Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 1, 2017
Syria – Erdogan’s Lost Bet – Trump Likely To Follow A Cautious Strategy

The last Syria thread noted:

South of Al-Bab the Syrian army is moving towards the Euphrates. It will cut off the Turkish forces path to Raqqa and Manbij.

That move concluded. The Turkish invasion forces are now blocked from moving further south. They would have to fight the Syrian army and their Russian allies to move directly onto Raqqa. They would have to fight the Syrian-Kurdish YPG and its U.S. allies to move further east.

For the first time since the start of the war the supply lines between Turkey and the Islamic State are cut off!


map by Peto Lucem bigger

 


map by South Front bigger

Erdogan is still hoping for U.S. support for his plans for Raqqa but I doubt that the U.S. military is willing to give up on their well regarded Kurdish proxies in exchange for an ill disciplined Turkish army in general disarray and with little fighting spirit. Erdogan removed any and all officers and NCOs that he perceived as not being 100% behind his power grab. That has now come back to haunt him. He is lacking the military means to pursue his belligerent policies.

Last year Erdogan had allied with Russia and Iran after a (U.S. supported?) coup attempt against him failed. He felt left alone by the U.S. and its reluctance to support his plans in Syria. After Trump was elected Erdogan perceived a coming change in U.S. policies. He exposed himself as the ultimate turncoat and switched back to a U.S. alliance. His believe in a change of U.S. policy drives his latest moves and announcements.

Elijah Magnier reports that his sources in Damascus have the same impression of Trump as Erdogan. They believe that Trump will strongly escalate in Syria and will support the Turkish moves against the Syrian state.

But it is the U.S. military that drives the strategy in the Trump cabinet. The Pentagon has no appetite for a big ground operation in Syria. The plan it offered Trump is still the same plan that it offered under Obama. It will work with Kurdish forces to defeat the Islamic State in Raqqa. Notable is also that a director of the Pentagon financed think tank RAND Corp publicly argues for better cooperation with Russia in Syria. The old RAND plan of a decentralized Syrian with zones under "international administration" (i.e. U.S. occupied) is probably no longer operative.

Recently Erdogan announced that his next move in Syria would be to towards Manbij, held by the YPK. Shortly thereafter pictures of U.S. troops in Manbij displaying U.S. flags were published on social networks. The message was clear: stay away from here or you will be in serious trouble.

On Monday planes from the Iraqi air force attacked Islamic State positions within eastern Syria. The attack followed from intelligence cooperation between Syria and Iraq. It is easier for Iraq to reach that area than for Syrian planes stationed near the Mediterranean. This cooperation will continue. In western Iraq militia integrated with the Iraqi military are ready to storm Tal Afar. This is besides the besieged Mosul the last big Islamic State position in the area. The U.S. had planned to let the Islamic State fighters flee from Mosul and Tal Afar towards Syrian and to let them take the Syrian government positions in Deir Ezzor. Syrian-Iraqi cooperation blocked that move. The U.S. attempt to separate the war on the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq failed. Any attempt to again use the Islamic State as a means to destroy Syria will meet resistance in Iraq where the U.S. is more and more engaged. U.S. commanders in Iraq will be well aware of that threat.

In my opinion Trump's more belligerent remarks on Syria, on safe zones and military escalation, are rhetoric. They are his negotiation positions towards Russia and Iran. They are not his policies. Those are driven by more realistic positions. Obama balanced more hawkish views supported by the CIA, Hillary Clinton and the neoconservatives against reluctance in the military to engage in another big war. Trump will, even more than Obama, follow the Pentagon's view. That view seems to be unchanged. I therefore do not believe that aggressive escalation is the way Trump will go. Some additional U.S. troops may get added to the Kurdish forces attacking Raqqa. But any large move by Turkish or by Israeli forces will not be condoned. The big U.S. invasion of Syria in their support will not happen.

Meanwhile the Syrian army is moving on Palmyra and may soon retrieve it from the Islamic State. A new Russian trained unit, the 5th corps, is in the lead and so far makes a good impression. With Palmyra regained the Syrian army is free to move further east towards Raqqa and Deir Ezzor.

Erdogan may still get some kind of "safe zone" in the area in north Syrian his forces now occupy. But Damascus will support Kurdish and Arab guerilla forces against any Turkish occupation. The Turkish forces in Syria will continue to be in a lot of trouble. Erdogan will not get active U.S. support for further moves to capture Syrian land. His change of flags, twice, was useless and has severely diminished his standing.

Netanyahoo and the Israel lobby also want a "safe zone". This one in south Syria and under Jordanian command. This would allow Israel to occupy more Syrian land along the Golan heights. But the areas next to the Golan and towards Deera are occupied by al-Qaeda and Islamic State aligned group. These groups are a serious danger for the unstable Jordanian state. There is nothing to win for Jordan in any "safe zone" move. Likewise the U.S. military will have no interest in opening another can of worms in south Syria. Like Erdogan Netanyahoo will likely be left alone with his dreams.

Comments

Syria opposition chief negotiator Nasser Al Hariri calls for regime change in … Iran..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJuqWQ_7Ibw

Posted by: virgile | Mar 3 2017 22:35 utc | 101

@101 virgile.. they don’t get to be negotiators, or the chief negotiators without a solid reason! followers of ‘regime change 101’ is a given requirement! pushing all the right buttons for their overlords, lol..

Posted by: james | Mar 3 2017 22:46 utc | 102

Lozion@100 – Well, Barzani is already a party to the Yazidis genocide in Sinjar. He sat on his ass for a week when the U.S. ordered ISIS to show up and kill all of them, and then only moved his thugs into the Sinjar ruins to ‘claim’ it for Barzanistan. No surprise that he’s trying to finish the job now.
“…A possible Erdo/Barzani move to open a corridor to Syria?…”
Yup, because Barzani figures Rojava (and it’s oil and water) always did belong to him. The U.S., Turkey (and Israel to a large extent) encourage his megalomania because it is ultimately in their interest. At some point in the future, Barzani will cease to be of use to those other parties and eliminated. He’s either too stupid to realize that or too arrogant to think he can’t be disappeared. If the U.S., Turkey and Israel get their Barzani proxy to exterminate the Yazidis, then they won’t have to do the dirty deed later when the pipelines need to start being built.
The Yazidi’s only crime is living on a strategic slice of land that is needed in a colossal oil-theft scheme. I would honestly love the Shia PMUs to march on Sinjar and destroy Barzani’s thugs. The Shia know exactly what is happening to the Yazidis and why, and the PMUs seem surprisingly effective. Of course, the U.S. would love some excuse to bomb the PMUs because U.S. pinheads figure Shia = Iran, and Iran is scheduled for destruction… er, ‘freedomization’… next.

Posted by: PavewayIV | Mar 4 2017 7:39 utc | 103

@103 Agreed on all counts.. See the open thread for a follow up on this discussion..

Posted by: Lozion | Mar 5 2017 22:21 utc | 104

‘Meanwhile the Syrian army is moving on Palmyra and may soon retrieve it from the Islamic State. A new Russian trained unit, the 5th corps, is in the lead and so far makes a good impression. With Palmyra regained the Syrian army is free to move further east towards Raqqa and Deir Ezzor.’
this is now ancient history and the re liberation of Palymra has come to pass

Posted by: brian | Mar 6 2017 23:05 utc | 105

What is the overall strategy of the SAA (et al) in regards to Raqqa and Deir Ezzor, and how does it match against the SDF who is also intent on those above towns? The SDF is practically on the doorstep of Raqqa while the SAA has some ground to make up in a possible race. The recent closing off of the Turkish backed FSA around Al Bab and connect to SDF area by the SAA may have eased up the pressure for their east Aleppo push?
There are at least 3 obvious approaches for the SAA, the east Aleppo one is the closest, but probably has alot of traction since ISIS has been using that as (one) of their supply routes.
Whilst the highway from Hama to Raqqa seems not to have been utilised?
The recent retaking of Palmyra opens up the road to Deir Ezzor.
Is it a question of manpower?

Posted by: Musasa | Mar 7 2017 17:16 utc | 106