You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Turkey to attack in northeast Syria; US forces to pull back
2019-10-07
See also here.
WASHINGTON DC (Kurdistan 24) ‐ Late on Sunday, the White House issued a summary of a telephone call that US President Donald Trump held with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan earlier that day.

The White House statement explained that Turkey was about to attack in northeastern Syria and US forces will withdraw from the area where the Turkish military operation is to take place.

The White House said that "Turkey will soon be moving forward with its long-planned operation into Northern Syria."

"The United States Armed Forces will not support or be involved in the operation, and United States forces, having defeated the ISIS territorial ’Caliphate’ will no longer be in the immediate area," it continued.

On Saturday, Erdogan told an annual conference of his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), "We will carry out a ground and air operation" across the border into Syria, east of the Euphrates River. "Maybe, today; maybe, tomorrow," he affirmed.

READ MORE: US warns Ankara, amid worry of Turkish incursion into northeast Syria

Turkish media reported on Saturday that the army was reinforcing its positions around Sanliurfa, across the frontier from the Syrian town of Tel Abyad.

And later on Saturday, Washington’s well-regarded Institute for the Study of War warned, "Turkish invasion of northeast Syria looks imminent."

On Sunday, before the White House read-out was published, Turkey issued its own summary of the telephone conversation between Trump and Erdogan. It did not address the issue of an imminent attack. Rather, the Directorate of Communications, which issued Turkey’s read-out of the discussion, said that Trump had invited Erdogan to visit Washington next month, as it was reported by the state-run Anadolu Agency.

The Turkish readout created the impression that no major action would occur until after the two presidents met in November. But the White House read-out made clear that an attack is to be expected at any time, even as it failed to mention any invitation to Erdogan.

A Turkish assault on northeastern Syria raises many questions about the future of that area. The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have been America’s main ally in the war against the so-called Islamic State in Syria. They control a large swathe of territory‐one-third of the country.

Yet Turkey considers the Kurdish component of the SDF‐the People’s Protection Units (YPG)‐as the Syrian branch of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK.)

If the self-administration of northeastern Syria is disrupted, it could easily lead to the re-emergence of the Islamic State. The White House statement did not address that problem.

Moreover, the SDF holds a large number of Islamic State fighters as prisoners, as well as their wives and widows, along with their children.
Posted by:Besoeker

#33  This whole thing about 50 US troops.
Posted by: Phaick Uneretle6310   2019-10-07 23:30  

#32  So the season opener will be Turkey vs. Syria/Iran/Russia? Popcorn is great, but any opinions on deep fried peanuts? New to me.

Now, one of the Hanson brothers will end up boxing Erdy's ears, and he will come crying to NATO for help, and may encourage a human wave to enter Greece as pressure on NATO to get involved.

At which point I hope NATO tells Turkey to go stuff their noses with capers.

My prediction, and this is a long shot, is that regardless, Turkey will initiate the journey of some 20,000 refugees, or even as few at 5,000, enough to be large enough to not be bothered as they walk to a major European city, preferably with some symbolism. Say, Vienna. Only instead of Kara Mustafa Pasha and a dredge of wailing imams leading the horde, it will be Doctors without Borders, the video production arm of Red Crescent, and the fokkin Pope, and everyone who asks where the food and winter clothing is coming from gets branded a white nationalist or Nazi.

I can only hope we have been there as long as we have in order to prepare the Kurds for when this day would come.

I will also point out that the timeline to form a greater Kurdistan had been extended about four years beyond my amateur estimation.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2019-10-07 19:59  

#31  China, me droogs. Don't lose focus. The middle east is a tar baby. Focus on the Chinese threat.
Posted by: Lex   2019-10-07 19:26  

#30  g(r)om - I disagree with letting regional allies suffer on our behalf, whether Kurds, Hmongs, Ukrainians, Georgians, et all.
Posted by: Frank G   2019-10-07 19:08  

#29  It is not in the interest of the American people to engage in endless war in Syria. End of story.
Posted by: Herb McCoy   2019-10-07 16:45  

#28  "Some bad choices were made after WW1"
~ Rand Paul, Fox News 7 Oct 2019

A perfect example of peace keeping donor fatigue. Anyone remember the democrat silence when Soetoro pulled out of Iraq? If someone, or a group of someone' feels the need, they can ruck up and go join the Kurds. Have at it !

We have no dog in this fight and certainly don't need another trip wire. Call it a day. Get the fok out, stay the fok out !
Posted by: Besoeker   2019-10-07 16:25  

#27  Why do we even have troops in Syria?

Because when Obama failed to provide air support to the once a future ISIS, aka McCain's Heroes, Obama needed a trip wire to keep them from getting rolled up and provide a safe area of classic insurgency practices.

Then Erdy saw an opportunity to punish the Kurds and take some major crossroads - Kobani for instance - and tried picking a fight with Syria, who at this point also meant Iran and Russia. A scrap between a NATO member and a Russia/Iran combo would have been awkward to say the least considering bids for uranium were opening. Also, it kept Iran and Russia's ally Syria safe from attack.

Seriously? The Turk is going to conquer the world? We need to stomp them hard as if they were Nazis?

You don't history much do you? You only seem to address conflict in terms of warfare, very 2D there Kahn. This area has been the trade crossroads of the world since before cuneiform. Though it may not be as important as before the age of steam, there is still a large chunk of world trade and resource gathering, people, in this region.

And in terms of warfare, you are wrong again, but I have real work so maybe later.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2019-10-07 16:04  

#26  You go Erb!
Posted by: Skidmark   2019-10-07 15:49  

#25  So would this be the maximally inconvenient time to mention the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)? I hope so. You know, the Marxists?
Posted by: Herb McCoy   2019-10-07 14:51  

#24  Seriously? The Turk is going to conquer the world?

Tell that to the Turk rubbing his hands in glee, getting hard at the thought of the coming slaughter of proud boys and girls of the peshmerga.
Posted by: Dron66046   2019-10-07 14:48  

#23  I'm told that this could also be because of the left-leaning base that formed the YPG. They're all marxist seculars, which is why they're so open to other ideas and religions. Maybe that was why Trump decided to let them fight their own war, 'let's see who sends for help'. Another communist regime in a pressure-cooker zone is probably not what the world needs.

But in a time when optics are more important than kinetics, this couldn't have come at a worse time. I think the Republican party will be the most disappointed in this move. Bolton would never have advised this.
Posted by: Dron66046   2019-10-07 14:46  

#22  Sorry (c) prefer NOT to operate overtly
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2019-10-07 14:33  

#21  Frank G.
(a) Recep been jailing professional officer corps and replacing them with loyalists.
(b) Syrian Regime (i.e. Russia) is firmly opposed to invasion of its territory & Kurds have good relations with Alawis (both are minorities hated by Sunni Arabs).
(c) Kurds have very effective allies who prefer to operate overtly.
(d) Kurds have been build up in western public's eyes as virtual saints, they ain't.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2019-10-07 14:31  

#20  Once again we desert the Kurds, how long before we once again try to coheres them in to becoming our proxies?
Posted by: Hupiper Schwarzeneggar6867   2019-10-07 14:31  

#19  Yeah, they only take Americans as hostages, ship refugees to Europe to destabilize, threaten Israel, attack our Kurdish allies, assassinate, in Europe, beat demonstartors in America, and threaten to colonize a caliphate.

But appeasement scum like you say: "Hey, What me worry? It's only some other suckers getting killed and stomped." Literally Hitler? No mirror at home?
Posted by: Frank G   2019-10-07 13:57  

#18  Seriously? The Turk is going to conquer the world? We need to stomp them hard as if they were Nazis? I hear some howlers on Rantburg but that one takes the cake.

Just accept that you lose arguments once in a while, and that doesn't make the other people Hitler.
Posted by: Herb McCoy   2019-10-07 13:38  

#17  The Turks have troops tied up in Cyprus, Qatar, Somalia and on the border west of the Euphrates.

Post their anti Gulan purges I don't think they have more than the equivalent of one Division of soldiers that are both reliable and competent enough to handle the job east of the Euphrates. They might be in even worse shape than I have guessed.
Posted by: lord garth   2019-10-07 13:23  

#16  First they took the Rhineland Northern Cyprus and we didn't care. Then they took the Sudetenland Afrin and we did nothing. Next they will take Czechoslovakia Northern Syria (they already have Austria Idlib...) and they will stop there, right, Right??

If the Assads are vicious little Mussolini's they at least don't have the external ambitions of Erdogan.
Posted by: magpie   2019-10-07 13:03  

#15  #13 Yes, I agree. I just see for some reason a bigger game at play here to be seen. With Trump I see more than the obvious domestic media consumption provided. The media will misdirect as I believe is part of the plan. They certainly can be played that easily. Perhaps I am reading more into this but a wait and see attitude is my attitude. :)
Posted by: Dale   2019-10-07 12:59  

#14  Tar baby. Best to stay out.
Posted by: Lex   2019-10-07 12:08  

#13  Why do we even have troops in Syria? ISIS is defeated. Assad won the civil war. What are we even doing there, other than spending billions every month that are badly needed back home?

Or if that's not enough for you: what's the prize when we win? What are we fighting for in Syria? What does victory look like? Bolton doesn't know and neither do you.
Posted by: Herb McCoy   2019-10-07 11:31  

#12  In addition, there's the NATO angle. So long as Turkey is notionally a member, it's prudent to avoid any direct military fighting against their troops.
Posted by: Chinemp Shiper1154   2019-10-07 11:16  

#11  Iran has been aggressive. Erdogan's in trouble politically. There's a good chance one or both is trying to claim a 'victory' over US troops for PR / negotiating purposes and provoke a counter strike whose civilian casualties would also be heavily publicized.

Air strikes are a real possibility if Erdogan goes too far. But if in fact the Kurds make him pay - specifically, if he can't use this to appear strong at home - it will backfire on him badly and he can't claim we did it to him.
Posted by: Chinemp Shiper1154   2019-10-07 11:13  

#10  IMO it's time we stop policing the world an let the countries in that area take care of their own shit.This will probably let Erdrogan know they aren't as bad as they think they are too.
Posted by: chris   2019-10-07 10:55  

#9  What Could Possibly Go Wrong!
Posted by: Sonny Black   2019-10-07 10:51  

#8  Pssst, Yippy? I heard the leaders of this attack are closet Gulenists. Just saying...
Posted by: Frank G   2019-10-07 10:37  

#7  The Turks will do a quick strike, bloody things and themselves up for PR and pull back.
Posted by: DarthVader   2019-10-07 10:36  

#6   I doubt the Turkish military can sustain a substantial operation for a long period.

Agreed. In fact, the Kurds have previous experience bleeding them heavily — at the height of the Afrin nonsense I recall a Rantburger comfortingly explaining kill boxes to me — which one imagines President Trump is aware of, and which changes the complexion of this announcement considerably.
Posted by: trailing wife   2019-10-07 10:33  

#5  I doubt the Turkish military can sustain a substantial operation for a long period.
Posted by: lord garth   2019-10-07 09:12  

#4  "BEIRUT — U.S.-backed Kurdish-led forces said American troops began pulling back Monday from positions along the border in northeast Syria ahead of an expected Turkish invasion that the Syrian Kurds say will overturn five years of achievements in the battle against the Islamic State group.

The Syrian Kurdish fighters also accused Washington of failing to abide by its commitments to its key allies in the fight against ISIS. It's a major shift in U.S. policy". Interesting. This just doesn't sit well. Looks to me like we are seeing a chess match. Game pieces are hidden. Time will tell.
Posted by: Dale   2019-10-07 08:15  

#3  One ultimately does have to fight for oneself. If the decades of struggle have taught the Kurds anything it should be that.

'Ain't no one you can depend on but yourself'.
Mad Max (was it ?)
Posted by: Dron66046   2019-10-07 08:03  

#2  That bastard sold out the Kurds to the Turks and their two-bit Sultan wannabee. Huge mistake. This will create even more of a mess, and embolden Turkey further. Trump screwed this one up badly.
Posted by: Ulurt Jones8687   2019-10-07 07:52  

#1  First big mistake after Bolton leaving.
Posted by: Dron66046   2019-10-07 07:42  

00:00