******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
I tend to agree with Chris on this, although admittedly this article is probably the one and only place we have seen such clear discussion of the existence of "pro-Turkey" advisors in the Trump administration. Seems logical that at least some would exist - after all, we all know that ultimately US imperialism would have thrown the Kurds and the SDF to the wolves and patched up with a powerful capitalist state like Turkey (and like the Assad regime, which has actually gained much more than Turkey out of this). So it is in this sense that I think we can say that Trump's move, even if the way it was done, the timing, the language etc may have been just Trump acting on whim, it would have corresponded to the views of at least some small section of US ruling class opinion, and it does have its own logic. That said, John is of course correct that the overwhelming majority of the US ruling class is not just opposed but absolutely furious with this move - the Pentagon, most of Congress, all Democrats and most Republicans, including close Trump allies, from liberal doves through hard-nosed realists to rabid neocons, almost all are opposed, for a variety of reasons. Now was not the right time, and the way it was done is a savage blow to the credibility of US imperialism. And even from the article, the suggestion is that even the more "pro-Turkey" advisors were thrown off-course by the suddenness of the move and the resulting chaos. Russia, which is pulling the strings of both Assad and Erdogan, and which has arranged the partition of the former SDF territories between its two poodles, is absolutely the master of ceremonies (and all talk about "possible clashes between Turkish and Assadist forces is complete nonsense). The US has not only lost all credibility as a reliable ally, but has also made itself irrelevant as Russia is in complete control. Iran has also gained. And this fact pisses off a lot of US ruling class figures. However, once again, this is anything but universal - Trump's "Kissingerism" in this respect (I know it may sound to compare a master of imperialist diplomacy to a dunce like Trump, but here I'm talking about the "muscular" version of the "realist" school of US imperialism) is more consistent than we often realise, even if Trump himself doesn;t always realise. The US has no special interests in Syria (other than defeating ISIS) and has been backing a Russian-led solution with a modified Assad regime in power, over a more chaotic Iranian-led situation, for years now. That's also the Israeli and Gulf view. Of course both Israel and the Saudi-UAE-Egypt alliance were furious about the Turkish invasion and especially Israel was furious about betrayal of the "gallant Kurds" (Netanyahu), but if a Russian-backed Assad emerges a clear victor they will be back on board. On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 12:02 PM Chris Slee via Marxism < marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote: > ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > ***************************************************************** > > The WSJ article says: > > "After years of balancing between competing Kurdish and Turkish interests, > Trump > administration policy began to shift toward Ankara, as new advisers > sympathetic to Turkey joined the team." > > The article does not specify the names of these advisers, but it does > claim that advisers sympathetic to Turkey do exist. I assume the authors > know what they are talking about. > > I can't prove this, but I suspect the decision to withdraw was not quite > as sudden as it appeared. There was a facade of negotiations resulting in > the SDF withdrawing a few kilometres from the border. I believe this was > aimed at facilitating the Turkish invasion. The vast majority of US > personnel in Syria would have been left in the dark, to avoid them alerting > the SDF. This meant they were unprepared, resulting in a certain degree of > chaos. > > Chris Slee > ________________________________ > From: John Reimann <1999wild...@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, 20 October 2019 10:25:55 AM > To: Chris Slee <chris_w_s...@hotmail.com> > Cc: Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition < > marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> > Subject: Re: [Marxism] WSJ: Inside America?s Chaotic Retreat from Syria > (On the "Saigon Moment") > > Chris Slee says the chaos resulted from the division among Trump's > advisors regarding withdrawal from Syria. In the first place, that is > manifestly untrue just in the sense that the reason for the chaos was that > there was simply no preparation. And why was there no preparation? Because > the entire government, especially the military, was completely unprepared > for this decision. More to the point: Who among Trump's advisors supported > his decision? Where within the US state was there support for his > withdrawal? The diplomatic wing of the government opposed it. The US > military, from top to bottom, most certainly opposed it. Even Trump's own > political party opposed it. Yes, there may have been one or two in his > administration that would speak up in support, such as Pompeo or Mulvaney, > but they were simply doing so because their boss had made that decision. It > wasn't as if he had had consultations with different advisors and some > advised for and some against. > > The reason I keep coming back to this point is that I think all too many > on the socialist left have been far too slow to accept the immense crisis > that the US capitalist class faces. That crisis is the fact that they have > lost control over their presidency. That is what Trump's troop withdrawal > represents, and it's an unprecedented situation. I think Trotsky once said > that revolutionaries (meaning Marxists) can be some of the most > conservative in all of society. I think this is a prime example. We have an > overall view of how the capitalist state operates, and all too many of us > are reluctant to see that this situation doesn't fit that overall view. > > John Reimann > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 2:47 PM Chris Slee <chris_w_s...@hotmail.com > <mailto:chris_w_s...@hotmail.com>> wrote: > I think the chaos resulted from conflicting opinions amongst Trump's > advisers, between those who prioritised restoring good relations with > Turkey - which required allowing Turkey to invade Rojava - and those who > prioritised suppressing ISIS - which required preventing Turkey from > invading Rojava. > > Chris Slee > ________________________________ > From: Marxism <marxism-boun...@lists.csbs.utah.edu<mailto: > marxism-boun...@lists.csbs.utah.edu>> on behalf of John Reimann via > Marxism <marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu<mailto:marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu>> > Sent: Sunday, 20 October 2019 6:45:29 AM > To: Chris Slee <chris_w_s...@hotmail.com<mailto:chris_w_s...@hotmail.com>> > Subject: Re: [Marxism] WSJ: Inside America?s Chaotic Retreat from Syria > (On the "Saigon Moment") > > ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > ***************************************************************** > > RKOB posted a series of articles detailing the hectic situation in a US > outpost in NE Syria. I assume he posted these in defense of the claim that > this is similar to the US defeat in Vietnam. The moment of withdrawal may > have similar scenes, but overall it is nowhere near comparable for two > reasons: > > First, the US did not face a military defeat in Syria. Nor were their > troops hated and driven out by the local population. On the contrary, the > Kurds evidently felt they were being protected from Turkey by the US > troops, and so they were. > > Second, this decision to withdraw was opposed by all wings of the US state > and by the capitalist class in general. It shows the extreme political > crisis of US capitalism at home. This is as opposed to Vietnam, where if > anything the US capitalist class wanted to withdraw before Nixon was ready > to do so. > > In general, I agree with RKOB that US imperialism has been weakened > globally. But I think it's a mistake to impose this general truth onto our > understanding of what happened in this particular situation. > > John Reimann > > -- > *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black > Jacobins" by C. L. R. James > Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook > _________________________________________________________ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/chris_w_slee%40hotmail.com > > > -- > “In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” from "The Black Jacobins" > by C. L. R. James > Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook > _________________________________________________________ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/mkaradjis%40gmail.com > _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
