Syrian Hmong

[Dill]

(10-08-2019, 11:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't have answers for all of this.

My first rule of justifying any US intervention in foreign affairs is to be part of a coalition.  And creating a coalition that includes parties who are enemies with each other is never going to end well.

The ISIS "intervention" was carried out by a coalition for sure.

The US also constructed a coalition to go after Saddam in 1990-91, and it included mutual enemies--just that Saddam, like ISIS now, was considered a greater enemy.  That CAN work. So those boxes are checked.

As far as abandonment of the Kurds though, from my point of view it was certainly avoidable. 

Right now it is hard to assess much, because we don't know what the Turkish invasion will look like. Will they assume responsibility for detention camps as the Kurds make an orderly withdrawal? Will they displace Kurds who have been living for generations in areas to be cleared? They are currently NATO members and have applied to the EU--and a bloody sweep of former US allies living on foreign soil would pretty much end accession to the latter. Will the US continue supplying the Kurds military needs? So the degree to which we have abandoned Kurds is not all that clear.

It is clear, though, that Turkey was not ready to undertake this move without a US OK. And NO ONE in the foreign policy establishment, from the far right to the center (no real leftists there), agreed with the sudden green light to a Turkish military sweep of regions cleared of ISIS by Peshmerga blood.  (American special forces who fought alongside the Kurds must be especially enraged.)  And this is complicated because, more so than the previous Syrian withdrawal order, this one sets Turkey in motion if not quickly rescinded.

The US clearly could have maintained the coalition status quo in the region--a coalition which included Turkey and fought in the national interest of Turkey.  At least there is no clear reason at present why Turkey would seriously contest that status quo, should the US NOT want that.

It looks like Trump, with his own interests foremost in mind, unimpeded by knowledge of the history and current architecture of US foreign policy in the region, decided to "help out a buddy," because, you know, HE CAN. There might have been consideration of his own properties in Turkey, and additional calculation that his base would approve of "getting out of the ME," or at least one part of it.  This would make sense to someone who had no idea where ISIS came from and who the Kurds were. "ISIS is finished.  So why stay? Why keep giving aid to foreigners? Why are we protecting Turkey and Syrian refugees? America first for a change."

Random decisions like this are not the product of military or diplomatic necessity. And suddenly, no leader in the region can "read" US policy and intentions, plan with them in mind.