Month: October 2019
Whose side would you choose?
These have been consequential days to be out of commission due to lack of a computer power supply, but Amazon delivered yesterday in Bologna, where I am meeting with students and faculty at the SAIS campus. So I’ll try to catch up.
President Trump has pulled the plug on the US presence in Syria with the expected results: a Turkish invasion from the north and a push from Syrian government forces from the south. The Syrian Kurdish YPG, formerly the core of the US-sponsored forces fighting the Islamic State, has understandably opted for allying itself with Damascus, while Islamic State personnel are busy escaping from YPG captivity. International politics abhors a vacuum and fills it with armed people.
What could have been differently? The Americans needed to negotiate their withdrawal, as they have been trying to do in Afghanistan. Rather than leaving a vacuum, they might have arranged for Ankara, Damascus, Moscow, and the Kurds to come to an understanding about areas of control, at least on a temporary basis. Without such an understanding, the parties concerned will need to fight it out, to the detriment of the effort against ISIS and other extremists. The US is moving towards imposing sanctions on NATO ally Turkey in order to get it to stop fighting the Kurds. The absurdity of that sentence tells you all you need to know about how bad the decision to pull the plug was.
The second major development in recent days is the US/China mini trade agreement. Beijing will supposedly renew massive imports of US agricultural products in exchange for a truce on tariff increases. That accords with the first law of holes: when in one, stop digging. The tariffs are having a negative effect on the world economy, and the dip in Chinese agricultural purchases is blowing a multi-billion dollar hole in the US government budget as the Trump Administration tries to compensate farmers for their losses and hold on to their political loyalty.
But the agreement does little or nothing to solve the bigger problems in the US/China trading relationship, especially theft of intellectual property and forced technology transfer while leaving in place the several waves of tariffs already levied. My guess is that Trump is happy with that: he shows no sign of wanting to get rid of the tariffs, which he views as encouraging US manufacturing despite massive evidence to the contrary. The tariffs are hitting a lot of intermediate goods needed by US manufacturers, making them less competitive in US and world markets. But Trump is a mercantilist. He’ll want to keep the tariffs, no matter what Beijing agrees to do.
The mini deal is at least a step in the right direction: an end to a trade war the US cannot win. That is not true of the President’s decision on Syria. It is prelude to a wider and even more ferocious war in northeastern Syria, where erstwhile US allies will find themselves crushed between the Turkish onslaught and the Syrian counterattack. Levying tariffs on Turkey compounds the misjudgment, as it suggests the Americans did not understand what everyone else knew would happen. Trump is proving the US an unreliable ally to both Turkey and the Kurds, to the advantage of Syrian President Assad. He now has an opportunity to retake the substantial agricultural lands and oil and gas resources of northeastern Syria.
Making America great again is proving not just an empty slogan but a menace to American friends, who will need little encouragement in the future to rely on others for protection. Russia and Iran are the big winners from US policy in Syria. China is proving that trade wars are not easy to win. Whose side would you choose to be on?
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 13
Who knows what US policy in Syria/Turkey is this morning? NYT has some “live updates.” The president played golf yesterday while aides scrambled to explain what was happening. Lindsey Graham said Trump was willing to sanction Turkey now. [He has the power already; where’s the sanction?] Axios said officials said Trump had called Erdogan’s bluff two times. Looks the opposite to me. Maybe later this week somebody will write the tick-tock.
In other news, it looks as if China got the most out of the mini trade deal.
AP has more background on the Trump=Zelensky phone call.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks October 13-19
After the Syrian Pullback: What’s Next for Middle East Policy|October 15, 2019|9:15am-11:00am|Hudson Institute|Stern Policy Center, 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Suite 400, Washington DC 20004|Register Here
Hudson Institute will host a debate on the latest developments in Syria and Turkey, the impact on U.S. interests, and the future of U.S. Middle East policy. Hudson Senior Fellow Mike Doran will argue in favor of the president’s withdrawal, while Hudson Fellow Blaise Misztal and Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Mary Beth Long will present the counterargument that this move is detrimental to U.S. interests in the region.
The Trump administration’s decision to move U.S. forces out of the way of a Turkish military operation in northeastern Syria is a fundamental change to the last five years of U.S. policy in the region. The decision appears to bring to an end the U.S. partnership with Syrian Kurdish forces, forged in the fight against the Islamic State, while potentially reinvigorating the flagging U.S.-Turkish alliance. The debate will explore the broader implications throughout the region.
Speakers
Blaise Misztal Fellow, Hudson Institute
Mike Doran Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
Mary Beth Long Former Assistant Secretary of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense
Program
Registration: 9:15 a.m. — 9:30 a.m.
Introduction: 9:30 a.m. — 9:35 a.m.
Panel Remarks and Discussion: 9:35 a.m. — 10:35 a.m.
Audience Q & A: 10:35 a.m. — 11:00 a.m.
Iraq Conference|October 15, 2019|10:00AM-4:00PM|Middle East Institute|1763 N St. NW, Washington, District of Columbia 20036|Register Here
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host its second Iraq Conference, which will bring together leading policy voices to explore the key challenges and opportunities confronting current and future generations in Iraq. Four panels and two keynotes will explore the ways in which Iraqis, the United States, and the international community must adapt to the political, economic, and social changes facing Iraq.
Agenda:
10:00-11:30AM | Panel I: Regional Cooperation: Operationalizing the Baghdad Declaration
The opening panel will examine opportunities for growth in regional cooperation. Specifically, panelists will propose economic, security, and trade policies which encourage bilateral and multilateral solutions to systemic regional issues.
Joey Hood
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs
Randa Slim
Director of Conflict Resolution and Track II Dialogues Program, MEI
H.E. Fareed Yasseen
Ambassador to the United States, Republic of Iraq
Ross Harrison, moderator
Senior Fellow, MEI
11:30AM-1:00PM | Panel II: Rebuilding Iraq’s Social Fabric: A Way Forward for IDPs and Communities Liberated from ISIS
This panel will address the urgent humanitarian concerns, economic desperation, and legal limbo facing internally displaced persons in Iraq, and propose policy solutions regarding livelihoods, safe resettlement, and minority rights protections. Panelists will also explore the legal and social challenges Iraq is facing in dealing with the aftermath of the war against ISIS.
Basma Alloush
Policy and Advocacy Officer, Norwegian Refugee Council
Amb. Rend Al Rahim
President, Iraq Foundation
Rasha Al Aqeedi
Managing Editor, Irfaa Sawtak
Hallam Ferguson
Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator of the Bureau for the Middle East, USAID
Joyce Karam, moderator
Washington Correspondent, The National UAE
1:00-1:30PM | Lunch
1:30-2:45PM | Panel III: Energy, Water, and Climate Change
This panel will explore the ways in which the water crisis and the long term effects of climate change have impacted Iraq. Panelists will explore policy solutions to these challenges and prospects for energy innovation.
Omar Al Nidawi
Program manager, Enabling Peace in Iraq Center
Abbas Kadhim
Director of Iraq Initiative, Atlantic Council
Bilal Wahab
Nathan and Esther K. Wagner fellow, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Randa Slim, moderator
Director, Conflict Resolution and Track II Dialogues Program, MEI
2:45-4:00PM | Panel IV: Forecasting Local Provincial Elections and the Popular Mobilization Forces
The closing panel will focus on the upcoming local provincial elections and the importance of political pluralism and participation of Iraqis. The panelists will examine the influence of the PMF and will propose policy solutions to Iraq’s political system and institutional crisis.
Naufel Al Hassan
Former Chief of Staff, Prime Minister’s Office, Republic of Iraq
Shahla Al Kli
Principal Development Specialist, DAI
Michael Fleet (via skype)
Senior researcher, Institute on Governance
Hafsa Halawa
Independent Consultant and Political Analyst
Ambassador (ret.) Gerald Feierstein, moderator
Senior Vice President, MEI
The Syrian Conflict and Kurdish Issue: A Regional Dilemma|October 16, 2019|11:00AM-12:30PM|Turkish Heritage Organization|National Press Club, 529 14th St NW, Washington DC 20045|Register Here
Join THO on October 16, starting at 11:00 AM for a panel discussion on the latest situation in Syria and the realties in the region. We’re delighted to be joined by a group of experts who will analyze the situation and offer their expertise.
Speakers:
Eva Savelsberg, President of the European Center for Kurdish Studies, Germany
Kyle Orton, Senior Foreign Policy Expert, United Kingdom
Abdullah Kedo, Executive at Political Commission of Kurdish National Council & Member of Yekiti Party
*Lunch will be served
Yemen at a Crossroads: Are New Conflict Dynamics Reshaping the Country’s Future?|October 16, 2019|12:30PM-2:00PM|The Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington|1050 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 1060, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here
Recent developments in Yemen’s war, in particular violent clashes between forces operating within the Saudi-led coalition supporting President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi, have focused attention anew on deep North-South fissures, the viability of the internationally recognized government, and the boost Houthi rebels have received from the drawdown of Emirati forces. What appears certain is that the dynamics of Yemen’s protracted war have changed materially: Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which have invested deeply in the conflict, are seeking to protect both national security and economic interests. An emboldened Houthi insurgency seems determined to press its advantage. Even extremist and terrorist groups have re-emerged to assert their capacity to act as spoilers in any political settlement.
Have the Houthi rebels, for all intents and purposes, won Yemen’s war? Is the notion of a unified Yemeni state yet another casualty of the conflict? How are neighboring countries calculating the impact of recent events on their core interests? Have Saudi Arabia and the UAE unleashed forces in Yemen that will threaten these interests and test their alliance?
Speakers
Elana DeLozier – Research Fellow, Bernstein Program on Gulf and Energy Policy, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abdulghani al-Iryani – Political and Development Consultant on Yemen
Charles Schmitz – Professor of Geography, Towson University
Ambassador Stephen A. Seche, Moderator – Executive Vice-President, AGSIW
Refugees in Lebanon: Perspectives from on the Ground|October 16, 2019|2:00PM-3:30PM|Middle East Institute|1763 N St. NW, Washington, District of Columbia 20036|Register Here
In recent months, refugees in Lebanon are facing a dismal climate of social polarization, opportunistic political rhetoric, and increasing hostility, with the demolition of some informal camp settlements, enhanced labor law restrictions, and widespread protests. Humanitarian programs must navigate tensions between host, Palestinian and Syrian refugee communities against the backdrop of Lebanon’s serious economic and environmental difficulties.
The Middle East Institute (MEI) and Anera are pleased to invite you to a panel discussion of the many challenges facing Syrian and Palestinian refugees in Lebanon.
Speakers
Dima Zayat | Anera Deputy Country Director, Lebanon
Serene Dardari | Anera Communications and Outreach Manager, Lebanon
Mona Yacoubian | Senior Advisor on Syria, the Middle East, and North Africa, United States Institute of Peace
Randa Slim (moderator) | Senior Fellow and Director of Conflict Resolution and Track II Dialogues Program, MEI
Exploring New Approaches for Atrocity Prevention|October 16, 2019|3:00PM-4:30PM|United States Institute of Peace|2301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037|Register Here
A new report from the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC) proposes an international doctrine called the “Right to Assist,” which would strengthen external support for nonviolent civil resistance campaigns demanding rights, freedom, and justice against nondemocratic rule. Drawing from social science research and insights from practitioners, Right to Assist argues that support for nonviolent civil resistance can help avert atrocities and civil war, as well as increase the prospect for long-term democratic stability.
Join USIP for a discussion on the Right to Assist doctrine with ICNC President Hardy Merriman, co-author of the report, and other civil resistance experts. The event will look at how Right to Assist could be implemented, as well as how increased external support might be viewed from the perspectives of efficacy, international law, practical concerns, and possible unintended consequences. Join the conversation on Twitter with #PeoplePower4Peace.
Speakers
Quscondy Abdulshafi
Research Consultant, Dexis Consulting Group-OTI/USAID
Ariela Blätter
Program Officer, Atrocities Prevention and Response, Wellspring Philanthropic Fund
Alejandra Espinoza
Executive Director, Voices of Nicaragua
Nancy Lindborg
President and CEO, U.S. Institute of Peace
Hardy Merriman
President, ICNC
Maria Stephan
Director, Program on Nonviolent Action, U.S. Institute of Peace
Complex Puzzle, Shifting Pieces: The Domestic, Regional, and International Forces Reshaping the Gulf|October 17, 2019|8:30AM-5:00PM|Gulf International Forum|The National Press Club, 529 14th Street NW, Washington DC 20045|Register Here
It comes as no surprise that the past year has been a remarkable one for the Gulf region. The sheer change in circumstances for the region compared to this time in 2018 is staggering. While last year’s conversation was unduly concerned with the ramifications of the still-ongoing ‘Gulf Crisis’ the apparent institutionalization of the rift has seemingly killed the bloc’s original purpose. Arising within this void have been the proliferation of new questions related to the War in Yemen, deepening inter-Gulf tensions, a post-JCPOA Iran, and an Iraq precariously fending off a resurging ISIS. Meanwhile, the region has brought about renewed skepticism from the United States and other Western nations, leading to questions concerning the Gulf’s place in the world order. In both hemispheres, a once-quiet region has been vaulted into the spotlight for reasons related to conflict, economics, geopolitics, and human rights. Given these complex dynamics, GIF is looking forward to our Second Annual Gulf International Conference “Complex Puzzle, Shifting Pieces: The Domestic, Regional & International Forces Reshaping the Gulf.” Please join us for a day of panel discussions and presentations that seeks to offer clarity concerning inter-Gulf dynamics, conflict scenarios in Iraq and Yemen, the looming presence of Iran and possible changes to the U.S-Gulf relationship.
Schedule of Events
9:00-9:15 Opening Remarks – Dania Thafer, GIF Executive DIrector
9:15-9:45 Keynotes – the Honorable Ambassador Chas W. Freeman Jr. and Dr. Abu Bakr al-Qirbi
9:50-11:05 – Panel 1: The Changing Same: New Developments for Old Challenges Facing the Gulf
- Congressman James P. Moran Former member, US House of Representatives
- General (Ret.) Mark T. Kimmitt Fmr Asst Sec State for Political-Military Affairs
- Dina Esfandiary Intl Security Program Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and Intl Affairs
- Dr. Lina Khatib Head of MENA programs, Chatham House
- Dr. Kristian Coates Ulrichsen MENA Fellow, Rice University Baker Inst. for Public Policy
11:10-12:25 – Panel 2: Triumphs and Tribulations of Implementing Gulf Economic Visions
- Dr. Tarek Yousef Director, Brookings Center – Doha
- Dr. Bessma Momani Professor, Dept of Poli. Sci University of Waterloo
- Dania Thafer Executive Director, Gulf International Forum
- Dr. Jassim Hussein Former Member, Parliament of Bahrain
12:30-1:00 – Network/Break for Lunch
1:00-2:00 – Lunchtime and Award Ceremony
- Husham Althahabi Founder – The Iraq Home for Creativity
- Maali S. Alasousi Country Director, Direct Aid Organization
2:10-3:25 – Panel 3A: Changing Dynamics of Security and Defense in the Gulf
- Professor David Des Roches Associate Professor, NESA Center for Security Studies
- Dr. Capt Jeffrey Macris USN. RET. Professor of History, United States Naval Academy
- Elana DeLozier Research Fellow, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Ambassador Gerald Feierstein Fmr. United States Ambasador to Yemen
- Becca Wasser Policy Analyst, RAND Corporation
- Dr. Abbas Kadhim Director and Senior Resident Fellow Iraq Initiative, Atlantic Council
2:10-3:25 – Panel 3B: Cracked but Unbroken: Women and the Gulf’s Glass Ceiling
- H.E. Dr. Hend al-Muftah Member, Qatari Shura Council
- Negar Morazavi Consultant Editor, The Independent
- Dr. Sahar Khamis Associate Professor, University of Maryland
- Dr. Lana Baydas Human Rights Expert
- Dr. Maalak al-Rasheed Professor, Kuwait University
3:30-4:45 – Panel 4A: Congress and the President: US-Gulf Policymaking in a Divided Government
- Rachel Oswald Foreign Policy Reporter, CQ Roll Call
- Aaron David Miller Fmr. Senior Advisor-Arab Israeli Negotiations, State Dept.
- Steve Simon Fmr. Senior Director-MENA, National Security Council
- The Honorable Mary Beth Long Fmr. Asst. Sec. Def., United States Department of Defense
- Khalil Jahshan Executive Director, Arab Center – DC
- Sheikh Abdulla al-Ali al-Sabah Kuwaiti Academic and Researcher
3:30-4:45 – Panel 4B: Manipulating Religion: Political Islam and the Region’s Competition for Dominance
- Khaled Saffuri Director, National Interest Foundation
- Dr. Abdullah Baabood Professor, Singapore National University
- Dr. Bulent Aras Senior Scholar, Wilson Center
- Dr. Courtney Freer Research Fellow, London School of Economics
- Dr. Kristin Diwan Senior Resident Scholar, Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington
4:50-5:00 – Executive Director’s Closing Remarks
What’s Next for Democracy and Women’s Rights in Afghanistan?|October 18, 2019|8:30-9:30AM|United States Institute of Peace|2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington DC 20037|Register Here
Join Rep. Susan Davis and Rep. Martha Roby as they reflect on important progress made by and for Afghan women within the domestic, civic, military, and political spheres, which they have highlighted in annual congressional delegations to Afghanistan over the past 12 years. Afghan women have expressed their sense of empowerment, resilience, and determination as they have gained influence over this period. They have also emphasized the challenges they face in securing their critical role in the future development of their country. Rep. Davis and Rep. Roby, who recently led a bipartisan member delegation to Afghanistan in May 2019, will reflect on the past, present, and future of the country. Light refreshments will be served.
Speakers
Rep. Susan Davis (D-CA)
U.S. Representative from California
Rep. Martha Roby (R-AL)
U.S. Representative from Alabama
Nancy Lindborg, moderator
President and CEO, U.S. Institute of Peace
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Green light
President Trump, whether intending to or not, has made it eminently clear that the US would do nothing militarily to avoid a Turkish push into Syria against the Syrian Kurds who have fought for years with the US against the Islamic State. With the US troops on the border withdrawn from their buffer role by Trump, Turkish troops are now pressing into Syria in an effort to destroy the YPG, the Syrian Kurdish forces President Erdogan characterizes as terrorists because they are an adjunct of the PKK, Kurdish forces that attack inside Turkey.
President Trump has threatened the Turkish economy, but he won’t go through with it. He is anticipated to veto a sanctions bill working its way through Congress, where the votes to override are not available.
It was hard to imagine that the situation in Syria could be made worse than it already was, but Trump has managed it. Instead of negotiating the US withdrawal with Turkey and Russia, he simply pulled the plug on the US presence at the border. I’d be the first to say that presence was not sustainable and needed to be withdrawn. But vacuums get filled. The trick is to make sure they get filled with something that protects US interests. Trump failed to even try to do that.
Now the outcome is all too predictable: the Turks will chase the Kurds from the border area, which is where most of them have lived for generations. The Kurds will respond not only by resisting the Turkish attack but also by conducting terrorist operations inside Turkey and Turkish-controlled Syria. One has occurred already in a Turkish border town, according to press reports. Distracted by the fight against Turkey, the Syrian Kurds will not be able to sustain the fight against resurgent ISIS forces or perhaps even maintain the camps in which they hold ISIS prisoners.
Damascus will seize this opportunity to offer some protection for the Kurds, who will not have any other option. They will go back to the purpose for which their military units were created by Damascus: attacking inside Turkey. So a war that today looks like it is between Turkey and the Kurds will soon be a war between Turkey and Syria, with unpredictable results.
It is not impossible that Damascus and Ankara will reach a pact restoring Syrian authority along the border in exchange for repression of the Kurdish threat to Turkey and return of large numbers of Syrian Arab refugees from Turkey back to Syria. But of course a messy continuation of war between Turkey and Syria is also possible.
The big losers in all of this will be Syria’s citizens, both Kurdish and Arab. They will suffer major humanitarian challenges as civilians are used as human shields or flee to escape the fighting. Eventually large numbers of Syrian refugees inside Turkey are likely to be forced back to Syria, violating their non-refoulement right.
Assad, the Russians, and the Iranians have reason to be pleased. Trump has demonstrated once again that US support is unreliable, the Russians are strengthening their foothold in Syria and the region, Assad is getting a chance to restore his authority over northeastern Syria, and the Iranians will enjoy his triumph as well as the smashing of the Kurds. Make America Great Again once again means weakening the United States by failing to use diplomatic instruments to enable a withdrawal that could have been executed without the risks we are now running.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 10
Do you know what US policy is toward Turkey this morning? I can’t figure it out. The president called the Turkish invasion “a bad idea” but also lambasted the Kurds for not having helped America at Normandy. [He got this fact from what he called “a very powerful article,” presumably this.] Trump also warned Turkey about its invasion, but gave no details as to what actions would be unacceptable.
The Graham-Van Hollen sanctions bill, outlined here, might well pass the Senate, but I doubt such a measure could sustain a presidential veto, and GOP leaders might work to limit the blowback to a single vote instead of a regular bill.
NYT has messages showing US officials didn’t want to publicize the release of aid to Ukraine.
FP says budget officials raised bureaucratic nitpicks to prevent disbursement of millions in humanitarian aid as the fiscal year ended.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A Kurdish view of Turkey’s invasion
Yousif Ismael is the Director of Media and Policy at the Washington Kurdish Institute. Colin Tait is a Research Assistant at the Middle East Institute.
Colin Tait: What can we expect in the coming days in northeastern Syria with this invasion?
Yousif Ismael: It’s already started. It has already resulted into the death of two civilians and the injury of one. The airstrikes are intense and covering all the bordering towns between Syria, the Kurdish region, and Turkey. We expect a lot of internally displaced people from those areas to go south. We expect massacres and we say massacres because we have experience with the same groups and the same state with Turkey and the jihadists in Afrin in March of 2018. We expect disaster and unfortunately, there’s not a lot of ears to eat.
CT: Ankara right now claims that they just planned to establish a safe zone and peace corridor along the border. Do you expect that they will go further south?
YI: First of all, the peace corridor or whatever they call it is based on a war propaganda. This is not reality. Sometimes they claim to fight ISIS but there is no ISIS over there whatsoever. The Kurds secured that region and the Kurds have never shot a bullet against Turkey from that region. It’s safer than the bordering points that Turkey has with the opposition groups and with Assad elsewhere. So, this is just a war propaganda. They are talking about a safe zone of 30 kilometers deep that basically is the Kurdish region of Syria. What people need to understand is that the Turkish ambition is historical against the Kurds. They are against any Kurdish entity rising up. They did the same thing in Iraqi Kurdistan, but then there was an imposed no-fly zone against Saddam which helped the Kurds create the entity. The same thing with Syria, they’re fighting with Turkey. Inside Turkey, the Kurds of course are suffering since 1923 when the Turkish state was built. We are worried it is not going to be only that but the 30 kilometers is good enough for Turkey to destroy the Kurdish region.
CT: The US removal of troops has caused a lot of short-term disasters that are occurring in the region. What is the long-term blowback you think for the region as a whole as well as the damage to the relationship between the Kurds and United States?
YI: Now the Americans as people, as lawmakers, as media, and as think tanks have showed their true feelings, which is about supporting the Kurdish and avoiding massacres and genocide. It mostly itself is based on the humanitarian situation. We love and we appreciate what America has showed to us except President Trump. He is the only one who is convinced to allow Turkey to invade and commit massacres. In the short-term, the US doesn’t have good policy in Syria. They gave up the West during the Obama Administration and now, they’re giving up East to Turkey during the Trump Administration. The relationship will always be great between the two Nations. However, the Kurds right now are obligated to go to our enemies and the enemies of the US as well, which is Iran, the Assad regime, and Russia to get some source of some protection. It is a fight for survival.
To be fair and far from emotions, the Syrian regime and Russia also don’t offer much to the Kurds. They don’t give them any entity or any rights. But to surrender the entire region to Assad, which is basically going back to pre-2012, the Kurds were persecuted without citizenship and had no rights. We didn’t have many options.
Going back to the cooperation between the US and Kurds, the Kurds wanted to defend their land and not become refugees and stay in their homeland. And the only people to help them they were the US and the US-led Coalition which was great. The Kurds defended their land thanks to the US but also the Kurds fought with US on behalf of the world against terror organizations. It’s two sides of the argument here and we are very disappointed that this big threat to the national security of the US and elsewhere is not affecting the president’s decision making because ISIS is on the verge to come back. Al-Qaeda is only becoming stronger and nobody’s even talking about it. They even have schools. They have thousands of troops in Syria. Then we’re talking about Iran, yet we’ve given them another strategic part which affects the allies of the US.
CT: Going back to the Kurds and the US and Trump harming the relationship. Congress on both sides of the spectrum have said that they want to impose sanctions and push back on President Trump’s decision. Do you think sanctions are enough? And what can US policymakers do to backpedal and reverse this decision.
YI: Just a side note. The only bipartisan non-binding resolution that took place by the Senate was in January or December of last year when Trump wanted to withdraw. That was the only bipartisan movement. The Kurds united the two sides, the Democrats and Republicans. This same thing is repeating itself, which is amazing because national security should be a bipartisan issue. It should not be a Democratic or Republican. But yes, sanctions are not enough. There’s always a veto by the president and there are always ways to get away with it. Turkey got away with breaking the sanctions of the US against Iran. Turkey got away with buying Russian weapons. Turkey got away with helping the Venezuelan dictatorship by trading gold between Iran and Venezuela and this is all on record on a media publicly. I think that a good immediate solution is to shut down the skies on Turkey to stop these massacres against the Kurds. The Kurds then could figure out how to resist or just to survive better than allowing them to use the sky. A no-fly zone would be ideal and that should be the priority of Congress.
CT: I met with a former Syrian diplomat and he discussed how the Autonomous Administration of North Eastern Syria is the best model for the future of a stable Syria. What can be done to preserve this idea as Turkey starts to invade Northeastern Syria?
YI: The US built this multi-ethnic Kurdish majority and now Arab majority multi-ethnic force that defeated the most brutal organization of ISIS. After that, Kurds helped the other communities, with the help of the US DOD and Pentagon to be specific, to help these civilian councils to manage. This is a very secular decentralized system that is pro-human rights and women rights. They have a different vision and they’re not calling for independent Kurdistan. They want to remain in Syria.
It is a very good model to follow. The only way to preserve it is to stop Turkey because sooner or later, if this continues, Iran, Russia, and the Syrian regime will pounce at the towns because the Kurds cannot fight everyone and all the Kurds are asking for is peace and talks with Turkey.
Nobody wants war. Nobody wants to be killed. 11,000 YPG members have been killed and 22,000 injured as the SDF. This is affecting 200 thousand families. Look how many families are affected by this. The economy there is stable. All of these displaced people are in that region. Turkey is complaining about the refugees, but that region also has refugees. The Kurds were welcoming them even though they are under blockage of Syria, Turkey, and sometimes even by Iraq. It is not just a Kurdish problem. It is a Syrian problem.
CT: Can you talk about how the International Community aside from the United States can help with this crisis?
YI: To be fair, it is European responsibility even before the US to prevent this. Europe is closer to Turkey and the terrorists will eventually make their way to Europe before the United States. The Europeans should definitely do more, and I urge them and beg them and ask them to stop this invasion because this is not in their interest and not in Turkey’s interest, meaning the economy and the authoritarian regime of Turkey. This is having the Turkish soldiers ordered to go fight for something that is not his problem. This is something that is personal to Erdogan and his dictatorship ideology to resolve this Islamic Empire of Ottomans and this and that. It’s against the interest of everyone. I hope the Europeans will be serious and finally step up their game and prevent what is to happen in the coming days.
CT: What are you and other Kurdish organizations here in DC and around the country plan to do about this issue?
YI: We do our job as raising awareness. We defended the political, the culture, and the human rights of the Kurds in all parts. Today, Syrian Kurdistan is really in trouble and they’re facing massacres by Turkey. We will continue raising awareness, but we are again thankful for every voice from actors to think tanks to the media to lawmakers that they came up and spoke the truth and stood against the bad decision of President Trump.
RSS - Posts
