A week or so ago, Trump seemed to make the inexplicable announcement that he was withdrawing American forces from Syria and abandoning Syrian Kurdish allies to their fate in an anticipated confrontation with Turkey. This seemed to me to be ill-advised but also perhaps making the best of a very bad situation. However, after two-and-a-half years, it is also clear that Trump is always playing three-dimensional chess. You can never take the literal reading of his words and actions, you always have to look for the second and third order consequences that he might be seeking to accomplish.
Almost every torpedo of outrage his critics launch against his words or actions circles back on them. The purported leaking of the Ukrainian phone has the probability, it seems to me, of 1) bringing down the legal but institutional corruption involved in the family enrichment of the Gores, Clintons, Kerrys, Bidens, etc., usually through the lucre of repressive regimes and 2) exposing the the network of DNC/Intelligence agencies and FBI by which sought to undermine or reverse the results of an election. An election which threatened the sinecures of the establishment.
So what is going on with the Kurdish issue? I have been casually following the ebbs and flows of the tragic Kurdish people from the 1970s. While I know a lot of facts, I also know that whatever you think you know is likely wrong to a degree and that unless your knowledge is direct and real-time it is out-of-date and partial.
The strong condemnations from all the usual suspects are not worth the electrons of the bytes they are written in. The usual critics will use anything they can to beat Trump and virtually none of them know history or facts.
I have read nothing so far this week which has added to my knowledge and much which I know to be wrong, one-sided, or misleading. Almost every critic is casting their discussion about the Kurds as if they were a monolithic people without distinguishing the immensely complex, varying, and different histories of the Kurds in Syria, in Turkey, in Iraq, and in Iran. We have allied with and fought against different configurations of these groups multiple times over the past few decades.
Oddly, the first piece I have come across which seems half-way informed, and half-way cogent is from a paper of which I have never heard, the Israel Hayom. No idea what axes they have to grind or positions they take. From Trump did not betray the Kurds by Caroline B. Glick. I also do not know of Glick as a writer or observer. Clearly she is pro-Israel and anti-Iran but everyone has a position.
This article by Glick is both the most informative I have read as well as among the more nuanced and likely the closest to an ever shifting truth. She confirms what I have suspected that the "withdrawal" is not a withdrawal, we are merely redeploying our small number of troops within Syria.
She resurrects the backdrop for this move which most American commenters have omitted or hidden, the five-year Obama effort to anchor our strategic interests on Iran at the expense of all our other portfolio of difficult or troublesome allies (Kurds, Turks, Saudis, Pakistan, Gulf States, Israel, Egypt, Shia, etc. It is a snake pit out there and simplistic long term American goals for the region are mere dust in the ever shifting wind.
Iran, should it ever shed its repressive religious theocracy, is probably the largest cultural group in the region, after India, most able to add to human knowledge and productivity and hue closer to classical liberal aspirations. But there are innumerable impediments that make that at best a possible but unlikely outcome.
My perspective is that the best America can do to is assemble regional coalitions to own initiatives out there, get the Europeans to shoulder much more of the responsibility for the region since they are the prime beneficiaries and victims of whatever happens, and force local players to carry more of the consequences for their desperate intransigence.
There is nothing fair or easily negotiable in the tragic and ill-fated region. Bad things will happen. All we can do is play the Great Game (also woefully under-discussed among the shouted condemnations) while reducing our exposure (in blood and treasure) as much as possible. Glick's article presents a lot of argument consistent with that view.
I don't understand the nature and timing of Trump's move but I don't see anything inherently wrong with it, either tactically or strategically.
UPDATE: Another source of information consistent with the above view. From a thread by Thomas Wictor.
On Syria.
The Trump plan is now clear, and it's working.
Until now, the Kurds refused to negotiate with the Syrian government. Now they've made a deal.
The Kurds control one third of Syria, so they'll end up with an autonomous region that's part of Syria.
From what I can tell, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has not been engaged in actual fighting for years now.
But showing the flag is as good as fighting.
The Kurds are making it impossible for Turkey to continue the offensive.
When the SAA arrives, the Gulf Cooperation Council also arrives.
This soldier was videotaped with one of Assad's units. He's obviously an adviser.
Does he look Syria, Lebanese, or Iranian to you?
So the Kurds and Assad are going to work it out.
The US can cripple the Turkish economy.
Finally the EU is on our side when it comes to Turkey.
The Turkish-backed National Front for Liberation--Islamist rebels--was totally destroyed by "al-Qaeda" in January of this year, so northwest Syria was cleared of jihadists.
This is the final battlefield of the Syrian Civil War.
Trump is ending the war without causing the same disaster that we caused in Iraq.
Remember:
Trump is using economic leverage on all our enemies.
Therefore we don't have to go to war.
Assad was a puppet of the Iranian mullahs, and now he's a figurehead. His army has not engaged in actual combat since late 2016.
Syria is full of GCC commandos posing as SAA and rebels.
After the Turks are defeated, there will be kabuki that allows Assad to go to Russia in retirement.
This is the endgame for Syria.
Iran, the Houthis, and Hezbollah are still threats, but regime change in Iran has to begin with the Iranian people.
It can't be imposed from the outside.
So Trump didn't "abandon" anyone. He simply said nobody is entitled to American lives.
So the Kurds stopped cutting bait and began fishing.
END
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment