America has kept order in the world until the Second Iraq War, after which the Middle East was destabilized by Bush the Second, and Obama the First idiotically spread chaos in Syria and Libya. Nonetheless, Obama, within the constraints of incredibly conventional thinking, helped keep order in the world.
Trump is producing an un-raveling on the global level such as Bush the Second achieved in Iraq.
Unless America resumes its role as a fair-dealing hegemon, things will only get worse and worse.
Perhaps it's a utopian viewpoint, but when will we have progressed enough as a species and a society to find ways to settle differences other than to kill each other? This is a terrible way to limit population growth.
1
So let's get this straight. Erdogan has been pulling away from NATO and cozying up to Putin.
Syria's military is worthless, took them years to suppress a bunch of rag-tag fighters lacking airpower or sophisticated weaponry.
Russia's military is not, they've got the advanced planes and helicopters, tanks, and navy vessels.
So while the territory is Syrian, the opposing military is Russian.
So Erdogan is going to spar a few rounds with Putin, and then expect NATO to back them up seeing as Russian's military is vastly superior by any metric?
(Turkey is 9th, Russia is 2nd. The gap is huge, similar to the gap between Russia and #1, but hey we only outspend Russia by a factor of roughly fifteen. Of course nukes make everything moot.)
OH YEAH!! Let the games begin. Turkey, Syria, Russia, Iran all fighting. Main thing is we are in the bleachers watching. This is so disappointing to our Military Industrial guys but they may be able to sell some weapons under the table.
This should go infer a few years if our experience matters. The real tragedy is the millions of innocents that will suffer. However, we created a lot of these already.
Lets see,Iraq, civil war, ISIS , corruption. Afghan heroin ,corruption and Taliban the winner.
Can't afford health care but trillions tp blow up these regions. Now we get to pay it off.
8
Turkey invaded Syria.
So why is Turkey complaining?
5
Reminds me of the old Fugs song, "Kill for Peace".
3
“Our only aim there is to stop the massacre by the regime.” . . . The offensive has driven nearly a million residents toward the border with Turkey"
Those are not just "residents." They are the jihadis and their families and sympathizers who were evacuated from areas previously taken, or who retreated ahead of Turkish forces. Syria put on bus convoys to take them.
This was always the inevitable final outcome, once there was no place else to retreat into. Turkey won't take them, for good reason, and so they are hard up with their backs against the wall.
Now it is accept defeat, or be defeated and many killed. When Nazi Germany fought to the bitter end, with a narrow strip of territory left between Western Allies and Soviet forces, they were in the same place. They chose to fight anyway, and many died.
The jihadis today are making the same choice, and seeking our sympathy and help in their immolation.
4
Turkey is the "sick man" of Europe. It's a very strange case for many reasons. Its Islamic Ottoman past and forced "secularism" under a brutal and pro-Western dictator, Kemal Ataturk, is now fully under control of Islamists led by Erdogan. The root of presrnt crisis and Turkey's fesire to eliminate Kurds lies with dictator Kemal who officially brutalised and marginalised all religious minorities while claiming to be secular. Now Trukey is increasingly flirting with Putin and other dictators and Islamic Sunni autocrats as and when needed basis, and then arm twisting western democracies including EU and USA when running into trouble.
Turkey is fast becoming a failed state like most other Arab nations in that region full of violence and dictetors.
4
Turkish Erdogan is playing an ugly and vicious game by using refugees and vulnerable people to hold Europe to ransom. Erdogan's move to open its border will encourages human trafficking further, and equally add misery and destruction to the lives of thousands of people. The Turkish dictator Erdogan must be shunned by the world for his bloody role in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East.
4
Let's wish for as much Russian suffering as possible, anyone who thinks that fourth rate stalinist can be dealt with obviously graduated from trump university.
2
Could you please accompany this kind of article with interactive MAPS showing all of these territories and various occupations of said territories over time?
By the way it seems that old enemies Imperial Turkey and Imperial Russia are at it again..and please consider Peter the Great desire to "unlock" land-locked Russia into the Mediterranean, which Putin is assiduously pursuing.
Maps, please, and some historical perspective, please; after all much of today' s troubles in this region can be traced to England and France' s carving up the Middle East to their own designs and desires after WW I, a century ago. In drawing the borders of today' s Middle East Countries they showed very little regard for ethno/religious indigenous groupings, and we are witnessing some of the results of their territorial policies to this day.
3
Turkey's Erdogan has only one ambition and it's to expand his power towards a dreamed Ottoman like empire profiting from the hate against the Kurds left alone with the U.S. withdrawal and now profiting from the 'western' support of Salafist and Muslim Brotherhood among Syrian 'rebels' (Al-Qaeda) concentrated in Idlib. It's amazing how Russia can be in the right side of the conflict here supporting the last secular government in the Middle East, the Baath Party Syrian government.
3
Seems about time that Turkey recognizes the Syrian regime as hostile and takes action. Rather hope that they go "all the way" to Damascus and bring Assad to heel.
1
listen this is supposed to be UN job why was it created? Why do we have UN peace keepers? It seems Turkey is doing UN s dirty job. I come across question like Why Turkey is in Syria? Well The Northern Syria is mainly the Turkman tribes with their roots to Turkish ancestry. Turkey is obliged to not leave them alone. As part of UN, Turkey is also obliged to stop humanitarian crisis anywhere in the world As any other nation part of UN. 3) Turkey feels the PKK and its off shoot group will create a nation comprising of part of iraq part of syria and Turkey None of these nations will allow or give away land to anybody Would US give land to Kurds? No So why should any of these nations. So if Turkey was obliged to help under the UN charter humanitarian rights then NATO should have been there for Turkey no ifs and no buts Was not Turkey with the US in the Korean war Iraq war Afganistan and so on. Instead their political game is let Turkey get weak in the process of fighting the syrians and maybe the russians. but NATO is looking at today and not tomorrow Dont forget what goes around comes around and when Russians start the aggression against the eastern european countries and help is asked from Turkey What do you think Turkey should do?
3
@kingscorpion
Turkmen tribes are not in northern Syria. They are in Mosul Iraq.
When They were attacked by ISIS, Erdogan didn't move his finger.
These people are right now in Idlib, they are Sunni Arabs. Which Turkish majority is Sunni However Turks are nothing to do with Arabs.
In fact Turks has a very big split during WWI, Arabs joined to British and Rebelled against Ottoman empire.
But Erdogan is a Islamist and he feels more connected Sunni Arabs. Turkish people doesn't share that there lies Erdogan's big problem.
How to sell war Turkish people which never feel close to Arabs.
3
When the UN succeeds you dont hear about it
Excellent comment.
1
Erdogan’s excuses are worse than hollow. Turkey has invaded Syria, not the other way around. It violates the UN Charter and negates the NATO treaty.
The nation most responsible for directly prolonging the Syrian war is Turkey.
Who was the pipeline that permitted thousands of foreign jihadists transit into the conflict? Who turned a blind eye to shipments of weapons? Who was the intermediary for the millions of dollars to pay the terrorists? Who traded with ISIS for oil?
When al-Qaeda and its fellow travelers failed to overthrow the Syrian government, Erdogan stepped in to prevent the Syrian authorities to reclaim their final territory.
Erdogan has shown his aim—destruction of the Kurds and use of rebels to fight in Libya.
It is fallacious to use the chaos next door to invade when Erdogan has played the central role in creating the situation.
7
After opening their border to uncontrolled migration into Europe, Turkey should expect no NATO assistance should their hostilities with Syria widen to include Syria's allies, including Russia.
3
To answer some of the reader's questions: "who are the rebels in Idlib?" Anti-Essad rebels who have been fighting since 2011; the forces we had supported before be pulled the troops out. "why is Turkey supporting them?" Turkey have been supporting anti-Assad forces since the beginning. The Turks are afraid of a new wave of incoming refugees. We didn't want to take in a couple of thousand refugees when the Turks have to deal with 3.7 million refugees since 2011 despite their limited economic power. We basically left the Turks alone here. "Turkey is the aggressor here" It is not that simple. How long have Syria lacked its legitimate authority on that land? Do you say that same thing for the Kurds how established an autonomous region in northern Syria (if not why?) If the Turks go back, more than a million living in and around Idlib would be sitting ducks. Syrian forces with the support of Russians have been indiscriminately bombing the rebel towns. . Don't let your hate of Erdogan blind you. It is odd to see suddenly that when it is Erdogan -a democratically elected leader with authoritarian tendencies- vs. Assad -a criminal who has caused one of the most serious humanitarian crisis of the 21st century- people so easily choose Assad. Have you lost your minds? This is Assad we're talking about who should be tried at the Hague for crimes against humanity.
6
Russia's "warn[ing] that it could not guarantee the safety of Turkish aircraft over Syria" certainly seems like a typical Russian threat. If they follow through, will Erdogan finally realize that Moscow is his true enemy, and stop trying to use Moscow to leverage his own NATO allies?
Too bad Turkey was allowed to join NATO in the first place. At least the EU has kept the country from joining. That would have been an unmitigated disaster as we're all clearly seeing.
Another major Mideast conflagration about to boil over. Again.
3
Recently the Turks were claiming they had killed scores of Syrians. Erdogan is a supremely mercurial leader. At the beginning of the civil war with Syria Erdogan quickly attempted to take advantage of Syria's distress. Turkey green lighted ISIS fighters through Turkey to Syria. Now the proxy war is reaching a conclusion. After years of al Qaeda jihadists hiding among the civilian populace and perpetrating false flag chemical weapons attacks aided by their white helmet allies. This is a horrible disaster of which Syria has it share of the blame. But the massively cynical efforts of Turkey and the US to refuse Syria to reclaim its borders and repatriate millions of Syrians needs to be seen.
3
Turkey seems not to have leaned the lessons of the US in the MidEast. Don't go aggressively into a situation beyond your borders without consultation and then expect NATO to jump into the fire.
5
While it can be rightly said that there was likely no "good" outcome possible in Syria, the United States maintained credibility until the point where President Obama drew a "red line" and then erased it, naively believing that Russia would act in good faith and restrain Assad.
Then Trump's pull-back of the minimal American force in place, betrayed the Kurds, gave license to Erdogan, and permitted further Russian hegemony in the Middle East. With a hollowed State Department headed by a political hack, and a Russophile President lacking in competence and knowledge... what could possibly go wrong?
The bolix created by both American administrations, Democrat and (Trump) Republican, has created the greatest humanitarian disaster since WWII, changed the demographics of Europe, and enabled right wing haters to regain a foothold. Xenophobic and Anti-Semitic tendencies reminiscent of the late 1930 have now resurfaced worldwide.
The next POTUS must quickly reconstitute alliances, and face the facts regarding the reduced security we now enjoy as a result of our risk aversion policy in Syria. Europe in potential turmoil, millions displace, and Russia gaining preeminence at our expense.
3
@Phil Zaleon "the United States maintained credibility until the point where President Obama drew a "red line" and then erased it,"
No, the red line was for the Assad regime to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction....which it did. Obama was actually careful to not make a demand that he would not follow up on, like "Assad step down".
3
Isn't it time we open an investigation into how the Syrian war began in the first place? If it was Syrian 'rebels' allegedly fighting for Democracy, how did the US wind up with a bunch of Kurdish PKK terrorists as allies? Make no mistake, regardless of who started the war, the ultimate goal was toppling the Syrian government from the very beginning.
7
@BlackJack While figuring out how this war started would be nice in theory, isn't it much more important at this point to figure out how to end it. Every day people die: either from combat or from starvation, the elements, lack of clean water, disease.
"for the first time openly declaring war on the government of Bashar al-Assad"
The long standing drive for regime change seems little different from declaration of war on "a government."
That is important, because the US has been doing that without benefit of declaring war in the correct way, through Congress.
Otherwise, it is more of the same, merely an escalation of rhetoric.
Either Turkey will take another province of Syria, adding Idlib to Hatay Province they took years ago, or Russia will stop them.
4
Welcome to the quagmire! It’s only going to get worse for erdogan.
3
@Ak -- He does have a choice remaining, and it is one he has taken before. He can make a deal with Assad at the expense of the Kurds: no Kurds on the border if Assad controls it.
The loser in that is of course the Kurds, but also the Americans and Israelis who sought to put them there meaning to use the territory as bases for more operations against Iran.
@Mark Thomason
Not a lot of Kurds in Idlib...
And in the East the Kurds were already living there. The US didn't put them there.
Unfortunately the only clear thing here is that Turkey is the aggressor, it is on syrian territory helping "freedom fighters" to regain the control they use to have, we can expect more blood thanks to the expansionism of the turks believing that the can get along with russia
9
The Syrian mess is becoming messier. When Trump called for removing American troops from areas occupied by Kurds it basically gave the green light to Erdogan to launch an offensive against Kurds. The Kurds feeling they were being abandoned by the US turned to Assad, practically becoming allies against Turkey. That in turn is making Erfogan move aggressive against Assad. What exactly Syrian troops thought they were accomplishing by attacking Trurkish troops is a mystery. Either a ceasefire with everybody staying where they are is agreed on or the war will get even more violent than it was until now.
4
@Serban: Let's back up, Serban. How and why did these Kurdish PKK terrorists become our "allies?"
1
Who are the rebels in Idlib ? Why is Turkey supporting them? Are they fighting for Democracy? What are their demands? I think it is time for Russia to show real strength and end this atrocious war.
8
@Walter Gerhold
If I were Russia I wouldn't mess with NATO's 2nd largest and most powerful military in its backyard. Your statement concedes the fact that the only reason that Assad is able to maintain control of the country is with Russian support. Without it, he's toast. Nothing I have read suggests that Russia has a strong strategic interest in Syria that they will risk a confrontation with Turkey.
2
@Wonderer Russia's air and naval bases in Syria are one motivation for protecting Assad. The other is that with a minimal investment in military forces Russia can keep the Middle East pot boiling and maintain the Shiite axis to counterbalance the American backed Saudi/Sunni influence.
Maybe it is time for Erdogan to sit down and make up his mind which side he is on. He cannot be a NATO member and be cutting deals with Putin. He has been allowed to play both sides for some time by Trump, because God forbid Trump not cave to whatever Putin wants - but enough is enough!
Turkey should disconnect the Russian missile system and come back into the NATO fold completely or get kicked out of NATO for good!
9
@Joe And which side do you think Trump is on ?
Turkey is in the wrong here. It is in violation of international law by having its forces in Syria illegally but also with its direct support of terrorists. Since 2018 it has actively engaged in trying to subvert peace in Syria. It's only purpose in Syria is based on a paranoia of the Kurdish people. Take Turkey out and peace returns to Syria. It is time to support the legitimate Syrian government whose only "crime" in Western eyes is its fight to remain sovereign. Yet, it is the only government that would ensure that religious minorities, Muslim moderates, and secularists can live with security.
19
@Demian
Seems to me that you're suggesting that only a strong dictator can keep the peace in the middle east (otherwise the factions will be at each other's throats). As long as you apply that consistently to other undemocratic regimes such as Egypt or Jordan...One other point though and that is that Turkey can't be 'taken out' of this equation because Syria is in their backyard and they have far more important strategic interests there than, say, the US.
5
Obviously the danger for escalation is high. Russia isn't going to give up it's vassal state without a fight and presumably if Russia goes after Turkey that could drag the entire NATO alliance into war.
4
@Scott McElroy
I doubt NATO will come to aid Turkey in the event of a Russo-Turkish war. Most likely, each member will come up with various excuses not to directly aid Turkey (but will provide intelligence, weapons, etc.). A Russo-Turkish war would be devastating for both sides but I am not sure that Russia would dominate - Turkey is a very formidable power and they are fighting in their own backyard. Russia does not have significant ground forces in Syria and its air power can be overwhelmed.
2
@Scott McElroy
It's unlikely Turkey and Russia will come to military blows. Turkey can't win against Russia and Russia will not NATO forces brought into play against it. They both have incentives to keep things quiet.
The articles is exasperating unclear on the question of whether Turkey actually declared war on Syria; if so, it would be the first formal declaration of war for decades (perhaps since World War II). My guess is that Turkey didn't declare war, as understood in the world of diplomacy; that practice has fallen into desuetude and it would be remarkable if Turkey has revived it on this occasion.
18
Turkey's expansion of its fight with Syria has the potential to drag NATO into any conflict if Turkey and Russia get into a shooting war. Other than that grim scenario, and the horrible suffering of the refugees from Idlib pressing against the Turkish border, I don't see any 'end game' for Turkey or for Syria in this mess. This is tragic and will only lead to more suffering in a region that has had far more than it can bear.
8
Turkey is no doubt coming to the realization that its purported NATO allies are in fact just fair-weather friends.
3
@David This really should be clarified in the agreements, that we help defend members if they're attacked, but that doesn't mean we have to pile into any fight they start. Of course, that can mean the intractable task of sorting out "who started it" or "who elevated it." So in any situation that starts to develop, NATO should meet and come up with a clear list of conditions for the member country to abide by. Do's and Don'ts need to be spelled out. Which means developing the deliberative apparatus to do something like that.
15
@David Turkey is acting as the agressor here, and Turkish involvement in Syria has been counter to the interests of the rest of NATO, so I cannot understand why we should bail them out.
11
@Robert David South
But it is Ok if the Russians are attacking innocent people in Syria and I almost forgot Ukraine as part of their expansionist policies. What about the Eastern European at Europe's doorstep. But then Trump is Putin's best friend.
3
Let all these dictators fight it out in Syria. It's simply not much possible to bring or maintain peace in that part of land where religious fundamentalism and primitive feudal society is among the worst in the world.
9
@Bonku
Russia is their main supporter and the Syrian president would not have had such success in killing the population without Putin. They are hardly fighting it our alone. Of course there are the refugees. Where do they go?
And how about our religious fundamentalism groups that support our soon to become dictator, Trump, the man who could shot somebody on 5th avenue and get away with it are. How different are we?
4
Now it begins. Why does this action seem to have unexpected consequences written all over it? Time for Russia to jump in with both feet or cut and run. What with Russia busy telling our voters for whom we must vote, this must be an annoying distraction. I advise Russia to cut and run, but I don’t think they will take my advice.
3
Turkey is an inveder in Syria . Every country has it's right to keep it's geographical integrity .Erdogan is an expensinist ,represent the Ottoman era. Need to oust him for the better future of Turkey ,Syria and whole world .
12
Imagine trump not pulling troops out of the area controlled by the Kurds. They wouldn’t have been massacred and neither this new war between Syria and Turkey would have happened.
Is there nothing that trump touches that isn’t damaged?
48
@Gene Nelson This is a stretch. I am not a Trump supporter in the slightest but the Turkish counter-offensive is aimed at Syrian forces along the M5 highway with the strategic goal being to drive them back to previously agreed upon cease-fire/de-militarized boundaries, not to seize more territory along Syria's northern border. This is the consequence of a demilitarization deal that was doomed to failure from the start.
Obama got us into this mess, not Trump. Trump is a more a feckless bystander.
9
Massacred Kurds? Where did you get that idea?
2
@Gene Nelson Turkey can not massacre the Kurds because %35 of the Turkish army consists of Kurds.
Kurds, Arabs, Turkmens all immigrating to Turkey. If we kill them why they are coming. totally 6-7 million refugees living in Turkey at the moment
1
“Within the scope of legitimate defense, our target will only be regime soldiers and their members attacking our troops.”
Unfortunately it never works out that way.
8
There is no way to interpret Turkey's move as the "next" phase of the US invasion of Iraq. This demonstrates the continuing instability of the Middle East. What the US & Russia do next is for someone else to guess about.