Posts
This
is what the mainstream media (here, BBC) are saying.
Syrian
rebels, backed by the Turkish military and US air cover, say they
have taken the town of Jarablus from jihadists of so-called Islamic
State.
The
Turks are supposed to have "liberated" Jarablus from ISIS
in just a few hours. Are the Turks suddenly more effective than, say
the joint Russian/Syrianc campaign in Aleppo?
I
suspect the following is closer to the truth
No Islamic State in Jarabulus — Instead, a NATO Occupation
25
August, 2016
\
Reports
of Turkish forces alongside Western-backed militants crossing into
northern Syria and entering the Syrian city of Jarabulus preceded
what many expected to be intense clashes with the self-titled
"Islamic State." However, there were one.
It is alleged that Islamic State militants either surrendered without a fight or fled, an outcome uncharacteristic of years of clashes involving the international designated terrorist organisation. Analysts and even the Turkish foreign minister himself have revealed in recent months that Islamic State militants have been based within Turkish territory for years, reinforcing their positions in Syria both with men and materiel with little to no resistance from the Turkish government.
A May 2016 Washington Times article titled, "Turkey offers joint ops with U.S. forces in Syria, wants Kurds cut out," would reveal (our emphasis):
Joint operations between Washington and Ankara in Manbji, a well-known waypoint for Islamic State fighters, weapons and equipment coming from Turkey bound for Raqqa, would effectively open “a second front” in the ongoing fight to drive the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, from Syria’s borders, [Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu] said.
Analysts and strategists
are likely to point out that if this was the case, according to
Turkey's own foreign minister, then why wasn't the fighting capacity
of the Islamic State not uprooted at its very source, Turkish
territory? The fact that the Islamic State is apparently operating
out of Turkey may explain why Turkish forces and accompanying
militants were able to move so easily into Jarabulus without a
fight.
Islamic State fighters likely didn't "flee" or "surrender," but were instead absorbed by the advancing force.
Now there exists in northern Syria a bastion protected by Turkish forces and by extension of NATO agreements, NATO's entire membership including the United States. As pointed out earlier, this is the fulfilment of longstanding US plans dating back to 2012 involving the establishment of "safe-havens" in northern Syria from which to prolong the fighting and strike deeper into Syrian territory.
However, when these plans were drafted in 2012, Russia and Iran were not so directly involved in the conflict. Turkey also has shifted, if even superficially, from its geopolitical stance four years ago.
Analysts are divided over whether Turkey's advancement into Syrian territory represents the fulfilment of US designs, or something else entirely, possibly even diametrically opposed to those plans. Reactions from Syria and its allies are still forthcoming, and until actions are taken (or not taken) against or with Turkey in regards to its cross-border foray, little can be said for certain
But what can be said for certain is that NATO troops are now occupying an enclave in northern Syria and occupied it with little to no resistance from Islamic State fighters who have bitterly contested every other square meter of Syrian territory they have invaded over the last several years.
The next moves will be critical, proving once and for all which side Turkey has finally come down on, and whether it is bringing Islamic State troops with it if and when it moves south and west deeper into Syrian territory.
The New Atlas is a media platform providing geopolitical analysis and op-eds. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.
Islamic State fighters likely didn't "flee" or "surrender," but were instead absorbed by the advancing force.
Now there exists in northern Syria a bastion protected by Turkish forces and by extension of NATO agreements, NATO's entire membership including the United States. As pointed out earlier, this is the fulfilment of longstanding US plans dating back to 2012 involving the establishment of "safe-havens" in northern Syria from which to prolong the fighting and strike deeper into Syrian territory.
However, when these plans were drafted in 2012, Russia and Iran were not so directly involved in the conflict. Turkey also has shifted, if even superficially, from its geopolitical stance four years ago.
Analysts are divided over whether Turkey's advancement into Syrian territory represents the fulfilment of US designs, or something else entirely, possibly even diametrically opposed to those plans. Reactions from Syria and its allies are still forthcoming, and until actions are taken (or not taken) against or with Turkey in regards to its cross-border foray, little can be said for certain
But what can be said for certain is that NATO troops are now occupying an enclave in northern Syria and occupied it with little to no resistance from Islamic State fighters who have bitterly contested every other square meter of Syrian territory they have invaded over the last several years.
The next moves will be critical, proving once and for all which side Turkey has finally come down on, and whether it is bringing Islamic State troops with it if and when it moves south and west deeper into Syrian territory.
The New Atlas is a media platform providing geopolitical analysis and op-eds. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.
It
seems like this has more to do with opening another front (with
support from the US who has 'boots-on-the- ground in this part of
Syria against the Syrian government and its backers
A
Levant Front official said Euphrates Shield aims to seize
Al-Bab.Syrian rebels hold a meeting prior to Wednesday
BEIRUT
– An official in a rebel faction participating in the
Turkish-supported cross-border incursion into Syria has revealed that
the operation aims to seize Al-Bab, an ISIS-stronghold near both
Syrian regime and Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) frontlines.
Mohammad
Abu Ibrahim—a military commander in the Levant Front—told a
pro-opposition outlet that the next step of the Euphrates Operation
following the capture of Jarablus and surrounding villages, which was
achieved Wednesday evening, will be the “commencement of the battle
to liberate the strategic town of Al-Bab,” which lies 60 kilometers
southwest of Jarablus.
In
mid-January, Syrian regime forces reached within 10 kilometers of the
ISIS-held town, however the offensive grounded to a halt following a
counterattack by the jihadist group. The SDF, for its part, advanced
on Al-Bab, the largest remaining population center controlled by ISIS
in the northeastern Aleppo countryside, during its offensive on
Manbij earlier in August.
The
rebel official also told Zaman al-Wasl that Turkey’s participation
in the campaign was “limited” to logistical support, aerial
cover, reconnaissance and “heavy weapons,” a reference to the
battle tanks the Turkish army has been deploying across the border
into Syrian territory.
Meanwhile,
another opposition figure participating in the Euphrates Shield
offensive spoke to Enab Baladi about the dramatic campaign and its
next steps.
According
to Mustafa Sejari, the head of the Mutassim Brigade’s political
office, rebel fighters in Jarablus would initially focus on
reinforcing defensive positions around the border town.
He
explained that the Turkish-supported factions would then fight
westward, but instead of naming Al-Bab as their ultimate goal, Sejari
said the Euphrates Shield operation would aim to break ISIS lines
around the northern Aleppo town of Mara.
“We
will not stop until we connect Jarablus to Marea,” he vowed.
Turkish
media outlets on Wednesday reported Euphrates Shield aims to secure a
strip of territory along the Syrian border stretching from Marea to
the east bank of the Euphrates River, but did not specifically name
Al-Bab as being one of the targets of the operation.
Top
officials in Ankara, for their part, have been more vague in their
public declarations of the specific military goals of the campaign,
saying only that it aims to “secure” the border, not only from
ISIS, but also the expansion of Kurdish forces west of the Euphrates.
NOW's
English news desk editor Albin Szakola (@AlbinSzakola) wrote this
report. Amin Nasr translated Arabic-language material
REBRANDED
AL QAEDA GROUP IN SYRIA RECEIVING US WEAPONS
Dan
Wright
25
August, 2016
Drone
footage of the battle for the Aleppo artillery college, taken by
Jabhat Fateh al-Sham. Source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx0ey8HkCs4
Though
many scoffed when the Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria, Jabhat
Al-Nusra, rebranded
itself Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham, that
cosmetic change was apparently enough to convince the US government
to start sending them arms.
In
the recent push by rebels in the city of Aleppo, Al-Nusra /Al-Sham
took a leading role and was reportedly among
the rebels groups who received US weapons. Those
weapons will first be used to kill Syrian government troops and after
that, well, who knows?
Many,
if not most, of the rebel groups fighting the Syrian government are
jihadist and few have any serious objection to Al-Nusra participating
in their operations, especially given that Al-Nusra has proven to be
one of the most effective groups on the battlefield. If Al-Sham and
fellow Sunni jihadists prevail over Syrian government forces, a
genocide will likely commence against religious minorities in Syria,
starting with the Alawites and moving on to other Shiites.
From
the Atlantic Council:
Fateh al-Sham’s support extends beyond the immediate political and military opposition. Roshd Virtual University in Istanbul, Turkey offered 100 scholarships to the children of the fighters who participated in Aleppo’s battle. The opposition’s desperation to change the balance of power in Syria has made themembrace Fateh al-Sham and turn a blind eye to the fact that it was until recently the Nusra Front, an internationally designated terrorist group with ties to al-Qaeda.
According the Syria analyst Charles Lister, there is a significant subsection of the Syrian opposition that does not oppose Fateh al-Sham’s participation in Aleppo related military operations. Moreover, Lister said that opposition forces fighting in Aleppo received for the first time American weapons that are normally designated for forces fighting the Islamic State (ISIS). The opposition’s takeaway is that the United States does not object to preserving the balance on the ground with the Syrian regime, even if doing so indirectly bolsters Fateh al-Sham.
While
it would be a mistake to say this is the first time the US
gave assistance to Al Qaeda-linked rebels in Syria, it
is a pretty stunning digression from earlier claims from US officials
that assisting Al Qaeda and ISIS was completely off limits. Now the
US is arming them in one of the most crucial battlefields of the
Syrian Civil War.
Then
again, Al-Nusra /Al-Sham claims it no longer is within the Al Qaeda
network (though they also appear to still hold much of the same
beliefs). I guess a rebrand is all it takes for the US to take a
group from sworn enemy to ally worthy of receiving anti-tank weapons.
What
could go wrong?
Here we see those Turkish Special Forces which valiantly crossed the Turkey-Syria border to liberate Jarabulus from evil Daesh goons actively engaged in serious combat.
---Pepe Escobar
Knowing Erdogan? I'm sure it's just a funny coincidence....
The
Turkish army has shelled a Kurdish militia group near the Syrian
border town of Jarabulus, Turkish media reported Thursday. © PHOTO:
HIKMET DURGUN Turkey's Operation 'Not Limited to Jarablus' in Attempt
to Secure Border Areas ANKARA (Sputnik) —
The
Turkish military opened artillery fire on Kurdish People's Protection
Units (YPG) fighters to the south of the town, wiping out the group,
Turkish channel NTV said, citing military sources.
Ankara
announced on Wednesday that Turkish forces, backed by US-led
coalition aircraft, had begun a military operation dubbed Euphrates
Shield to clear the Syrian border town of Jarabulus of militants from
the Islamic State jihadist group, outlawed in Russia and many other
countries.
Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Wednesday that the operation
in Jarabulus was aimed at stopping the threats posed both by Daesh
and Kurdish militants in Syria, which Ankara considers to be linked
to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) branded a terrorists
organization in Turkey.
Earlier
on Thursday, Turkish Defense Minister Fikri Isik said that Turkey
expects Syrian Kurds to leave the western bank of the Euphrates
within the next week.
Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that the military campaign on the
border with Syria is meant to free the town of Jarablus from Daesh,
but Ankara's true goal involves retaining control over a
100-kilometer-long corridor that will help Turkey to assist radical
groups in the war-torn Arab country, analyst Stanislav Ivanov told
Izvestiya.
"The
Turks are saying that they are ostensibly bombing Daesh targets to
keep this corridor. In reality they are conducting airstrikes against
Syrian Kurds," he said. "This campaign is primarily aimed
at retaining control over this stretch of border to provide
assistance to anti-Assad groups, particularly in Aleppo."
The
corridor that Ivanov mentioned stretches from Jarablus in the east to
the Syrian city of Azaz in the west, located 32 kilometers (20 miles)
north-northwest of Aleppo. The international community has long urged
Turkish leadership to seal the area that radical groups, including
Daesh and al-Nusra Front have used to resupply and rearm, but Ankara
is apparently not interested.
"Turkey
cannot allow this stretch of border to be sealed. Should this happen,
the balance of power in Aleppo could shift in favor of Damascus-led
forces and the Kurds, not the pro-Turkish groups. If the Kurds take
this corridor under control, they will link their enclaves and create
an autonomy" in northern Syria, the analyst explained.
Read
this article HERE
We Will Not Retreat to East of Euphrates: YPG Spokesman Redur Xelil
People's
Protection Units (YPG) spokesperson Redur Xelil has said the Kurdish
force will not retreat from the west of the Euphrates to the east.
Speaking
to journalist Mutlu Civiroglu, Xelil said his words had been
misconstrued and that they wouldn't withdraw at anyone's request.
"We
are in our own country and not withdrawing on the request of Turkey
or someone else," Xelil told Civiroglu.
Reuters
had said that Xelil had told them they would withdraw if the SDF
instructed them to.
Turkish
officials have threatened YPG with military action if the Kurdish
force, which took part in the liberation of Manbij on the west of the
Euphrates under the umbrella of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF),
did not retreat back across the river.
A
top US official and Vice President Joe Biden also said they had told
YPG forces to retreat to the east of the Euphrates or they would
cease support for the group.
Turkish
troops and FSA militants began a cross-border incursion into Jarablus
today and have taken control of the ghost city within 12 hours.
Reports suggest there were no clashes between them and Islamic State
militants, who have withdrawn to Al-Bab. Some commentators have
called attention to the fact that IS had allegedly conducted
artillery attacks on Turkish soil in the past two days but there was
no IS presence in Jarablus when Turkish-FSA forces arrived.
Did
Turkish President
Erdogan Just Use A False
Flag To Justify Invading
Syria?
25
August, 2016
On
Sunday Turkey experienced its deadliest terrorist attack this year. A
suspected child suicide bomber struck a wedding celebration in the
Turkish city of Gaziantep, killing
at least 54 people and injuring dozens more.
Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan immediately blamed ISIS for the
attack. This reaction is especially peculiar given the fact
his policies have
directly contributed to the growth of ISIS in more ways than one. His
government is reportedly providing ISIS fighters with passage through
Turkey, weapons, and medical assistance, to name a few examples.
Most
interesting, however, is that ISIS has not claimed responsibility for
the attack, and as the Guardian notes,
ISIS has not historically claimed responsibility for attacks within
Turkish territory. This is despite ISIS’ habit of readily praising
and accepting
responsibility for
almost every Western attack — even a mass killing as absurd as the
Orlando shooting, which realistically had nothing
to do with ISIS.
So
let’s do a little bit more digging.
According
to one Turkish
Member of Parliament,
Mahmut Togrul, the targets of Sunday’s attack in Turkey were
predominantly supporters of the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic
Party (HDP). It is true that ISIS
has been battling the Kurds for
some time now. However, the Kurds — specifically the HDP — have
another powerful enemy.
As
the Telegraph reported
in 2015, the biggest threat to Turkey’s president obtaining
unilateral control of the country during the 2015 elections was the
HDP. In an article entitled “How
Erdogan Enabled ISIS To Attack The Turks,” The
Huffington Post reported in June of this year that the HDP won enough
votes in June of 2015 was enough to “derail Erdogan’s plan
to create a powerful presidential system that would benefit the
Turkish leader and his family.” The HDP did so well that their
success would deny Erdogan’s political party a majority for the
first time in more than a decade.
The
threat the Kurdish movement poses to Erdogan’s control of Turkey is
further demonstrated by his policy of heavily
bombing Kurdish territory in
Syria, despite the fact that Washington regards the
Kurds as the most effective fighting force against ISIS. As noted by
the Huffington
Post,
Erdogan would regularly link the HDP to the fighting force known as
the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), regarded by some as terrorists.
Erdogan
then blamed the subsequent terrorist attacks that occurred
late last year and
earlier this year on the Kurds, despite
the fact that they in turn denied responsibility.
Sound
familiar?
Even
at the time of this article’s publishing, ISIS’ responsibility
for the wedding attack has still not been confirmed. This is
illustrated by CNN’s
reliance on Turkey-based journalist Andrew Finkel. As CNN reported:
“He
said there were a number of reasons the Sunni terror group – if
it is responsible for the attack – could have been motivated
to strike Kurdish targets.”
To
date, the only person convinced of ISIS involvement is Erdogan
himself. When
corporate media has to quote an official to infer someone’s
responsibility for an attack, it often means there is no actual
evidence for that person or groups’ involvement. If there was
evidence, the headline would presumably run with that evidence —
not the official’s
statement.
A good example of this was when the mainstream media ran stories
stating John
Kerry was certain of the Assad regime in Syria using chemical
weapons.
Yet no proof was actually offered, and if anything, the intelligence
was fabricated.
If
the Turkish authorities have proof that ISIS committed the attack,
considering the group is obsessed with claiming all manner of attacks
against their enemies, surely Erdogan could present it.
If
not, what is really at play here?
What
we do know is that the targets of the attack were supporters of
a political party that threaten Erdogan’s dreams
of totalitarianism. We
also know ISIS has not claimed responsibility for the attack, nor has
Erdogan provided any evidence they were responsible, except to
reiterate their alleged responsibility over and over.
Don’t
be surprised, therefore, if this attack is used as a further excuse
to expand military operations against ISIS or some other group that
Erdogan considers terrorists - or as a further move to target the
Kurdish movement in Turkey and Syria.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.