American immunity

Will the creation of “security forces” with the support of Washington in the Syria regions controlled by the Kurds to new armed conflicts in the Middle East and the next exacerbation of Russian-American relations?

Turkish President Recep Erdogan sharply criticized the “security forces” created under the auspices of the United States, which is supposed to assign a mission to protect Kurdish regions on the Syrian-Turkish border. Formations of up to 30 thousand people will consist mainly of the Kurds themselves and their union forces. Speaking at a rally in Ankara, Erdogan said that the country that the Turkish authorities consider an ally forms a terrorist army that threatens Turkey’s security. Erdogan threatened to destroy the military formations created on the initiative of the United States in the north of Syria. The Syria government also condemned the plan for creating Kurdish formations, promising to destroy them, and at the same time to expel the American military contingent from the country, which has about 2 thousand people. The ally of Damascus Russia described the American plan as an attempt to dismember Syria and establish American control over part of its territory. Iran also opposed the formation of "security forces" in the regions of Syria.

For almost all seven years of the war in Syria, the United States and Türkiye often acted together, helping the forces of resistance to the regime of the Syrian President Bashar al -Assad. The split between them occurred due to Washington’s support by the Syrian Democratic Forces organization, which was mainly equipped with Kurdish fighters. The SDS is designed to protect the Kurdish population in the border areas adjacent to Turkey and Iraq, as well as in the depths of the territory of Syria.

American officer and fighters of Kurdish armed groups

The situation is commented by the senior teacher of the Department of Political Science of the Higher School of Economics, an expert on the situation in the Arab world and in the Middle East Leonid Isaev .

- It is known that the Kurds were US allies in the fight against the Islamic State, and, apparently, they very much hoped that after the victory over the Islamists, they would be able to create an independent state. The United States, of course, could not openly support the creation of such a state. Can then the formation of security forces as a certain compromise option that the Kurds de facto independence ensures?

- I think that at least this is a completely adequate decision on the part of the United States, because since such significant forces have been spent to free this territory from the Islamic State, and since the Kurds played a key role in this, then, of course, the United States is considering this part of Syria, controlled by the Kurds, as their sphere of influence. Of course, it is necessary to protect it, because it is obvious that the Kurds are the group in Syria, which is probably criticized by the vast majority of forces involved in the Syrian crisis. They are under the threat of both from the Syrian regime, they are at risk both from Turkey and Iran. And in this regard, the creation of a security zone will allow the Kurds to acquire a certain immunity, at least from encroachments on the territory that they now control. And the United States will guarantee the preservation of influence on Syrian territory. And accordingly, this will enable America in the future to play an important role in both Iraqi and Syrian fate and politics.

-But can this situation lead to some new armed conflicts? Türkiye openly threatens to "destroy the Kurdish formations created in the bud. How like it is that it will embody this threat? After all, this will actually mean confrontation with her NATO ally - USA.

Leonid Isaev

I do not think that Erdogan would now be profitable to get involved in some kind of armed conflict

- These statements, which Erdogan makes regarding the Kurds, this, it seems to me, is to a large extent populism. Of course, they cannot pass this in Ankara, the Turks must react to such actions by the United States in relation to the Kurds, in relation to their main, probably an opponent in Syria. But to do something real for the Turks, it seems to me that now there are no possibilities. To start hostilities in Syria against the Kurds - this can lead to very large losses. And these losses that the Turks can bear, having quarreled in the fight against the Kurds, can very poorly affect the ratings of Erdogan himself, who, incidentally, has outlined presidential elections in 2019. And the possibility of the fact that these elections can be held ahead of schedule is discussed. Therefore, I do not think that Erdogan would now be profitable to get involved in some kind of armed conflict, which potentially lead to big losses. But Erdogan is trying to use the Kurdish problem for populist purposes in order to rally the population around him. On the Kurdish issue, there are no discrepancies in the Turkish society, therefore this is a very successful external excuse for conducting the domestic and to some extent already election policy of Erdogan. On the other hand, if we talk about security and, conversely, the conflicting of the US decision, it seems to me that this decision of the Americans must be considered more to the immunity that the Kurds from attacks from the Syrian government forces receive from the Turks. The official policy of Damascus and the military strategy of Damascus is to sooner or later, but to take control of absolutely the entire territory of Syria. And what we now see in Idlib, for example, what we see in the eastern guta shows that the Syrian regime is not going to observe any agreements on the de -escalation zones and sooner or later plans to take control of all uncontrolled territories. From this point of view, only the presence of some comparable force comparable in military plan can stop the offensive of the Syrian army. And the fact that the Kurds have this power, to some extent, this is a guarantee that the Kurds will not be captured by Syrian government troops, and they will simply have more chances to negotiate about the future political structure of Syria, the place of the Kurds within the future Syrian state, on conditions that would also be acceptable for the Kurds.

- You are talking about how aggressively the current Syrian regime behaves, which managed to stay in power with the direct support of Russia. The situation that we are now discussing can lead to a new exacerbation in relations between Moscow and Washington?

- Maybe it gives. At least, this has already led to the next round of verbal skirmish. As far as I understand, the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russian parliament have already criticized this idea of the United States, saying that its implementation will inevitably lead to the split of Syria and the United States are not interested in ensuring that Syria is preserved as a single state. But I do not think that this will lead to some real military conflict. On the contrary, I am more inclined to regard this step by the Americans as some guarantees of the safety of the Kurds. What is very well understood in the Middle East is the language of power. And if the Kurds have power in order to withstand threats from the outside, in general, this guarantees them a certain calm existence, despite all these populist statements and criticism from Ankara and Damascus. By and large, now no one in general in the Middle Eastern region supported this idea, almost everyone was criticized, but this is certainly due to the very vulnerable position of the Kurds themselves. But with all this, I think that it is unlikely that we can see some actions from Moscow directed against the Kurds. I think that this will remain at the level of verbal criticism in the same way.

- And I would like to return to the question of the statehood of the Kurds. We are now talking about the Kurds in Syria, but the Kurds are in Turkey, the Kurds are in Iraq, in Iran. Judging by your words, the creation of such forces we are talking about will lead to the fact that the Kurds will become less vulnerable. Can this contribute to the unification of the Kurds? In general, in the Middle East, as I remember, there are almost more than 20 million of them. And will this lead to the fact that the movement for the creation of an independent common Kurdish state will only intensify?

Recep Erdogan

- It seems to me that this decision does not follow that the Kurds will be closer to the creation of their Kurdish state. Because the main problem here is that the Kurds are an extremely fragmented people, and sometimes it is very difficult for them to agree with each other. It is sometimes even more difficult for them to agree with each other than with their opponents. This is the main problem that prevents real advance to ensure that the Kurds become closer to the creation of their own state. A referendum, say, in Iraqi Kurdistan, which has recently been held, because he demonstrated it very well that the Kurds themselves still have a very poor idea of how to actually achieve the creation of a Kurdish state. They voted to vote, but no one could understand what to do next. Therefore, the main problem is Kurdish heterogeneity, which now exists. What, in general, the opponents of the Kurds also use, who cultivate and support this heterogeneity in every way. I think that the issue of creating a Kurdish state, of course, is becoming more and more relevant, but at the same time there are extremely few real movements in the direction of achieving this independence. And I hardly believe that the Syrian Kurds, even after creating security forces, if this US plan works, is unlikely to seriously declare the need to withdraw from Syria. Let's imagine at least Syrian Kurdistan as an independent state. I do not see any opportunities for the successful survival of this state, which will be completely surrounded by enemies. And in general, this will lead to a fairly deplorable state of the population that will live there. Therefore, I would less regard to this as a step towards obtaining my independence. Rather, as a step towards the fact that the Kurds will be almost the only force with which Assad will have to conduct a real political dialogue and, most likely, will have to sacrifice some powers, transfer them to the Kurds. This, it seems to me quite realistic and possible - concludes Leonid Isaev.