Log in

View Full Version : Assad hands control of Syria’s Kurdish areas to PKK, sparking outrage in Turkey



A Marxist Historian
28th July 2012, 01:10
Now here's something seriously to worry about. Turkish intervention into Syria to suppress the Kurds could blow up the whole region into murderous civil war, without even an imperialist intervention.

-M.H.-

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/26/157943/assad-hands-control-of-syrias.html

Posted on Thursday, July 26, 2012
Modified Thursday, July 26, 2012

Assad hands control of Syria’s Kurdish areas to PKK, sparking outrage in Turkey
By Roy Gutman McClatchy Newspapers

ISTANBUL — President Bashar Assad, facing a growing rebel presence in Aleppo, Syria’s largest city and its commercial hub, has turned control of parts of northern Syria over to militant Kurds who Turkey has long branded as terrorists, prompting concern that Istanbul might see the development as a reason to send troops across its border with Syria.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in comments late Wednesday, said that Turkey would not accept an entity in northern Syria governed by the Iraq-based Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, which has long waged a guerrilla war against Turkey, and its Syrian affiliate, the Democratic Union Party.

He said the two groups had built a “structure in northern Syria” that for Turkey means “a structure of terror.”

“It is impossible for us to look favorably at such a structure,” he said in an interview with a private television channel.

He warned that if Syrian Kurdish militants mount a terror operation or some other form of cross-border provocation against Turkey, “then intervening would be our most natural right.”

The prospect of a PKK-dominated zone in northern Syria appears to be an unintended consequence of the civil war now raging between Assad and rebels of the Free Syrian Army, who are Arab Sunni Muslims who’ve been fighting, with U.S. and other nations’ backing, to topple Assad’s government.

Assad withdrew forces last week from six predominantly Kurdish towns and handed control to the Kurdish militants in what appears to be an effort to bolster his defenses at Aleppo, which became the scene of sustained fighting last week for the first time since the anti-Assad uprising began more than 16 months ago. Assad also reportedly has pulled forces from the Idlib region of northeastern Syria and moved them to Aleppo in preparation for what some say will be a pitched battle for the city.
Tens of thousands of residents of Aleppo have fled in anticipation of the battle. Reports from anti-Assad groups indicate that thousands of pro-Assad and rebel fighters are converging on the city, which many believe Assad must hold if he is to maintain control of the country.

The developments in Kurdish areas, however, suggest that no matter who wins the civil war, the fighting is shifting the politics of Syria and its neighbors in ways that cannot be predicted.

The establishment of a Kurdish-ruled zone inside Syria has long been a goal of the Kurdish population. Leaders of the anti-Assad opposition have said in recent days that they would oppose such a zone, and Kurdish fighters have said they would not allow the Free Syrian Army to operate in the region.

Officially, the Democratic Union Party is sharing power over six towns – Kobane, Derek, Amude, Efrin, Sari Kani and Girke Lege – with the Kurdish National Council, an umbrella organization of anti-Assad Kurdish groups. In fact, the Kurdish militants have raised the PKK flag over public buildings or have used force to haul down their rivals’ flag, Kurdish news media in the Iraqi Kurdish capital of Erbil reported Thursday.

The PKK affiliate also controls stretches of the Syrian border, including a key crossing into territory of the Kurdistan Regional Government, the increasingly autonomous province in neighboring Iraq.

The stakes are enormous in this otherwise obscure region. Turkey fears that a Syrian Kurdish state run by the PKK will radicalize its own restive Kurds, who comprise 12 million, or one-sixth, of its 74 million population. Hundreds, possibly thousands, of Syrian Kurdish fighters have taken part in PKK raids inside Turkey over the years.

The development also could worsen the political situation inside Iraq, where the autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government maintains chilly relations with the central government in Baghdad, but ever closer relations with Turkey. Iraq’s prime minister, Nouri al Maliki, a Shiite Muslim, is a supporter of Assad, whose Alawite religious sect is an offshoot of Shiite Islam. Baghdad and the Kurdish government disagree over a range of other issues, from oil export policy to who should govern cities where the population is split between Kurds and Arabs.

Kurdistan’s president, Massoud Barzani, tried to head off a Democratic Union Party takeover several weeks ago, when he hosted the 16 or so groups comprising the Kurdish National Council, together with the Syrian National Council, also an umbrella body, at a meeting in Erbil. Many now believe the arrangement he brokered actually paved the way for the PKK takeover.

In a move some analysts said might be intended to undercut PKK influence in Syria, Barzani announced Sunday that the Kurdistan Regional Government would dispatch back to Syria, allegedly to fill a security vacuum, some of the Kurdish Syrian soldiers who’ve deserted into Iraq to escape the civil war. Kurdish media reported that some 650 Kurdish soldiers already returned to Syria last week, and there were suggestions that the Kurdistan Regional Government’s own military, the peshmerga, is considering entering Syria as well. That move is opposed by the PKK, local Kurdish newspapers have reported.

“Peshmerga forces are our brothers and relatives and we do not have any problems with them,” Salih Muslim, a Democratic Union Party leader, told the English-language daily Rudaw. “But Syrian Kurdistan does not need assistance from the peshmerga forces at this point and if the need arises we will ask for their help.”

Assad forces still control Qamishli, a city of well over 400,000 and the unofficial capital of the predominantly Kurdish northern region. But a decision by Assad to allow the PKK to take over there as well could move Barzani to intervene on Turkey’s behalf. Such a development could spark a reaction in Baghdad, whose authority over Iraq’s international relations would be directly challenged by a peshmerga move into Syria.

Turkey has shown little hesitance to invade neighboring countries in response to PKK attacks on Turkish targets. In October, Turkish aircraft and troops crossed into Iraq to hunt down PKK guerrillas who’d killed 29 members of Turkey’s security forces and five civilians in a series of raids in southern Turkey.

McClatchy special correspondent Abdulla Hawaz contributed from Erbil, Iraq.
Copyright 2012 McClatchy Newspapers. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Email: [email protected]
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/26/157943/assad-hands-control-of-syrias.html#storylink=cpy

cynicles
28th July 2012, 02:22
Wow, this is an interesting and unexpected development.

Positivist
28th July 2012, 02:33
Solidarity to the Kurdish. How worker oriented are these parties actually? Obviously there main focus is self-determination, but are they also committed to a pro-worker agenda?

Book O'Dead
28th July 2012, 03:14
I've looked for other sources that report this disquieting news, Aljazeera, CBS, NBC, ABC and Reuters and there is nothing about it!

I wonder why?

Perhaps someone else here can access a secondary source to this report?

Book O'Dead
28th July 2012, 03:22
In fact, a google search of the title returns a list of articles, all citing McClatchy News and, in at least one case two different by-lines!

This is very weird.

You'd think that something as consequential as this would be more widely reported.

Either the article is a hoax or there is a news blackout regarding this event or the story is time plant.

Positivist
28th July 2012, 04:48
In fact, a google search of the title returns a list of articles, all citing McClatchy News and, in at least one case two different by-lines!

This is very weird.

You'd think that something as consequential as this would be more widely reported.

Either the article is a hoax or there is a news blackout regarding this event or the story is time plant.

I'm not sure on this but it also may have to do with many liberals supporting kurdistani self determination. Widespread reporting of this could result in questioning the supposed just character of the "Syrian revolution" as mainly carried out by the FSA. But I don't really know what most liberals think of the PKK so I'm not sure. A lot of the liberals I know condemn the oppression that the kurds have faced, but most are also committed pacifists so I can't really see hem supporting a militant struggle.

... but then again there was that Kony bs where US intervention was actually being called for...

A Marxist Historian
28th July 2012, 05:03
I'm not sure on this but it also may have to do with many liberals supporting kurdistani self determination. Widespread reporting of this could result in questioning the supposed just character of the "Syrian revolution" as mainly carried out by the FSA. But I don't really know what most liberals think of the PKK so I'm not sure. A lot of the liberals I know condemn the oppression that the kurds have faced, but most are also committed pacifists so I can't really see hem supporting a militant struggle.

... but then again there was that Kony bs where US intervention was actually being called for...

The PKK is on Obama's terrorist list, and Turkey is an ally-but so is Barzani and his Kurds. Definitely this is not a rock that western imperialists would be thrilled at overturning.

I suppose the reporter could have just made it all up, but McClatchy is a fairly respectable news service, so if so, he's gonna get fired. And this is allegedly on the spot reporting.

Maybe McClatchy is simply the only news agency with a reporter in the right spot on the map to be aware of this, in the general confusion of a Syrian civil war focused elsewhere?

-M.H.-

freeeveryone!
28th July 2012, 05:14
Solidarity to the Kurdish. How worker oriented are these parties actually? Obviously there main focus is self-determination, but are they also committed to a pro-worker agenda?they are not committed to any agenda aside from kurdistan independence, they are solely a national liberation organization dedicated to national liberation regardless of who aids them or influences them post-independence. they are called a communist party because they were formed in the context of the cold war.

Le Socialiste
28th July 2012, 05:21
A quick google search gives me articles from the Miami Herald, FDL, and Christian Science Monitor:

Assad grants control of Kurdish region to militant group

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/26/2914808/assad-grants-control-of-kurdish.html

Kurdish Rebels Gain Control of Northern Syria, Risking Turkish Response

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/07/27/kurdish-rebels-gain-control-of-northern-syria-risking-turkish-response/

Turkey warns Assad that he must keep Kurds in check, or risk intervention

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0727/Turkey-warns-Assad-that-he-must-keep-Kurds-in-check-or-risk-intervention

Edit - Never mind, it appears these articles are all from the original McClatchy one...

cynicles
28th July 2012, 05:36
It always amazes me how much you can tell about the political leaning of a news source just the headings.

Red Commissar
28th July 2012, 06:14
In fact, a google search of the title returns a list of articles, all citing McClatchy News and, in at least one case two different by-lines!

This is very weird.

You'd think that something as consequential as this would be more widely reported.



A week back during the Damascus fighting, a lot of Kurdish sites were reporting that Kurdish groups in the east of Syria and Efrin had ejected Assad forces. Western news outlets are actually late reporting this. Here are two (Kurdish) sources on them-

An Iraqi Kurdish source

http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4977.html
http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4999.html
http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4992.html

A Turkish Kurdish (PKK sympathetic) source

http://en.firatnews.eu/index.php?rupel=article&nuceID=4954
http://en.firatnews.eu/index.php?rupel=article&nuceID=4957
http://en.firatnews.eu/index.php?rupel=article&nuceID=4953

There's been a problem here though within the Kurdish groups in Syria that hasn't been touched upon. While they are united in their sense of opposition to Assad's government as well as the opposition who they feel won't change much of their condition (hence protests in the Kurdish populated areas never took the shape of armed insurrection), there is division among the groups in their aims. The most simple way of seeing it has usually been in those under the PKK front organization, the PYD, and the various ones that have forged closer ties with the Kurds in Iraq under the banner of the Kurdish National Council.

The accusation is, as Turkey is repeating here, that Syria has reforged ties with PKK that it *officially* broke in the late 90s. The PKK has said that they would fight any Turkish invasion of Syria alongside government troops, and it has been accused that the PKK has helped the Syrian government in keeping order in their areas by silencing critics of Assad.

It's complicated really that in the above sources are saying that they fought for these areas, these sources are saying that the Syrian government essentially left it in a caretaker position to the PYD and allies. I suspect the truth may be closer to the government simply abandoning these areas with out much of a fight involved, as they are not really friendly to the FSA in either camp, and they might not see it being worth the damage at this point.

Book O'Dead
28th July 2012, 06:34
A week back during the Damascus fighting, a lot of Kurdish sites were reporting that Kurdish groups in the east of Syria and Efrin had ejected Assad forces. Western news outlets are actually late reporting this. Here are two (Kurdish) sources on them-

An Iraqi Kurdish source

http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4977.html
http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4999.html
http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4992.html

A Turkish Kurdish (PKK sympathetic) source

http://en.firatnews.eu/index.php?rupel=article&nuceID=4954
http://en.firatnews.eu/index.php?rupel=article&nuceID=4957
http://en.firatnews.eu/index.php?rupel=article&nuceID=4953

There's been a problem here though within the Kurdish groups in Syria that hasn't been touched upon. While they are united in their sense of opposition to Assad's government as well as the opposition who they feel won't change much of their condition (hence protests in the Kurdish populated areas never took the shape of armed insurrection), there is division among the groups in their aims. The most simple way of seeing it has usually been in those under the PKK front organization, the PYD, and the various ones that have forged closer ties with the Kurds in Iraq under the banner of the Kurdish National Council.

The accusation is, as Turkey is repeating here, that Syria has reforged ties with PKK that it *officially* broke in the late 90s. The PKK has said that they would fight any Turkish invasion of Syria alongside government troops, and it has been accused that the PKK has helped the Syrian government in keeping order in their areas by silencing critics of Assad.

It's complicated really that in the above sources are saying that they fought for these areas, these sources are saying that the Syrian government essentially left it in a caretaker position to the PYD and allies. I suspect the truth may be closer to the government simply abandoning these areas with out much of a fight involved, as they are not really friendly to the FSA in either camp, and they might not see it being worth the damage at this point.

Whatever the truth about this may be, the implications are very serious in terms of the fragile geopolitical balance that existed in the region for years. One, I might say, that had been guaranteed by the former USSR.

If Assad surrenders control of the Kurdish region to the Kurds, it's an obvious sign of desperation on his part; in he manages to stay in power he will not be able to recoup this territory without another costly fight.

Any move to empower the Kurds, for whatever reason, will inevitably draw Turkey into the conflict, possibly forcing Russia to act directly (or perhaps indirectly via Iran) and potentially drawing NATO into a broader regional war ostensibly to protect Israel.

IMHO, this is an extremely dangerous move on the part of Assad, if in fact he made it.

Now we can see how momentous the fall of the USSR was for the future of the world!

Martin Blank
28th July 2012, 06:50
Maybe McClatchy is simply the only news agency with a reporter in the right spot on the map to be aware of this, in the general confusion of a Syrian civil war focused elsewhere?

McClatchy gained a reputation during the invasion and occupation of Iraq for reporting news and information that the AP, Reuters, etc., would not touch for fear of losing their "access". It doesn't surprise me that they're doing the same thing in Syria.

Martin Blank
28th July 2012, 07:07
Whatever the truth about this may be, the implications are very serious in terms of the fragile geopolitical balance that existed in the region for years. One, I might say, that had been guaranteed by the former USSR.

If Assad surrenders control of the Kurdish region to the Kurds, it's an obvious sign of desperation on his part; in he manages to stay in power he will not be able to recoup this territory without another costly fight.

Any move to empower the Kurds, for whatever reason, will inevitably draw Turkey into the conflict, possibly forcing Russia to act directly (or perhaps indirectly via Iran) and potentially drawing NATO into a broader regional war ostensibly to protect Israel.

IMHO, this is an extremely dangerous move on the part of Assad, if in fact he made it.

Now we can see how momentous the fall of the USSR was for the future of the world!

I actually don't think it's as much a sign of desperation as it is an attempt to turn the tables on his opponents. There is little doubt that the existence of Kurdish autonomy in both Iraq and Syria will rekindle the demand for self-determination within the Kurdish regions of Turkey. This, in turn, would require military resources to be removed from the Syrian border and turned toward those regions, if only to contain any potential explosion. For the Syrians, this would relieve some of the pressure they've been under, since Turkey has been more than a bystander in the current civil war.

The Kurds would see such a military build-up as a provocation, as much as the Turkish government sees Assad's move as a provocation. This will only increase tensions ... and the likelihood of armed conflict.

Transferring Turkish troops east to deal with a possible outburst of Kurdish independence would rob the so-called "Free Syrian Army" of most of its heavy armor and air cover along the border region, allowing the Syrian Army to have a better chance of defeating the rebels while also avoiding a possible military clash with Turkish troops (a clash that would be used to invoke NATO's mutual assistance clause).

It's an incredibly cynical and calculated move by Assad. He's counting on the Kurds using the increased autonomy to force a rebirth of the armed independence movement. That's why control was specifically handed over to the PKK. Assad is hoping that the PKK and Turkish military wear each other out through ongoing skirmishes along the border -- that both sides will effectively exhaust themselves. After that, Assad's military forces can simply mop up what's left of the Kurdish fighters and secure their border.

It's a gamble, I agree. At the same time, though, it's a brilliant (albeit cynical) strategic move on the part of Assad (if it works, that is).

Book O'Dead
28th July 2012, 07:15
I actually don't think it's as much a sign of desperation as it is an attempt to turn the tables on his opponents. There is little doubt that the existence of Kurdish autonomy in both Iraq and Syria will rekindle the demand for self-determination within the Kurdish regions of Turkey. This, in turn, would require military resources to be removed from the Syrian border and turned toward those regions, if only to contain any potential explosion. For the Syrians, this would relieve some of the pressure they've been under, since Turkey has been more than a bystander in the current civil war.

The Kurds would see such a military build-up as a provocation, as much as the Turkish government sees Assad's move as a provocation. This will only increase tensions ... and the likelihood of armed conflict.

Transferring Turkish troops east to deal with a possible outburst of Kurdish independence would rob the so-called "Free Syrian Army" of most of its heavy armor and air cover along the border region, allowing the Syrian Army to have a better chance of defeating the rebels while also avoiding a possible military clash with Turkish troops (a clash that would be used to invoke NATO's mutual assistance clause).

It's an incredibly cynical and calculated move by Assad. He's counting on the Kurds using the increased autonomy to force a rebirth of the armed independence movement. That's why control was specifically handed over to the PKK. Assad is hoping that the PKK and Turkish military wear each other out through ongoing skirmishes along the border -- that both sides will effectively exhaust themselves. After that, Assad's military forces can simply mop up what's left of the Kurdish fighters and secure their border.

It's a gamble, I agree. At the same time, though, it's a brilliant (albeit cynical) strategic move on the part of Assad (if it works, that is).

Your explanation makes more sense than my doubts.

However, you would agree, I hope, that it's a move fraught with many unforeseeable dangers.

Sinister Cultural Marxist
28th July 2012, 10:39
As far as I know, Assad has been giving the PKK increasing freedom in Syrian Kurdistan for a while now as a counterweight to factions of Syrian Kurds who fell that Assad's Baathist Arab nationalist government ignores their needs (like refusing to give some 100,000 of them the rights of citizenship)

Leo
28th July 2012, 11:27
Now here's something seriously to worry about. Turkish intervention into Syria to suppress the Kurds could blow up the whole region into murderous civil war, without even an imperialist intervention.Turkish intervention into Syria to suppress the Kurds would be an imperialist intervention.


It's an incredibly cynical and calculated move by Assad. He's counting on the Kurds using the increased autonomy to force a rebirth of the armed independence movement. That's why control was specifically handed over to the PKK. Assad is hoping that the PKK and Turkish military wear each other out through ongoing skirmishes along the border -- that both sides will effectively exhaust themselves. After that, Assad's military forces can simply mop up what's left of the Kurdish fighters and secure their border.Assad's own forces will be more exhausted, and that is provided if he can win against the Sunni opposition in the first place. And for Turkey, although the Turkish prime minister did talk of intervention, actually invading a PKK controlled Syria has risks of its own, namely that the main power base of the PKK is in Turkey, and the PKK has already declared that they would turn Turkish Kurdistan into a war zone if Turkey attacks Syria.


The PKK is on Obama's terrorist list, and Turkey is an ally-but so is Barzani and his Kurds. Definitely this is not a rock that western imperialists would be thrilled at overturning.And currently, Barzani and his Kurds seem to be allied with the PKK in Syria.


funny seeing the action of cia kurd govt in (http://www.anonym.to/?http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/kurds-force-iraqi-troops-syrian-border) iraq against syria,alsocalls for support from certain "islamist kurds" for turkish help. (??)
PKK (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/22/us-syria-turkey-kurds-idUSBRE82L0UH20120322) for all the western propaganda are backing/backed by the syrians.Not exactly, Syrian forces aren't really in a position to back anyone anymore, and the Syrian Kurds are at least giving the appearance of neutrality, that is the PKK as well as Barzani's supporters. Recently, in fact, the Syrian government killed a number of Kurds, and the PKK actually retaliated.

Martin Blank
28th July 2012, 20:34
However, you would agree, I hope, that it's a move fraught with many unforeseeable dangers.

Oh, absolutely. Assad's playing with fire now -- more than he was before. This move could easily backfire.

Teacher
29th July 2012, 22:45
This is the first good news to come out of Syria in a long time.

Here's to hope for Syria and the PKK

A Marxist Historian
30th July 2012, 21:03
This is the first good news to come out of Syria in a long time.

Here's to hope for Syria and the PKK

Good news? This poses the potential for not just Syria, but just about the whole area, Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey, maybe even Jordan, to collapse into a bloodbath of mutual sectarian mass murder Iraq and Lebanon-style. Possibly erasing the possibility of workers revolution against the capitalists in that entire part of the world for decades to come.

About the only good thing that could come out of this is maybe giving Obama a little bit more second thoughts about the desirability of imperialist intervention. But even that is hard to tell, he has an election coming up and American politicians all too often will do anything to get re-elected during campaign season, no matter how disastrous it would be for everyone, even the imperialists.

-M.H.-