Syrian Civil War Developments

[Mihais]

US is getting out.US is also fickle.Iran is there.Turkey,a US ally is bombing the crap out of them.

If Russia and Iran will promise the Kurds the recognition of their state and support vs Turkey,your new Israel will be as opportunistic as the old one.

[Andrey Egorov]

Obama: Turkey has the right to defend itself and its airspace

Kevin Liptak-Profile-Image

By Kevin Liptak, CNN White House Producer

Updated 1817 GMT (0217 HKT) November 24, 2015

Washington (CNN)—Turkey's downing of a Russian fighter plane shouldn't lead to further wartime escalation in the region, President Barack Obama insisted at a press conference Tuesday.

But he maintained Turkey had a right to defend its airspace and charged that Russian air activity near the Turkey-Syria border has been an "ongoing problem."
Turkey said Tuesday it shot down the Russian plane with a missile strike after repeated warnings to the plane that it had flown over its territory.

Saying he expected to speak with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in the coming days to discuss the incident, Obama urged Russia and Turkey to communicate about the details of the operation in order to decrease the chance of escalation.

The downing of the Russian plane complicated Hollande's visit to the White House, where he pressed Obama for greater global cooperation on battling ISIS, including with Moscow.

Hollande has openly called for a greater international effort to push back ISIS, whose killing spree in Paris two weeks ago was the worst terror attack on French soil in more than half a century.

READ: Putin calls plane's downing by Turkey 'stab in the back'

He said Tuesday greater cooperation between the United States and Russia is required in battling ISIS, though persistent U.S. skepticism about Putin's intentions in Syria have until now prevented any significant military coordination between the two countries.

"We want to gather all countries," Hollande said. "We do not want to exclude anyone."

But he also said Russia must pledge to target the Islamic State terrorists instead of moderate Syrian forces opposed to the government of Bashar al-Assad, a requirement Obama also insisted upon during Tuesday's press conference.

"The strikes against the moderate opposition only bolster the Assad regime," Obama said, noting that many of those opposition fighters have the support of Turkey and that the Russian strikes are taking place very close to the Turkish border.

Obama said that he and Hollande agreed that Russia could help in the fight against ISIS if it changed the focus of its military activities in Syria.

"Russia could play a more constructive role if it shifts the focus of its strikes to defeating ISIS," Obama said.

He also said the U.S. and France were sharing intelligence information to help France coordinate its strikes on ISIS and called on Europe to do more to stop the flow of foreign fighters, share passenger lists and exchange information across borders.

Obama also cited the incident with Turkey as a reason for Russia to turn its focus to fighting only ISIS in Syria, saying that "some of those conflicts or potential for escalation are less likely to occur" if it narrowed its sights.

He said the encounter also "underscores the importance of our moving the political track along as quickly as possible" when it comes to resolving the Syrian civil war, which ISIS has exploited to seize territory.

READ: Obama and Hollande meet: What a différence in U.S.-French relations

Obama called ISIS a "scourge" that "must be defeated."

"We'll deliver justice to these terrorists and those who sent them," Obama said. ISIS "cannot be tolerated. It must be destroyed. And we must do it together."

"The United States and France stand united," Obama stressed.

Hollande's visit to Washington comes amid a spate of jet-set diplomacy for the French leader. He'll meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel Wednesday. He met in Paris with British Prime Minister David Cameron Monday.

Obama, who returned from a week-long foreign swing on Monday, made clear in the aftermath of the Paris attacks he wasn't considering a change in strategy, saying instead he was planning to intensify the U.S.-led coalition's air campaign in Iraq and Syria.

In his first press conference after the attacks, in Antalya, Turkey, Obama argued testily that alternative plans from Republicans ignored realities on the ground, saying that his own interactions with wounded troops instilled a wariness toward war.

After coming under intense criticism for his response to the attacks, Obama turned up his rhetoric on ISIS Sunday, saying during a press conference in Malaysia that his efforts to stamp out the group would succeed.

"Destroying ISIL is not only a realistic goal," Obama said. "We're going to get it done and we're going to pursue it. It's going to get done."

But he nonetheless departed Asia insisting the strategy he's utilized against ISIS is working -- and that other options, like sending in ground troops, aren't being considered.

The White House signaled Monday that it already believes U.S. contributions to the anti-ISIS effort are sufficient.

"The United States is certainly pulling more than our own weight when it comes to the contribution behind this coalition," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said. "That's something that we're glad to do. That is in line with the long tradition of American leadership. It certainly is a tradition that this president believes in."

CNN

I think that's about it

[citanon]

US is getting out.US is also fickle.Iran is there.Turkey,a US ally is bombing the crap out of them.

If Russia and Iran will promise the Kurds the recognition of their state and support vs Turkey,your new Israel will be as opportunistic as the old one.

fickle as in supporting them for the last 25 years?

and don't confuse Kurdistan with pkk. Kurdistan actually has good relations with turkey. the relation between pkk and Kurdistan has not been so good as a result.

also, Russian recognize kurdish independence from Iran influenced Iraq?

[Mihais]

We'll live and see.

[citanon]

It's funny you Balkan guys have been fighting the same fight for the past ~5 centuries, and you still see the world through the same lens. I guess because momentum has a life all its own and you can't really look away from that fight. The ABCA powers have a different thing going on. We have so many different problems in so many different parts of the world that we have to look at each thing in itself and try to come up with a tailored solution. Masses of people who look uniform to you we have to look at with a microscope and figure out different groups of friends and foes. To you, the crux is in labeling clear enemies and simple courses of action because you have to pull your entire nation together to mount an effort. To us, we can easily muster enough force to deal with the problem. The key is to limit the cost via divide and conquer and groom local intermediaries who will prevent the problem flaring up again. You see dire and existential, we see problematic and long term. That's the basic difference in the points of view.

Putin is adept at talking to your existential fears, but he plays the long game. You buy into his lies at your own peril.

[snapper]

first you make Russians think that they are creating friends among Europeans, they welcome their effort and make no problem with their participation against ISIS and when you gather your forces, wham!. Same scenario from the 19th century. Back than, Russia was defending legitimacy of aristocracy rule, was running around fighting revolutionaries and at the end it lost Crimea and sold Alaska to Americans out of fear that they will be attacked from behind. Same thing will happen now, Nato will enter in Syria, under the assumption that it is there to protect Turkey and than with the help of the hard core headcutters, bit by bit kick Assad and Russia out of Syria.

Problem is that, once when the corridor for the pipeline is established, our moderate headcutters will awake. You know what I mean Doc.

Nobody 'welcomed' Russian entry into Syria except Assad. Everyone else warned of the risk of precisely this sort of 'accident' occuring; 'deconfliction' talks were held to help prevent this. NATO has no desire to get involved in Syria; ISIS is a Sunni problem and should be fixed by Sunni troops with Western support. Now we hear on Russian TV that Istanbul/Constantinope belongs to them - the old 'Third Rome' - myth. But the Turks have been warning them for weeks to stop attacking the Turkmen in North West Syria but they have ignored this. Something like this was waiting to happen - over time it almost inevitable. If you don't like getting burned stop playing with fire.

The question now is whether Putin doubles his stake or quits. Short of putting a couple of divisions into Syria, which their logistic capability is not up to supporting, they cannot win Assad's war for him. Ramping up in Syria will inevitably risk more casualties and you can't win so common sense would dictate getting the hell out. However I think the 'TV war' for the domestic audience will force them to stay.

I am betting Gazproms price for Turkish supply will now rise, Turkey relies on imports from Russia for aprox 60% of it's energy requirements, which is of course why they were in favour of the Qatari gas pipeline via Syria. Assad blocking this was one of the causes of the trouble in Syria - apart from Assad being a psycho. So you begin to see why the Putin regime, who's only real source of income is gas exports, went to Syria and why only 10% of it's air strikes have been against ISIS. Now I think the Muscovite 'Syrian bluff' has gone badly off the rails - as it was bound to do - and they have again found them in a position in which they cannot win and cannot get out; Donbass 2.

[Mihais]

Citanon,that is an interesting point,but it's not quite so.Putin is not our friend.Those who consider him friend never had a border with Russia.
So while Greeks,Bulgarians,Serbs may think highly of Russia,Romanians and Poles would like the Russkies far,far away.Putin may be respected as a perceived strong leader,but we'll opose everything he has to say wrt our area.What he has to say about Syria,well,the situation has changed radically several times.
Now we see the Russkies as using Syria to stab us in the back with a Western knife-bad for us.We also see this as bad for US.We may think geopolitics,you,depending on whose in the White Hut may think playing golf.2 years ago we thought Putin helping US save face by not getting into a mess was a good thing to do.We would have preffered the crap as it was,although we kinda thought it could get messier,which it did.

As far as the Greek think,them allied with Israel,Armenia and Kurds-whom are quite muslim is the perfectly valid thing to do.For Serbs,the fight with Ottoman leftovers ain't over yet.

As far as divide and conquer,that's fine,with a big body of water between you and mortal foes.Otherwise,them dead or gone is much safer.

The points of view are equally valid,but make no mistake.We play diplomacy with equal ruthlesness.We can balance between great powers and offer a crucial advantage to any of them,for our own benefit.

[zraver]

So if I have this right... 2015 Great Game, Syria Edition

Turkey- doesn't like Assad, doesn't like Iran, really doesn't like the Kurds, kinda likes ISIS and really likes the FSA.

US- doesn't like Assad, frenemies with Iran, likes the Kurds, really doesn't like ISIS, likes the FSA

Russia- likes Assad, likes Iran, doesn't care about Kurds, doesn't care about ISIS, really doesn't like FSA

Iran- likes Assad, Frenemies with US and Russia, doesn't care about Kurds, really doesn't like ISIS, really doesn't like FSA

[citanon]

So if I have this right... 2015 Great Game, Syria Edition

Turkey- doesn't like Assad, doesn't like Iran, really doesn't like the Kurds, kinda likes ISIS and really likes the FSA.

US- doesn't like Assad, frenemies with Iran, likes the Kurds, really doesn't like ISIS, likes the FSA

Russia- likes Assad, likes Iran, doesn't care about Kurds, doesn't care about ISIS, really doesn't like FSA

Iran- likes Assad, Frenemies with US and Russia, doesn't care about Kurds, really doesn't like ISIS, really doesn't like FSA

Right except I don't think we have upgraded to renemies status with Iran.

[zraver]

Right except I don't think we have upgraded to renemies status with Iran.

We have in regards ISIS, we've even provided air support for Iranian led Shia militias in Iraq.

[GVChamp]

Nobody 'welcomed' Russian entry into Syria except Assad. Everyone else warned of the risk of precisely this sort of 'accident' occuring; 'deconfliction' talks were held to help prevent this. NATO has no desire to get involved in Syria; ISIS is a Sunni problem and should be fixed by Sunni troops with Western support. Now we hear on Russian TV that Istanbul/Constantinope belongs to them - the old 'Third Rome' - myth. But the Turks have been warning them for weeks to stop attacking the Turkmen in North West Syria but they have ignored this. Something like this was waiting to happen - over time it almost inevitable. If you don't like getting burned stop playing with fire.

The question now is whether Putin doubles his stake or quits. Short of putting a couple of divisions into Syria, which their logistic capability is not up to supporting, they cannot win Assad's war for him. Ramping up in Syria will inevitably risk more casualties and you can't win so common sense would dictate getting the hell out. However I think the 'TV war' for the domestic audience will force them to stay.

I am betting Gazproms price for Turkish supply will now rise, Turkey relies on imports from Russia for aprox 60% of it's energy requirements, which is of course why they were in favour of the Qatari gas pipeline via Syria. Assad blocking this was one of the causes of the trouble in Syria - apart from Assad being a psycho. So you begin to see why the Putin regime, who's only real source of income is gas exports, went to Syria and why only 10% of it's air strikes have been against ISIS. Now I think the Muscovite 'Syrian bluff' has gone badly off the rails - as it was bound to do - and they have again found them in a position in which they cannot win and cannot get out; Donbass 2.

Russia does not need to "win," it needs to function as a suitably strong spanner in the works that a viable solution cannot be achieved without acquiescence to Russian wishes.

Russia cannot "win" in the sense of restoring Assad to full control of Syria as in 2008. But it takes a hell of a powerful, organized coalition to take out Assad and replace it without something that does not resemble the Balkans. Or, more correctly, England before Cromwell decided to simply dissolve parliament.

Russia doesn't even need to win, it just needs to slow down the rate of loss until Assad can reconsolidate his position a bit. Prior to the Russian intervention, Assad was increasingly routed and his various militias refused to fight outside their local towns. Disaster in the waiting. Russian intervention that puts a few extra years of life into the Assad regime is a goddam nightmare for End-Game and Post-Assad rule.

Also, this is the Middle East. Alliances change. Hell, not even alliances, BORDERS change. Syria was ruled by Cairo not terribly long before I was born.

[kuku]

Seems like everybody is getting into a real mess over syria, Russia should have provided support to its attack aircraft, Turkey will attack them was for sure.
Perhaps Russia will now try to do the same
Turkey is also violating Syrian air space on a regular basis....

[astralis]

z,

US- doesn't like Assad, frenemies with Iran, likes the Kurds, really doesn't like ISIS, likes the FSA

also, to put another wrinkle in it, we like the Kurds but not so much so that we'll actively piss off NATO member Turkey.

[citanon]

z,



also, to put another wrinkle in it, we like the Kurds but not so much so that we'll actively piss off NATO member Turkey.

But actually Turkey claims to like Kurdistan but hate PKK. PKK claims to hate Turkey and feels hurt that Kurdistan doesn't love it.

[snapper]

Russia does not need to "win," it needs to function as a suitably strong spanner in the works that a viable solution cannot be achieved without acquiescence to Russian wishes.

Russia cannot "win" in the sense of restoring Assad to full control of Syria as in 2008. But it takes a hell of a powerful, organized coalition to take out Assad and replace it without something that does not resemble the Balkans. Or, more correctly, England before Cromwell decided to simply dissolve parliament.

Russia doesn't even need to win, it just needs to slow down the rate of loss until Assad can reconsolidate his position a bit. Prior to the Russian intervention, Assad was increasingly routed and his various militias refused to fight outside their local towns. Disaster in the waiting. Russian intervention that puts a few extra years of life into the Assad regime is a goddam nightmare for End-Game and Post-Assad rule.

Also, this is the Middle East. Alliances change. Hell, not even alliances, BORDERS change. Syria was ruled by Cairo not terribly long before I was born.

If you are not in it to win it you are in for alot of pain and death.