not kneel before any of these enemies.

The Levant Front poses a unique threat to both Assad and his allies on the one hand, and to IS on the other hand. Unlike either group, we represent the aspirations of the people of Aleppo. We are local fighters who wish to attain democracy and defend our hometowns from slaughter. We do not wish to fight; the criminal actions of Assad and his allies against Syrian civilians have forced us to do so. As such, we have been fully supportive of the political process, and we have attended most of the diplomatic talks to which we have been invited.

Most recently, we joined other Syrian revolutionary armed groups in a statement praising the opposition delegation to Geneva and calling for humanitarian access for all Syrians, as required by U.N. Security Council resolutions. Like the High Negotiating Committee — the official opposition delegation — we believe that productive diplomatic talks can only occur once starvation sieges are lifted, bombardments on civilians are halted, and women and children are released from detention.

We raised this issue with U.N. Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura before the current round of talks began, but he rebuffed us on the grounds that the criminal Assad regime would object.

Due to the silence and complicity of the international community, the recent diplomatic talks in Geneva have backfired. We have been left to face the grim consequences, as Russia used the negotiations in Geneva as political cover to unleash an unprecedented scorched-earth campaign against the Aleppo area. Over 500 air raids struck Aleppo on Feb. 1, the first day of this offensive. Schools, bakeries, markets, and aid convoys were targeted by Russian airstrikes, as they have been for months.

Suspiciously, regime and Iran-backed ground forces attacked along a route adjacent to IS territory. This is only the latest piece of evidence to suggest that Assad, Russia, and IS are coordinating their military offensives.

Conditions in Aleppo are now worse than ever before. Some 50,000 people have been displaced in just the past week, most of them the elderly, women, and children, who sleep on the ground with no shelter near the border with Turkey. The city of Aleppo has been severed from its countryside, which effectively cuts the Levant Front into two pieces. The regime and Iran-backed forces have even managed to cut the main humanitarian supply road from Aleppo to Turkey. If they advance further, they threaten to besiege Aleppo City entirely, placing 500,000 people at risk of imminent death by starvation and disease.

The United States is not defending us, even though we are one of the main Syrian groups fighting the Islamic State. The Levant Front desires a Syria that is free and pluralistic, with respect for human rights, peaceful elections, and the rule of law. Syrians in 2011 marched by the millions for this idea, and we will continue to fight for it until the Syrian people realize their aspirations for freedom.

But we have not received meaningful lethal support from the United States, and we were barely receiving any support at all until two months ago. It is not possible for even the most dedicated army to face swarms of Russian warplanes if they are armed with only basic weapons. Unless the United States drastically increases its support to the moderate Syrian opposition, the field will remain open for IS and for extremist ideologies to flourish. If America wants to win the battle of ideas, it must support its partners who are bravely fighting to beat back the Islamic State.

Dayuhan...if you are correct which you are not...this comment had the subtle meaning and you completely missed...the US is all talk and that is about it is what it means between the lines.....

IF you would follow the Syrian thread starting already in early 2015 SWJ readers are actually far far far more informed than the spokesperson for the DoS and the President.

I posted the link to the Daily Press Briefing from this week with a ton of intelligent questions by two journalists who evidently were well informed from social media sources.

Read and weep is all I can...and this is the "official" spokesperson for the US and he tap danced badly on Syria. If he "tap danced this badly" what is his boss doing because he is suppose to be speaking for his boss?

All I can say to you is you must get better informed on current events ie Syria as you are not that well informed as you assume you are....

Again this President is "standing by"......regardless of how many times you repeat the phrase "unilateral appeasement with not a single reciprocal move by Russia is the way forward for the US FP.....".

The US figured out that game a long time ago. The best way to deal with that kind of verbal sniping is to ignore it. Response and engagement only shows that you take them seriously and see them as peer interlocutors. It reminds me of the Hugo Chevez days, when poor Hugo would say something bitchy and people would jump up and down wondering why the US doesn't respond. Well guess what, Hugo is dead and gone, his project is in ruins, and the US is still there. gnats are best ignored.

This goes back to the need to reject the old Cold War assumption that every action on the other side requires an equal (or greater) and opposite reaction on our side. That's weak thinking, it makes you predictable and leads down any number of blind alleys. Just because Putin does something dumb and ineffective (like hiring an army of internet trolls) doesn't mean the US should respond in kind.

Even the Surpreme Leader is getting into the Iranian info war fight with the US...non linear warfare hard at work these days..only theUS cannot figure out the "game".....

But actually there is a grain of truth in this statement concerning the current Obama/Kerry concept of diplomacy....well so much for the Obama belief that Iran will "moderate".......

Khamenei.ir
‏@khamenei_ir
Americans smile, shake hands and say unctuous words in private meetings; this is for diplomatic meetings and has no value.

Putin and Obama can't "outplay" each other in Syria because they aren't playing the same game. Russia has clearly defined interests and goals in Syria and considers it a theater of high importance. The US has no clear interests and goals in Syria and considers it a theater of low importance. Putin wants to keep Assad in power, at least in the west of Syria, and maintain his foothold. The primary US interest is to avoid getting suckered into a conflict with virtually zero probability of a favorable outcome. Each side pursues its own interests, but because those interests are not in direct opposition, there's no winner/loser dichotomy.

Of course he's "standing by"; that's established. Why not move beyond that repetitive point and give us some convincing reason why he shouldn't stand by.

If the US is going to engage in a "political war" with Russia, the US should do it on favorable ground: a place where the US has clearly defined interests at stake, clear and achievable goals, viable allies or proxies, and domestic political support. None of those conditions apply in Syria.

Dude, seriously, if you want to have a discussion, you've got to stop responding to your own posts. It creates chaos and makes interchange close to impossible. There's a protocol in these things: you make a point and wait for a response. Plastering a thread with helter-skelter comments eventually achieved thread dominance, but only because everybody else gets bored and leaves.

It is really bad when your own appointed UNSC Ambassador who IMHO is one of the best in a very long time for having the courage to stand up against the Russian Ambassador's constant lying...she has been virtually muzzled for months now by Obama for her harshness on the failure of Russia to implement a single point in Minsk 2....

Damning indictment of Obama WH, Ambo Power for allowing #Russia #Iran Assad to commit "1st genocide of 21st century"
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/197727/the-ambassador… …

Needs to be thoroughly read by many here....

Just some of the article....
Even die-hard supporters of President Barack Obama’s “realist” approach to foreign affairs are nauseated by the White House’s Syria policy. New York Times columnist Roger Cohen, a vocal supporter of the nuclear weapons agreement with Iran, is fed up with nearly five years of the “fecklessness and purposelessness” of a Syria policy that “has become hard to distinguish” from Russian President Vladimir Putin’s. “Syria is now the Obama administration’s shame,” Cohen wrote last week, “a debacle of such dimensions that it may overshadow the president’s domestic achievements.” Ambassador Dennis Ross and New York Times military correspondent David Sanger also published articles excoriating Obama’s policies in Syria. There is a military solution, it’s “just not our military solution,” a senior U.S. security official admitted to Sanger. It’s Putin’s.

Perhaps most damning of the stink-bouquets was a Washington Post op-ed from former New Republic literary editor Leon Wieseltier and Harvard professor Michael Ignatieff. “It is time for those who care about the moral standing of the United States to say that this policy is shameful,” they wrote. “If the United States and its NATO allies allow [Putin and his allies] to encircle and starve the people of Aleppo, they will be complicit in crimes of war.”

What made the Post op-ed particularly striking is that Wieseltier and Ignatieff are both friends and former colleagues of Obama’s U.N. ambassador, Samantha Power. Ignatieff taught with her at Harvard, and Wieseltier published early parts of her book on genocide, A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, which described in searing detail the strategies by which American officials typically deflect responsibility for the massacre of innocents. Power’s 600-page book consists largely of case studies of how the United States responded to 20th-century genocides, like the Turkish genocide of the Armenians, the Nazi Holocaust, Cambodia, Saddam Hussein’s genocidal campaigns against the Kurds, Bosnia, Rwanda, Srebrenica, and Kosovo. As Power notes in the book’s conclusion, “What is most shocking about America’s reaction … is not that the United States refused to deploy U.S. ground forces to combat the atrocities. For much of the century, even the most ardent interventionists did not lobby for U.S. ground invasions. What is most shocking is that U.S. policymakers did almost nothing to deter the crime.”

There can be no doubt that the murderous campaign of sectarian cleansing that Assad and his allies Russia and Iran have been waging against the Sunni Arab population of Syria is a crime of historic proportions—the first genocide of the still-young 21st century, or, if you prefer the language of a recent U.N. report, state-sponsored mass extermination. Power herself has documented it all on Twitter:

Power’s tweets are a legitimate response to a horror that is unfolding daily. What’s so odd about them is the Twitter account they come from belongs to the American Ambassador to the United Nations, who has been a member of Obama’s inner circle since he hit the campaign trail in 2007. Hence, Ambassador Power’s doe-eyed outrage against the policies that she helped to shape in her time in the White House and whose current public face is literally Samantha Power leaves a casual observer a bit slack-jawed. Is the real Samantha Power being held prisoner in the U.N. basement with access to Twitter, while a Davos-friendly version of Arya Stark from Game of Thrones impersonates Power in policy meetings? Or was her book on genocide actually a clever way of advertising her services to a future U.S. administration, which—if history is a fair guide—would need someone to deflect responsibility for standing idly by while hundreds of thousands of innocent people were murdered?

As Ignatieff and Wieseltier suggest, Power is a handmaiden to war crimes. And no number of righteous tweets or broadsides against Russian diplomats can hide how the White House has used her monumental 2002 classic, A Problem From Hell, as a how-to manual in how to enable genocide and still maintain your soulful cred. From the very beginning when Assad opened fire on peaceful protesters, to the present, as Russia bombs hospitals, the United States has done nothing to stop Assad and his gory friends—and all the faux-outraged tweets and Putin-blaming in the world will not distract a single Syrian from the plain facts that the United States was not only indifferent to the destruction of their country, but has also diplomatically enabled their horrific suffering.

Remember when Obama warned Assad not to use chemical weapons against his own people? That, said Obama, “might change his calculus”—i.e., the use of chemical weapons against civilians would be such an obvious and grotesque violation of the international laws and norms and a host of arms agreements that Assad might actually manage to shame commander-in-chief into stopping a genocide. Obama was told repeatedly that Assad was using chemical weapons, but when the butcher of Damascus dared Obama, the leader of the free world blinked and said he wasn’t really going to take military action after all. Even after continued attacks with chemical agents, Obama boasted about getting rid of Assad’s chemical weapons’ arsenal, as if unconventional weapons was the only way the Syrian tyrant could process human flesh through his meat grinder. As Power notes in the conclusion to her book, “on occasion the United States directly or indirectly aided those committing genocide.”

It is hard to imagine any future edition of A Problem From Hell being complete without a chapter on Syria. Instead of helping to topple Assad, the mass-murdering goon who drops barrel bombs on civilian areas, the White House launched a phony train-and-equip program that required rebel fighters to sign a document that they wouldn’t use their weapons against the dictator who was murdering their families. The administration’s anti-ISIS campaign has allowed Assad to ignore ISIS nearly altogether and focus his attention instead on destroying other opposition groups, and indiscriminately targeting Sunni towns and villages. The White House’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action has now put additional tens of billions of dollars in Iran’s coffers, which it is now free to use in supporting Assad’s genocide. Indeed, it is partly because Obama was so eager to secure a nuclear agreement with Iran that he disdained any efforts to stop Tehran’s ally from slaughtering Sunnis when Assad first started nearly five years ago.

Continued....

It is great to be considered an intellectual president but Obama in his "standing by" mode should actually refrain from making any statements right now on Syria...he is just making things worse....

Obama on Syria: "This is not a contest between me and Putin."

That’s not what the other guy says… And he’s spectacularly outplayed you at every step........it is bad when even Obama does not understand the full extent of the Russian non linear warfare...being used in support of the political war Putin is pushing..

And he is not "standing by"????

AND that highly successful Obama Syrian strategy is getting more "standing by" by the minute......the creation of an "Islamic Sunni Army" being led by KSA was actually the dream voiced often by Khomeini but he wanted it led by the Shia......as an "Islamic Army" under his command.

When one reads the article..take notice of the battle flag in the background...the same exact style carried by the staff of Mohammed in his battles to unify Islam...the green war flag of Islam.....NOW convince me there is not a looming sectarian Sunni Shia war on the horizon.....the IRGC really wants one to payback KSA for their support of Saddam in the 80-88 war and from their constant info war side they feel it will be in Syria.

http://www.thenational.ae/opinion/co...omes-a-reality …

Saudi Arabia's two-war doctrine becomes a reality

Faisal Al Yafai

February 16, 2016 Updated: February 16, 2016 05:52 PM

Saudi Arabia’s military exercise was a goodbye wave to America

Quote:

For decades after the end of the Second World War, the United States maintained a “two-war” defence doctrine. The military organised its capabilities around the idea that it should be able to fight two conventional wars, in two separate theatres, at the same time.

That, after all, had been the reality in the Second World War, when the US had to fight in Europe and the Pacific simultaneously.

The doctrine came to an end in 2010, and in the 60 years that it was active, it was never enacted. The nearest the US came in recent history were the two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, neither of which were conventional wars for long. Indeed, it was the inability to win those wars that finally pushed the US to change its policy.

A similar doctrine appears to be taking shape in Saudi Arabia, but the other way around. The kingdom is having to ramp up its military presence in response to multiple threats, not to meet some future perceived threat.

Saudi Arabia doesn't have the advantages that the US has long enjoyed, hidden away behind two oceans. In fact, Saudi Arabia faces serious challenges on at least three of its borders.

There is the long, porous border to the south with Yemen, currently the focus of its most serious military effort. There is the eastern flank, facing regional rival Iran. And there is its long northern border, the majority of which has Iraq on the other side. Only to the west, across the Red Sea, are there clear allies in Egypt and Sudan.

Saudi Arabia has not yet articulated its defence posture. But it does look as if it has taken the two-war doctrine as a starting point.

The Northern Thunder joint military exercises it is conducting with 20 other countries, touted as the largest joint military exercises ever conducted in the region, are a pointed message to its adversaries, whether states (Iran), regimes (Syria) or groups (ISIL).

That it is taking place in Saudi Arabia’s north is no coincidence. With a serious war underway to the south, the kingdom is seeking to show that it can, despite suggestions, fight on two separate fronts.

After all, if the country can project power with Northern Thunder, what is to stop it using that power farther north?

The obvious place for that power projection is Syria. Earlier this month, a Saudi official, Brigadier General Ahmed Al Asiri, suggested the kingdom could send ground troops to Syria to fight ISIL – although it is likely to seek support from its allies as well, some of whom are involved in Northern Thunder.

Taken together with other elements – Saudi fighter jets are now stationed at Turkey's Incirlik base, close to the Syrian border – it is hard to avoid the message that Saudi Arabia and its allies are prepared to involve themselves in the Syrian civil war, if need be.

But there’s a second part to any new defence doctrine, and that is the political aspect. Saudi Arabia’s new muscular military posture requires close cooperation between allies.

Northern Thunder, after all, is a follow-up to Abdullah Sword, Saudi Arabia’s 2014 military exercise that was, at the time, the largest it had ever conducted.

Abdullah Sword involved all the GCC countries except Qatar. Northern Thunder builds on it, expanding Saudi’s list of allies further.

The message is unmistakable. The Saudi-led coalition is expanding, not diminishing.

And it is in that that we can discern the real intention behind Northern Thunder. The Saudis are seeking to use the military exercises as a way to deepen the political coalition against Iran and any future Russia-Syria-Iranian axis.

Problems like Iran and Syria don’t have long-term military solutions. Iran’s re-emergence is not a one-off event; it is a process that will play itself out in various ways, affecting political alliances and diplomacy.

Saudi Arabia may be seeking to send a strong message to Tehran that it can defend itself against external aggression – even while involved in a conflict in which Iran is a proxy – but it is also preparing for the much longer political and diplomatic fight.

By assembling a 20-country coalition, Saudi Arabia is gathering its allies close, preparing to deepen ties between it and the Muslim world, so that when the inevitable diplomatic confrontation takes place with Iran, it will have the political capital to react.

That is the real intention behind Northern Thunder. The message being telegraphed is not merely that Saudi Arabia is ready to defend itself, but that it does not intend to do so alone.

Once the war games begin in northern Saudi Arabia, it will not be the strikes of lightning that matter so much, as the gathering of the clouds which precedes it.

And that highly successful Obama Syrian strategy will now give the US that NFZ that the Turks and the Saudi's have been demanding for a long number of months....and it will be secured on the ground and air by both Turks and Saudi's...and there is nothing the US can now say and or do ......they have no further US creditability after they failure to control their own proxy the Kurds....

Al Arabiya English ‏@AlArabiya_Eng ·
BREAKING: #Turkey wants secure line created 10 km within #Syria, including town of Aziz -deputy PM

SWJ carried an article on the great successful Obama Syrian strategy which just needed some more messaging for all of us to understand that it was highly successful...then we have this SWJ article on the Obama "standing by"........

If the Obama strategy is to defeat IS and they were using their Kurdish proxy for the goal to be met...ie funding, weapons and training.....

Does that now successful Obama Syrian strategy include the ethnic cleansing of Arab Sunni's from areas what have been largely Sunni and Arab since 1104.

Never thought I would see US FP supporting ethnic cleansing, starvation, war crimes and genocide in the name of keeping the US out "of danger"...BUT WAIT...where is then the fight against IS.....just a myth of this WH.

Well the old and worn out excuse that the Kurds would be fighting IS is now safely out the window...and the so called US fight against IS is then for all practical purposes dead in the water.....practically non existence outside of the AF and a few bombs....

Aleppo Kurdish #YPG attack rebel held Kaljibrin village btw #Azaz & #Mare
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=de&lat=36...16451&z=13&m=b …
but new frontline with IS is quiet

So nothing for three days except for the Kurds/YPG other than constant attacking FSA with Russian CAS and not a single Kurdish attack anywhere along the IS frontline....

This alone proves the Kurdish intent....HOPE Obama and Kerry did anticipate this move by the Kurds....what a great Syria successful strategy...it has turned out to be..basically creating Kurdistan and we still do not have the Turkish response....

Kurdish #YPG rename former #SAA regime airbase "Menagh" to "Serok Apo" base

This is an Arab area since 1104........not Kurdish.......

Kurdish #YPG renamed arab "Tell Rifaat" city in northern #Aleppo to "Arpêt" after occupation

City Tel Rifaat in northern #Aleppo before & after #Russia'n
& kurdish "Liberation"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6BiVA2K44E …
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DruKjePZbA …

Dayuhan..do you really want to state the US is combatting IS inside Syria with anything other than bombs which are not really effecting them much these days as their numbers are still growing and they only lost 11% of their Iraqi and Syrian areas....

BUT the only one really fighting IS inside Syria is dodging IS, Assad, the entire Iranian shia mercenary army and Russian/US AF air strikes...

Care to comment now...and yes Obama is truly "standing by"..

BUT WAIT....has not Obama been telling us for the last month his Syrian strategy is working and he is aggressively attacking IS to defend all of us....?

No shame to loose against this "democratic coalition"
pic.twitter.com/B4Bytk7TRA

Appears even the US AF is "standing by" or are they "sharing strike data" with the Russians OR vice versa...?

Either way they really got it wrong yesterday.....not a beep out of CENTCOM....

BreakingReport
Up to 28 civilians killed in international coalition air strike on bakery in #Shaddadi.
SOHR+LCC

So it begs the question is the US supporting now RuAF air strikes as some reporting has them providing CAS to the Kurds fighting FSA along side Russian CAS....YET both AFs claim they are bombing IS.....??

If you want to have a discussion, reply to one post with one post. There is no other way to have a reasonable discussion. If you open the site and find a half dozen different random posts with random points in different places, all you can do is click somewhere else.

You cannot engage in a foreign policy discussion, let alone debate, without clarifying the national interests being pursued. The whole point of foreign policy is the pursuit of national interest, so without clarity on that point there is no basis for discussion.

The war drums are beating on lots of sides, but that doesn't man the US needs to be involved. In a Sunni/Shi'a war neither side is a natural ally and neither side has interests that are congruent with those of the US.

Dayiuhan..you might like this statement from an unnamed because of the nature of the comment "unnamed US diplomat"..."what ceasefire?" ...if the Russians, Iranians and Kurds keep this up "all Sunni's will be either dead or refugees"....and we will not need a ceasefire.

That my friend is your US FP for the ME...dead or refugees and have you ever figured out in this debate exactly what the economic damage to the US will be if cut out of the ME?????

Billions.....and the related US jobs thousands......

AND you wonder why the war drums are beating on the Sunni side...you really do need a long education on the ME...

Dayuhan..you still have not taken up the debate offer…..have you? A lot of questions but avoiding debating…interesting…..

I will go a step further and state Obama simply has no foreign policy whatsoever…..and on top of his “standing by” his current position is one of total US hypocrisy…….

Obama and Kerry even you have to admit have extensive understanding of the Putin negotiation tactics from the still ongoing so called failed Minsk 2 agreements, how Russia has avoided them totally and is still fighting heavier than ever in Ukraine.

Kerry knew exactly how Russia would function in Geneva and yet caved when the Russians held out for their their Minsk 2 tactic….....a "ceasefire"…BUT with the following "we will continue to bomb and kill “terrorists” for seven days...pure a la Minsk 2 with the following Debaltseve battle for six days.

BUT during his press conference next to the Russian FM he awakes with comments that the air strikes will end in seven days AND this is critical humanitarian aid will follow immediately.

IF you listened to Lavrov he stated we will implement if the opposition and Assad agree…..one week later Assad says no….BUT Kerry and Obama keep on stating the ceasefire is critical…..

Many then questioned ..did in fact Russia already know the Assad positon…THEN Assad in an interview this week defines that he will not stop fighting and what he views a terrorist to be a la Putin definition.

Then Obama one day after the Assad statement states this.

One day after Assad said it, US state dept doesn't expect ceasefire in Syria this week but maybe some progress!
http://cnn.it/1XwnXvj

Maybe some progress……then do not even go to Geneva…in the first place and do not demand the opposition cave when you know exactly before hand the Russians are not going to negotiate unless it was on their terms exactly as in Minsk 2.

I call that hypocrisy pure…but for you unilateral appeasement is the best thing going for the US in the next 20 years right?

The headline might as easily read "America is no longer the lapdog of its regional allies".

Why should the US place the interests of Saudi Arabia or Turkey above its own? Why should the US go to war in service of Saudi or Turkish interests?

Obama is absolutely "standing by". Why shouldn't he? It actually taks considerable fortitude to refuse to go to war when people all around you are screaming for it. In the absence of compelling US interests at stake, specific and achievable goals, viable allies or proxies, any domestic political support, and any realistic probability of a favorable outcome, why would he want to go to war?

Dayuhan...another writer who is well known in the ME and knows this Syrian fighting far better than I do is saying almost the same thing I am...

Whether you will ever see it....Obama has basically abandoned the former regional allies of the US and he is in fact "standing by" "just to protect his own legacy" and that my friend makes for poor foreign policy.

Dayuhan read the article below AND then let's debate it...you can argue the fact that staying out has been the greatest thing for US ME FP since sliced bread because we have no strategic interests in the ME which is what you state over and over and I will argue the US has for all intents and purposes basically abandoned the ME and to some degree Europe as well.

AND I will additionally argue that the Syrian refugee crisis is causing the inherent unravelling of the EU and the US is "standing by" and allowing that to occur as well.

http://www.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/americas-policies-are-failing…

America’s policies are failing its regional allies

Hassan Hassan

February 14, 2016 Updated: February 15, 2016 04:09 PM

Last week, there were reported hints that Saudi Arabia, under certain circumstances, could send troops to Syria to fight against ISIL. The suggestion follows months of calls by western officials for Sunni Arab countries to deploy forces to fight the extremist group.

In November, for instance, US secretary of defence Ashton Carter told The Atlantic about advice he had fiven to the Gulf states that they should be involved on the ground, rather than from the air: “I’ve said the same things to them: ‘Guys, you come and complain to us but you’re not in the game. You have to get in the game’.”

But on Wednesday last week, Mr Carter did not seem so keen on the idea. He said: “I just want to emphasise there are lots of different ways that Saudi Arabia and Bahrain can contribute. One of them is on the ground – and we’ll definitely be discussing that – but there are lots of other ways as well.”

The United States sees any talk of Saudi Arabia sending in ground troops as an attempt to force its own hands in Syria.

According to The Wall Street Journal, US officials have complained that suggestions of Gulf states sending troops to Syria were aimed at pressuring president Barack Obama to be more assertive in Syria.

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have announced closer military coordination, through the southern Incirlik airbase and a wider Saudi-Turkish strategic coordination council to combat ISIL. But Turkey is also worried about the expansion of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG).

The Turkish military has shelled Syrian regime and YPG bases in Azaz, a town in northern Aleppo province that is seen as the centre of gravity for almost all parties involved the conflict.

ISIL sees Azaz as a gateway to the return of areas it lost in early 2014. The YPG considers Azaz fundamental to its expansionist project to link its cantons in northern Syria, while Turkey has frequently made it clear that it would not tolerate such moves.

The Syrian regime and Russia view Azaz and adjacent areas as central to their strategy of severing rebel supply lines to Turkey. And the United States has called on Turkey to de-escalate hostilities against the YPG, which has proved an effective ally for the US against ISIL.

So, a messy situation is only becoming messier. But Washington bears most of the blame for the uncomfortable situation in which it now finds itself.

In July, disagreements between Ankara and Washington reached a high point when the former wanted to establish an “ISIL-free zone” that would run from Azaz to Jarablus, clearly to disrupt the YPG’s moves.

The US finally resolved the issue by securing a promise from YPG commanders, and their political umbrella Democratic Union Party, not to advance west of the Euphrates river. Turkey scrapped its plan, and allowed the US-led coalition to use the Incirlik airbase to fight ISIL.

Four months later, in late November, the YPG violated its promise and tried to advance in northern Aleppo amid rumours that it was coordinating with the Russians in Syria. The US did not pressure the YPG to keep its side of the bargain and focus on ISIL in northeastern Syria. Worse, the special presidential envoy for the global coalition to counter ISIL, Brett McGurk, visited YPG commanders, who have direct links to the Turkish PKK, a group designated as a terrorist organisation by both the US and Turkey.

On Saturday, Mr McGurk tweeted that the administration “urged Syrian Kurdish and other forces affiliated with YPG not to take advantage of a confused situation by seizing new territory”, while also urging Turkey to cease artillery fire on Kurdish positions in Azaz.

The US knows that Turkey views the YPG in the same light as it does ISIL. Both of them are a national security threat, but the YPG’s self-rule project near Turkey’s southern borders presents a more pressing threat for Ankara, partly because the Kurds’ nationalist project could be a more sustainable effort internationally and morally.

The point it that the current crisis is connected to America’s inconsistent policies regarding Syria. Tactical gains, such as working with the YPG to expel ISIL from some areas – gains that project an appearance of progress and success – have become preferable to a wider strategy with long-term returns. Eventually, this has led to a worsening situation for America’s regional allies.

The same mistake is being made with the pursuit of progress, any progress, on the botched peace process, while neglecting the deteriorating situation on the ground.

For regional countries, there is a lesson to be learnt from acquiescing to half-baked US plans or fragile promises.

The increasing assertiveness displayed by Saudi Arabia and Turkey is a good example of how countries in this region should prioritise their own interests. The US administration’s policies have neither achieved the envisioned outcome nor pursued the interests of its allies.

THEN when you finish your debate piece I will argue that in fact if we look at the educational path of Obama and the paths he took actually created exactly what we are seeing....an inelastic president tied to a personal ideology that states talking is far better than fighting....in some ways it remains me of the current arguments of the German Left when they critique US involvement in the ME and Europe....and that my friend is really strange.

Because the image of Obama in the US is one that he is not a "Socialist".....BUT when we look at his FP moves since he came in....one does wonder.......

Dayuhan...the perfect example to accompany Hassan's comments....concerning the Obama "standing by".......

Earlier today:
US-backed FSA rebels destroyed a US-backed YPG pick-up truck using a US-made TOW anti-tank missile outside Tel Rifaat when the nearest IS forces were miles in the opposite direction and the YPG were receiving direct Russian AF CAS support......

You still think Obama is not "standing by".....??

Sorry he is way over his head now and has absolutely no solution other than "waiting it out"...only 300 or so days left then it is someone else's problem...that is what he is trying to reach...nothing more nothing less..it is that simple really.

Even you can see that??

The drumbeats of major in the Middle East - not just Syria - are clear to all. What is apparently not clear to anyone is why the US should be in the middle of it. What does the US have to gain from taking sides in a sectarian war, or from trying to mediate one? Neither side is a natural ally, neither side has objectives consistent with ours. Why do we need to be involved? Because a war ain't a war without us in the middle of it?

The drumbeats of a major sectarian war in Syria is being evidently missed by the Obama and Kerry "standing by".....

As I indicated before about 72 hours is just about all the time that is left before Turkey makes a move into Syria.....probably using the Putin excuse of "their all vacationers and retirees, truck drivers and or miners AND oh by the way they "borrowed their tanks for the vacation".

Turkey's motto...we are saving our fellow Sunni's from being slaughtered by a genocidal dictator and a Russia who is not Arab or Sunni and whose own ROC has declared "a Holy War" on the Sunni.

With the horrific air strikes being provided daily especially those from yesterday by Putin THAT reason will hold water tightly in the UNSC.....as there are three UNSC resolutions that Putin signed that he is blatantly ignoring.

Turkey is setting the stage for pulling the NATO Article 5 trigger which they actually can as they announced ..."their national security is being threatened by Assad and Putin"....and there is nothing the US can do.....Obama will have a choice...fish or cut bait on whether he has ever fully supported NATO...or go down in history as a do nothing president when the ME and Europe unraveled.

[B]#Breaking: #Syria situation now is a direct threat to our national security: Turkish PM[/B]

THIS after the open warning directed at Obama recently by the Saudi's..."our national security is more important than world peace"....

This might be a provocative comment for some but really think about it.... as of this morning in Europe the so called "outrage over the bombing of hospitals" is rather nill by NATO or any of the European leaders AND certainly nothing has come out of DC on what is basically a "war crime" par excellence...

We live in a time when state militaries bombing hospitals is a new norm, & NATO & EU member states are on board.

When it comes to Russian combat operations(over 70 odd attacks a day on the UAF)either in eastern Ukraine and or in the sheer killing of civilians and the use of starvation in Syria..... NATO/US is strangely silent...

ANYONE ever notice the UNSC hypocrisy...their UNHCR has been in virtually in bed with Assad and altered their reports to cast a favorable light on the so called sieges of Sunni towns and villages, and their aid is being supplied to the SAA instead of the IDPs and other civilians in need of the aid...NOW this....

Turkey asked UN to stop Russia attacks on hospitals.
UN ignored.

Russia asked UN to stop Turkey attack on YPG militants.
UN meeting today.

The UN is "standing by" as well as Obama actually when you think about after three passed UNSC resolutions all signed by Putin calling for the stopping of bombing of civilians and for humanitarian aid to roll.

HAS any UNSC member ie the US called out the Russian killing of civilians and called for a special UNSC meeting to discuss it...not a single one..

BUT WAIT...Turkish shellings not killing civilians but the YPG and there is an immediate call....

You miss the point so completely that I have to think it's intentional. It's not about "soft power" vs "hard power", it's about the utility of trying to apply any kind of power in the absence of clearly defined interests and goals. What good is it to try to apply power if your objectives are uncertain, ephemeral, or unrealistic?

You seem completely unable to define what US interests are at stake, how those interests are sufficiently compelling to justify war, and what specific, achievable goals the US should be pursuing if it chooses to engage. In the absence of any such definition, what justification is there for joining a war?

The US has dabbled (unwisely, IMO, but nobody cares what you or I think) with support for a number of groups, including the FSA and the YPG. None of these were ever controllable and none were ever viable proxies... fortunately the US stopped short of elevating any of them to the level of a proxy, which would have been a very dumb thing to do.

Of course Obama is "standing by"... in the absence of compelling national interests, clear and practical goals, viable proxies or effective strategies, what else would you expect him to do?

Search

Why the West is Standing by Amid Russia's Campaign in Syria

Comments