Re: [Marxism] The US quid pro quo

[Michael Karadjis via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


-Original Message- 
From: Marv Gandall via Marxism


Former ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, reveals to FP that such 
assistance has been conditional on the support of the two left-wing 
Kurdish parties - the PYD in Syria and PKK in Turkey - for the joint 
effort by the US and Turkish governments and the Free Syrian Army 
(FSA) to overthrow the Assad regime in Damascus. Despite having 
designated the PKK as a “terrorist” organization, secret talks between 
the US and the left-wing Kurdish parties to this end have been held 
over the past two years.


That isn't the way I read either the FP article or the secret 
correspondence at its end. Most of the correspondence is between the US 
and the Kurdish National Council, a coalition of Syrian Kurdish parties 
that excludes the PYD. That is all quite an interesting discussion. Ford 
tries to encourage the KNC to join the Syrian Opposition Coalition 
(SOC), and before that existed, the Syrian National Congress. The KNC 
was open to the idea but was wary of the influence of Turkey and of the 
Muslim Brotherhood within the SOC/SNC, and their lack of recognition of 
Kurdish self-determination. Ford agreed that there were some extremist 
elements within the FSA, but said that was all the more reason the KNC 
should join to bolster the moderate, secular and liberal elements, and 
to push for clearer recognition of Kurdish rights. Eventually the KNC 
did join the SOC.


The other channel was the secret US discussions with the PYD since 2012. 
There is very little in the secret correspondence about the PYD, except 
the KNC's assertions that the Kurds don't like them but if pressed by an 
FSA which is under Turkish or MB influence they will choose the PYD, so 
the KNC tries to encourage the US to give them more aid to bolster their 
position as against the MB on one side and the PYD on the other. 
Interestingly, it also reveals that no such US aid was forthcoming. The 
correspondence also talks about the US back-channel to the PYD but says 
little about it. Several times it notes that the PKK and PYD deny 
accusations that they support the Assad regime.


I read nothing about the US conditioning support to the PYD on its 
support for the joint effort by the US and Turkish governments and the 
Free Syrian Army (FSA) to overthrow the Assad regime in Damascus. 
First, that would require the US to have such a goal. In FP, Ford says 
The main thing is we believed there needed to be a political solution 
that had to be negotiated (ie, the eternal and only US view of the 
Syrian crisis). The Kurds needed to be involved in that, even if we 
didn't think the PYD was fully representative of the Kurds. We wanted to 
understand why they continued to work with the regime and why they were 
hostile to Kurdish activists in the KNC.


To know why they continued to work with the regime is different to 
demanding they support the overthrow of the regime. As noted, the 
PKK/PYD deny the accusation in any case.


Then the article says that Kurdish sources, not Ford, referring to 
now, not 2012-13, claimed that Washington is currently pushing the PYD 
to distance itself from the Assad regime by joining the Syrian 
Coalition, working with the FSA, and improving ties with the KNC and 
Barzani.


Yes, the US probably wants the PYD to join the Syrian Opposition 
Coalition, which Washington sees as a necessary part of the bargaining 
for the political solution that needs to be negotiated with the 
regime, nothing to do with overthrowing the regime. As if the FSA on the 
ground care much about what the SOC says.


Finally, the article says The recent agreement between the YPG and FSA 
factions to fight IS together might reflect a PYD eagerness to meet 
preconditions for U.S. assistance.


I think that's nonsense. The PYD and FSA are cooperating out of 
revolutionary necessity. I think both sides needed to overcome a few 
hang-ups first. But it is an on-the-ground thing.


http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/10/07/washington_secret_back_channel_talks_with_kurdish_terrorists_turkey_syria_robert_ford_exclusive 



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The US quid pro quo

[Marv Gandall via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==



On Oct 10, 2014, at 7:35 AM, Michael Karadjis mkarad...@gmail.com wrote:

 -Original Message- From: Marv Gandall via Marxism
 
 Former ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, reveals to FP that such assistance 
 has been conditional on the support of the two left-wing Kurdish parties - 
 the PYD in Syria and PKK in Turkey - for the joint effort by the US and 
 Turkish governments and the Free Syrian Army (FSA) to overthrow the Assad 
 regime in Damascus. Despite having designated the PKK as a “terrorist” 
 organization, secret talks between the US and the left-wing Kurdish parties 
 to this end have been held over the past two years.
 
 That isn’t the way I read either the FP article or the secret correspondence 
 at its end.

[…]


 I read nothing about the US conditioning support to the PYD on its support 
 for the joint effort by the US and Turkish governments and the Free Syrian 
 Army (FSA) to overthrow the Assad regime in Damascus. First, that would 
 require the US to have such a goal. In FP, Ford says The main thing is we 
 believed there needed to be a political solution that had to be negotiated 
 (ie, the eternal and only US view of the Syrian crisis). The Kurds needed to 
 be involved in that, even if we didn't think the PYD was fully representative 
 of the Kurds. We wanted to understand why they continued to work with the 
 regime and why they were hostile to Kurdish activists in the KNC.
 
 To know why they continued to work with the regime is different to 
 demanding they support the overthrow of the regime. As noted, the PKK/PYD 
 deny the accusation in any case.

Yes, you’re correct, Michael. This morning’s Wall Street Journal supports your 
view. It reports, probably with some exaggeration, on “harsh criticism from 
Washington” and a “dangerous rift” between the US and Turkey having opened 
concerning the overthrow of the Assad regime which is reflected in the Erdogan 
government’s inaction on Kobani - apart from the long-standing hostility of the 
Turkish state to the PKK/PYD, of course.

Turkey Sits Out Battle in Syrian Border City
Ankara Chooses Not to Intervene in Fight Between Islamic State, Kurdish Militia
By YAROSLAV TROFIMOV
Wall Street Journal
October 10 2014

Turkey’s unwillingness to intervene in the battle over a predominantly Kurdish 
Syrian city on its border has earned the country harsh criticism from 
Washington, exposing a dangerous rift over how the two allies want to tackle 
Islamic State’s rise.

After more than three weeks of fighting for Kobani and its surroundings, the 
extremist group edged closer to seizing the city from Syrian Kurdish militia 
fighters on Thursday. By nighttime, city officials said the militants had 
managed to gain control of about a quarter of Kobani despite 19 U.S.-led 
airstrikes in the area in two days. The battle has unfolded within sight of 
Turkish tanks parked at the border.

In an effort to find a common approach on how and against whom the war in Syria 
should be waged, the Obama administration’s coordinator of the campaign against 
Islamic State, retired Marine Gen. John Allen, went to Turkey on Thursday to 
meet with senior officials.

But after a first day of talks in Ankara between Gen. Allen and Turkish 
officials, including Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, the State Department 
announced no breakthrough on issues dividing the two countries and indicated in 
a statement that discussions were likely to continue for some time. A joint 
military planning team will visit Ankara next week, U.S. officials said.

The U.S., which started airstrikes on Islamic State following the group’s rapid 
advances in Iraq this summer, sees the militant organization as the main foe in 
an unsavory neighborhood.

But Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has staked his international 
standing on ousting Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad, views the Assad regime’s 
brutality as the root cause of Islamic State’s rise. He is pressing the U.S. 
and its allies to commit to fighting Mr. Assad with the same vigor as they are 
fighting Islamic State.

“The government is not going to budge on this,” a Turkish official said of 
Ankara’s demand for a strategy shift. “As long as you have Assad there, with 
his policies of dropping barrel bombs, chemical weapons, this vicious cycle is 
going to continue on and on with more groups, different groups, coming in.”

Turkey also has little love lost for the Syrian Kurdish militias under attack 
in Kobani. These militias are affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or 
PKK, the Kurdish separatist movement that the U.S. classifies as a terrorist 
group. Though PKK is currently engaged in peace talks with Ankara, it battled 
the Turkish state for more than 30 years, for much of that time with the Syrian