Turkey commting assisted economic suicide?

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,014
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Turkey is alone in Syria. Even Trump is now reconsidering a bit his position: at Pentagon pressures are enormous and the reason is really simple.

US aided the Kurd People and the presence of American military units there was a kind of insurance. Mattis left Trump's administration because it seemed that the CIF was going to abandon an ally ... and now this is happening. Which will be the direct immediate consequence? That US will become like Italy: don't trust US as an ally ... they will betray you!

On the other hand, Russia and EU have got not a few interests to see the Turkish Army failing. Btw, after the last attempt to run a coup, the Turkish government has erased a good part of the command chain of its Army and now young inexperienced officers are leading the Turkish brigades on the front ... [and this is not good ... for Erdogan].

On the field, Russians in Syria have got a nice quantity of high quality forces, but I would be more concerned about their recent Navy units which have showed, just in Syria, a great offensive capability at long distance thanks to cruise missiles.

Anyway, if Turkey doesn't get crazy exaggerating, I don't think to a direct military action to stop its armies. Turkey won't push beyond the limit, just because it's alone.
 

Dreamhunter

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
7,482
Malaysia
Kurds need a country of their own. They can't be denied that forever. I reckon that Syria & Iran, even Iraq, might actually be gradually amenable to at least contemplating & countenancing that idea, at least in principle. Turkey would probably be tough though. Just my puny two cents.
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,546
Republika Srpska
Kurds need a country of their own. They can't be denied that forever. I reckon that Syria & Iran, even Iraq, might actually be gradually amenable to at least contemplating & countenancing that idea, at least in principle. Turkey would probably be tough though. Just my puny two cents.
I find it hard to see any of those countries willingly giving up territory to the Kurds.
 
Mar 2012
1,210
Magdeburg
To be honest a lot of turkish people were against the operation until trump's 'i will destroy turkish economy'tweet which changed their opinion. It motivated people to support it just to show that he cant threaten turkey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Von Manstein

Dreamhunter

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
7,482
Malaysia
I find it hard to see any of those countries willingly giving up territory to the Kurds.
Bashar would be our best first bet for this part, I reckon. He is already nominal allies with the Kurds in his war against IS. We ought to try it with him first.
 

Willempie

Ad Honorem
Jul 2015
5,375
Netherlands
Turkey is alone in Syria. Even Trump is now reconsidering a bit his position: at Pentagon pressures are enormous and the reason is really simple.

US aided the Kurd People and the presence of American military units there was a kind of insurance. Mattis left Trump's administration because it seemed that the CIF was going to abandon an ally ... and now this is happening. Which will be the direct immediate consequence? That US will become like Italy: don't trust US as an ally ... they will betray you!

On the other hand, Russia and EU have got not a few interests to see the Turkish Army failing. Btw, after the last attempt to run a coup, the Turkish government has erased a good part of the command chain of its Army and now young inexperienced officers are leading the Turkish brigades on the front ... [and this is not good ... for Erdogan].

On the field, Russians in Syria have got a nice quantity of high quality forces, but I would be more concerned about their recent Navy units which have showed, just in Syria, a great offensive capability at long distance thanks to cruise missiles.

Anyway, if Turkey doesn't get crazy exaggerating, I don't think to a direct military action to stop its armies. Turkey won't push beyond the limit, just because it's alone.
He wont. There was a token force, which is now withdrawn. His policy is quite simple: Reduce and preferably remove troops (from the ME region).
That is why the US is focusing on its own energy production. That is why the GCC is trained and supported. That is why the Israel is supported. That is why he for over 2 years he has asked every European partner to put boots on the grounds and comply with the NATO spending rules.
A year ago he had warned he would remove those troops. He asked troops from European partners to take over, all of them, among them the Dutch, refused. All of them, including the Dutch, also supplied groups that are now involved in the mess on the Turkish/Syrian border.
 
Aug 2019
67
Netherlands
I don't think the withdrawal of 50 men has much to do with that policy or context, considering the consquences here. There must be more intrensique reasons for this move..
 

Willempie

Ad Honorem
Jul 2015
5,375
Netherlands
I don't think the withdrawal of 50 men has much to do with that policy or context, considering the consquences here. There must be more intrensique reasons for this move..
It has a lot to do with it. From the start he told everybody he would get out of Syria once ISIS was defeated. He then specifically told in december last year that he would remove these troops.
Unfortunately for the European "partners" this chap doesn't make threats and promises he wont keep, like the last one (red lines and all that).

And when you see all the reactions, none of them mention going in their themselves. Though to be fair to our military, that would be very hard without tanks and proper ammunition.
 
Last edited: