Do Kurds need to be blamed for unscrupulousness?

116
Turkish military operation in Syria is in full swing. Erdogan’s soldiers attack the positions of Kurdish formations, and the Russian media clearly see the line: the Kurds themselves are to blame for their troubles, since at one time they began to focus on the United States and not on Russia. Let's try to figure out if this is really so?





"Source of Peace" became a source of war


On 9 on October 2019, Turkish President Recep Erdogan announced the start of an armed operation with the hypocritical name "Source of Peace." It is clear that no peacekeeping in the hostilities unleashed by Ankara in the north of Syria does not smell. Already, the number of victims of the “Source of Peace” goes to hundreds, and these are not only Kurdish militants, but also civilians, and Turkish soldiers themselves, and even foreign journalists.

The main objective of the Turkish operation is the Syrian Kurds. For many years, the northeastern parts of Syria have been under the control of the Kurdish People’s Self-Defense Forces - armed groups not controlled by the Syrian government. It cannot be denied that the Kurds made a huge fact in the fight against terrorist groups, being one of the most combat-ready forces on the front of the ISIS counteraction (banned in Russia) and other similar structures.



For Ankara, the existence of a virtually independent Kurdish enclave in northern Syria has always been an annoying factor, due to the unresolved Kurdish problem in Turkey itself. Erdogan views the Kurdish opposition in Turkey as “terrorists,” and accordingly also identifies Syrian Kurdish formations closely associated with the Kurdistan Workers' Party banned in Turkey.

Thus, in reality, the Turkish operation in Syria is not anti-terrorist in nature. Its main task is to eliminate or weaken as much as possible the Kurdish autonomy in the north of the neighboring state in order to protect Turkey itself from the Kurdish national movement.

For Erdogan, this task is a priority, for the sake of its solution he is ready to quarrel with anyone, including the EU countries, which he is already threatening to let Syrian refugees through the territory of Turkey, and even the United States of America. It would be naive to assume that Turkey would reckon with the military-political interests of Russia in the Middle East, although many short-sighted (or hypocritical?) People are trying to enlist Erdogan as Russia's allies.

Political unscrupulousness is not just about Kurds


Now, quite a controversial line can be traced in a number of mass media and, especially, blogs: the Kurds briskly turned over under the auspices of the United States, and now, they say, Washington betrayed them and the result is that the Kurdish territories were defenseless against the Turkish onslaught.

Firstly, it is hardly worth extending claims to individual politicians to the entire Kurdish people, which have at least 40 million people, but still do not have their own state.

The Syrian Kurds at one time found themselves in a very dangerous situation - on the one hand, they were threatened by ISIS militants (banned in Russia), on the other hand, there was an obvious threat of an attack from Turkey, which only now materialized, but could have come true much earlier. And the Kurds had no choice but to look for a strong patron. By chance, such a patron was the United States, in whose interests at that time it was to support the Kurds.

Actually, why did the Kurds at one time not be able to cooperate with the Americans? Unlike Turkey or Syria, the United States did not claim control of Kurdish territories and did not discriminate against the Kurdish people. But from the Americans it was possible to get high-quality weapon, financing, assistance of military instructors. And the Kurds took full advantage of this, thanks to which they were able to turn the militia into a more or less combat-ready structure.

Do Kurds need to be blamed for unscrupulousness? By the way, Russia itself deliberately distanced itself from helping the Kurds. If we talk about who betrayed whom, then the first and most high-profile fact of political betrayal related to the Kurds and their national movement was story with the arrest of the Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan, the “founding father” of the Kurdistan Workers' Party, who is now seventy years old and twenty of them, he is being held in prison on an island in the Sea of ​​Marmara.

Recall that Ocalan was captured by Turkish intelligence services 20 years ago, 15 on February 1999, in Kenya. Before that, Ocalan tried for a long time and to no avail in asylum in some countries, including Russia. Moscow did not cost anything to shelter Ocalan at home, but the then leadership of Russia did not do this, fearing to quarrel with Turkey.

Recall that at a time when Russia refused to provide asylum to Ocalan, Turkey openly supported terrorist groups in the North Caucasus. Turkish militants from religious extremist organizations fought in Chechnya, militants from the Caucasus healed their wounds in Turkey, and numerous Ichkeria missions were also located there. In those victims that Russia suffered during the two Chechen wars, terrorist attacks in the Caucasus and in the cities of our country, there is a very tangible share of the guilt of Turkey. Only today they prefer not to remember this - after all, it is impossible for Erdogan to be offended.

Russia forgave Ankara for the support of militants during the wars in the Caucasus. And today, our dignitaries pretend that nothing happened. Well, almost twenty years have passed since those wars, although the country still heals their wounds, and they will never return the dead. But how quickly the policy of our country has changed in recent years! On November 24 on November 2015, less than four years ago, a Russian Su-24M aircraft was shot down by a missile launched by the Turkish Air Force F-16C fighter.

The commander of the Russian crew, Lieutenant Colonel Oleg Peshkov, died during a parachute landing - he was killed by militants operating in the area of ​​pro-Turkish armed forces, who opened fire on the landing pilot. The navigator, captain Konstantin Murakhtin managed to escape - by a lucky chance, he landed outside the shelling zone. When the Syrian special forces and the Russian military carried out activities to search for pilots, pro-Turkish units shot down the Mi-8 helicopter, and the Russian marine Alexander Pozynich was killed.

Here is such a “gift” Erdogan made to Russia only four years ago. And then Russia reacted violently - imposed sanctions on Turkish imports, limited flights to Turkey. True, these sanctions were short-lived and Moscow soon reconciled with Ankara, and even so that the pro-government media began to represent Recep Erdogan as almost Russia's closest ally in the Middle East after Bashar al-Assad.

One could attribute the tragedy in the sky over Syria to the mistake of the Turkish Air Force, if it were not for one “but” - a significant part of the Turks, moreover from among Erdogan's supporters, warmly welcomed the actions of the Turkish Air Force and rejoiced at the death of the Russian pilots. The Internet stores everything, if necessary - you can easily get acquainted with the reaction of Erdogan supporters then, four years ago.



Finally, one should not forget that Turkey refuses to recognize Crimea as Russian and this position is not simply caused by the desire not to quarrel with Ukraine. Europe or the USA. A politician like Erdogan would not care about the consequences. The fact is that for Turkey, the Russian Crimea is an occupied Crimean Khanate, it is the territory of the Ottoman Empire. It is clear that times have changed, but Ankara will not support Russian sovereignty over Crimea.

And finally, Turkey never hid its desire to play a special role in the life of the Turkic-speaking states of the post-Soviet space, but also of the Turkic-speaking and Muslim peoples of Russia. Azerbaijan, the North Caucasus, Tatarstan and Bashkiria, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan in Ankara are considered as a sphere of Turkish national interests. Does Russia need this?

Therefore, when today Russian authors accuse the Kurds of having “laid down under Washington,” and then Trump betrayed them, they forget what Russia itself looks like in its strange “love” with Turkey. In the same way, the Kurds can be very distrustful of Russian proposals: what can be expected from Moscow if it does not properly respond to Ankara’s hostile policies even with regard to Russia itself?

Turkey may start conflict with Syria


Now Moscow deliberately distances itself from the operation of the Turkish army in northern Syria. But soon such a position will already be inappropriate - the Kurds turned to official Damascus for help. By the way, the Turkish army, if anything, invaded Syria and violated its territorial integrity. Syrian government forces advanced to the Syrian-Turkish border.

Of course, the forces of Damascus and Ankara are not comparable. And the adviser to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Yasin Aktay, has already publicly stated that the Turkish army is ready to repulse the Syrian government forces in the event of a clash. The agreement concluded by the Kurds with Damascus, Aktai described as an example of the hostility of Syria towards Turkey and emphasized that Ankara would not tolerate the presence of Kurdish armed forces on the Syrian-Turkish border.

Bravo! While the "patriots", rejoiced at the Turkish attack on the "American allies" of the Kurds, tirelessly talked about the political unprincipledness of the latter, such significant events took place. First, the very Bashar Assad, who is considered the most faithful Russian friend in the Middle East, has already stood up for the Kurds and sent government troops to northern Syria.

It turns out that Assad is unprincipled? Once he stands up for the "American allies" of the Kurds. Although, in fact, Assad, like every normal leader, cares about the territorial integrity of his country. It is not Turkey’s responsibility to deal with what is happening in northeast Syria, this is a problem for Damascus itself, but not Ankara at all.



If Erdogan is afraid of Kurdish radicals, then the only way out for him under international law is to strengthen the Turkish border, make it impossible for weapons or militants to penetrate into Turkish territory, but not to invade the territory of a neighboring state.

Secondly, Ankara threatens Damascus with a direct clash. That is, Turkish troops are ready to start a war against the Syrian government army, which Russia has supported all these years, in the war of which Russian soldiers and officers were killed, in whose ranks there are Russian military advisers and specialists. So now Russia, in order not to be accused of “political prostitution”, will also have to determine more quickly whether it is with the Turks or with Bashar Assad.

It would be naive to assume that Erdogan acts in Russian interests, forcing the Kurds to recognize the power of Damascus and submit to Bashar Assad. For Ankara, the main task is to protect themselves from the Kurdish national movement, which, by the way, also fits into the neo-Ottoman paradigm of Erdogan.

The Turkish army, having established control over areas in northeast Syria, will remain there. It is very unlikely that Erdogan will transfer control of these territories to Assad. Most likely, areas under Turkish occupation will be created, in which miraculously they will begin to issue Turkish passports to Syrian Turks, and even Sunni Arabs. By the way, according to some reports, this is already happening in the territories where Turkish troops are located.

In the strategic plan of Russia, the strengthening of Turkey in the Middle East is not at all necessary. Since, having dealt with the Kurds in Syria, Erdogan will inevitably want to realize his neo-Ottoman ambitions in other regions, which Turkish nationalists still consider their spheres of influence.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

116 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    15 October 2019 05: 25
    The trick ... different and very complicated.
    Everyone has their own interests.
    Then, all this will be discussed as long / hard as the same pact with Germany!
    The question always arises - who is your friend and who is your enemy?
    There is no easy answer!
    1. +5
      15 October 2019 05: 41
      Quote: rocket757
      The question always arises - who is your friend and who is your enemy?
      There is no easy answer!

      History has proven that there are no "friends", there are just situational allies. However, even with this amendment, your question remains valid.
      1. +4
        15 October 2019 06: 44
        It would be naive to assume that Turkey would reckon with the military-political interests of Russia in the Middle East, although many shortsighted (or hypocritical?) people and try to record Erdogan as an ally of Russia.

        It is clear that one cannot directly indicate who it is, although it is clear to everyone. After all, Putin called Erdogan not just some kind of ally, but another. And these words were by no means empty. If we take immediately the military, economic and political sphere, then how much Russia has done for Turkey lately, probably did not for anyone.
        1. +2
          15 October 2019 09: 31
          Quote: Stas157
          then how much Russia has done for Turkey lately, probably did not for anyone.

          You got excited. Our tourists, yes, burst there like on jelly shores, for which they are shocked to the fullest. In terms of turnover, if we enter the top ten, then at a stretch. In military-technical cooperation, we are not a priority for Turkey, and thank God. The S-400 contract is beneficial as a political maneuver and advertising no more than Russia has only one goal in Syria, to support the SAA and Assad in the fight against militants. The Kurds got involved in political games on the side of the United States, in every possible way interfered with the advancement of the Syrian army, and if you remember, even threatened Russia that we do not support them, announced the creation of our own state on part of the territory of Syria, guarded the oil-bearing regions controlled by the coalition led by the United States. And how was this to be understood? public with the unity of the Kurds in the fight against Turkey. In fact, this is not the case. 1. the leftist Turkish Workers' Party of Kurdistan, which loves to organize terrorist attacks in Turkey, and its wing in Syria (although it is not entirely clear there, ideologically they are the same, the Syrian denies the connection) Party of the Democratic Union. They used to be Marxists, then they became anti-authoritarians, their leader, who seems to be sitting in the Turkish prison Ojallan, created an almost anarchist doctrine TEV-DEM, which is now being successfully implemented by the PDS in Kurdistan. The paramilitary wing of the PKK is the People's Self-Defense Forces, but they don't seem to be particularly holy. The paramilitary wing of the PDS is the same YPG and YPJ that you probably know as the most effective military force in the Syrian conflict, according to our military experts. The PDS has an ally in the parliament of Iraqi Kurdistan - the opposition to the ruling KDP (about which below) the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. 2. Iraqi-Syrian Democratic Party of Kurdistan. They are in the position of national democracy, supported by the United States. In fact, they left the Iraqi Kurdish autonomy, which is now the most stable region in Iraq, and which was created with the participation of Turkey. Therefore, they have good relations with Erdogan and with America. It is the ruling (democratically) party of Iraqi Kurdistan. In Syria, it has several small satellite parties, with which the KDP form the Kurdish National Council. As I understand it, this can be considered the party of Syrian Kurdistan. Iraqi Kurdistan has its own armed forces, called peshmerga ("going to death" in Kurmanji), which are actually KDP forces in Syria.
          1. +1
            15 October 2019 09: 43
            Quote: Mar. Tira
            That you got excited.

            Seriously?? So I want to justify the king that you can neglect: 6 million tourists (they didn’t go on their own, but when he lifted the restrictions himself), he saved the nuclear power plant, two flow pipes, S-400 from the Coup, launched into Syria ... And that’s it this is in a very short time. You don't be unfounded, say for whom Putin did more during this time, than for Erdogan’s friend? There is no doubt that Russia also has some benefits from this. But what about the cons? Now, in case of sensitive situations, Turkey can blackmail Russia with such gifts on hand. Which by the way is already happening with threads.
            1. +5
              15 October 2019 14: 29
              Quote: Stas157
              So I want to justify the king ...

              this can be neglected, since the assistant to the president of Russia Vladislav Surkov called for “to investigate Putinism as a valid ideology of everyday life with all its social innovations and productive contradictions "A very rewarding endeavor as it represents a global political life hack, a well-functioning method of ruling."
              so that

              students will begin to study the multivolume edition of our president's promises
            2. +1
              15 October 2019 15: 34
              Quote: Stas157
              tell me for whom Putin has done more during this time than for a friend of Erdogan?

              And time will tell. What you have listed is also being done for other countries. Erdogan is used by Russia, and not Russia by Erdogan, do not be naive. And events in Syria will show it. What can Jupiter not be allowed to bull. We are most important to knock the United States and the coalition together with the militants from Syria. And how it does not matter. Turkey is not a rival to us, and under our pressure will leave from there.
          2. +12
            15 October 2019 09: 59
            Quote: Mar. Tira
            Our tourists, yes, are crowding there like on the jelly banks, for which they rake in full.

            The rams are also breaking ... During this year, a trip to Turkey turned out to be fatal for hundreds of Russians. Rudeness, neglect and indifference not only to the Turks, but also to the embassy is already obvious. Maybe Erdogan and a friend of Putin, but not the Russians.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. +3
              15 October 2019 15: 19
              Quote: Silvestr
              The rams are also breaking ..

              good Better not tell.
    2. +8
      15 October 2019 10: 18
      First, one important fact needs to be clarified, the Russian Federation and Turkey are subjects of international politics, and Syria, and especially Kurds, are objects. The author DOES NOT KNOW all the circumstances of the interaction between all who are cooked in this porridge, and there are much more parties than the above. If we follow the logic of the author, then we need to fight with Turkey. The country is a member of NATO, which has the second largest army in the alliance, a call, nuclear weapons on its territory, control of the straits, along which is supplied to our entire Mediterranean group. I have a wife and children and I do not want to go into the trenches in old age for someone's stupid politicking. So it is necessary to rejoice that we are following all this according to the zombies, and not through the parapet.
  2. +4
    15 October 2019 05: 32
    Political Unscrupulousness
    And what is "adherence to principles" in politics, if we talk about the state (in the case of the Kurds - national) level? Inflexibility, obstinacy? But politics is, by definition, flexible. As you know, there are no friends in it, but there are interests. So the Kurds are completely in their right to ally with whoever they want, if it is really in their national interests.
    1. +5
      15 October 2019 07: 40
      Politics is rather a dirty girl ... And what's more, these "dirty dances" with the Turks will come back to haunt us ..
      1. +2
        15 October 2019 09: 52
        However, how much cleaner and more honest politics are than prostitution!
        It does not lead to wars, hatred between nations and deaths.
  3. +1
    15 October 2019 06: 14
    And is the author sure that in this situation he sees everything? Probably only Putin knows how many layers are sketched. And our leadership should not be considered a foolish engine. Lenin supported Ataturk, who will say with confidence how this affected Turkey’s entry into World War II or not.
    1. +6
      15 October 2019 07: 35
      again 25 with another multi-move. It’s not time to admit that Putin just got ridiculous with the downed plane and the sale of the S400. and credits ... from a soldier for a broken peony a monetary fine "for damage to the state" was spilled, and Putin will be interestingly condemned for all his transactions?
      1. +2
        15 October 2019 19: 26
        Quote: Andy
        it’s not time to admit that Putin was just badly scolded and with a downed plane

        And you write this from the trenches, opposite the Turkish army?
      2. -1
        18 October 2019 04: 52
        and I believe that you are liquidated with your koment. Everyone has their own opinion. In order not to get into trouble, you need to be informed, and not to make hasty conclusions.
        1. 0
          20 October 2019 09: 12
          Well, that friend Erdogan threatens war in Syria, it means that either our tails between their legs (stating again that this war is not ours), like the Yankees, will leave there or fall under the batch. the same c400 can be tested on them. and Turkey, the Saudites, all the rubbish that financed the war in the Caucasus "wise" pu sells weapons. money doesn't smell. After all, the plane was forgiven by the Ottomans .... do you have any more questions?
          1. 0
            23 October 2019 05: 30
            questions of darkness, and about the downed plane and about the Saudis ... everything flows, everything changes.
    2. +3
      15 October 2019 10: 00
      Quote: igorra
      Lenin supported Ataturk,


      What good came of this?
  4. 0
    15 October 2019 06: 15
    In my opinion, the author wrote everything correctly.
    The article is a fat plus! +++++++
    1. +6
      15 October 2019 08: 58
      There is a suspicion that the author did not write ALL, but only one side that he sees or wants to show. Someone say: what for Assad support the Kurds?
      1. +4
        15 October 2019 09: 31
        Assad does not need tens of thousands of Kurdish refugees and militants. Better let them fight Turkey with the SAA. In addition, you can’t let Erdogan gain a foothold in these areas - then you can definitely forget about the territory.
      2. +7
        15 October 2019 09: 33
        maksbazhin did you read the text or limited to the headline and decided everything for yourself? Kurds are de jure and de facto citizens of Syria. Yes, with a wide level of autonomy and self-government, and with some aspects in relations with Damascus, but they are still citizens of the still united Syria. In addition, as the author correctly noted, on the territory of their habitat they managed to maintain order even in the most difficult times, which helped the Syrian leader a lot, who, in exchange for a certain degree of loyalty to himself, agreed to recognize the wide political autonomy of this ethnic enclave. But this does not mean at all that Assad thereby proclaimed the state sovereignty of Kurdistan, just as the Kurds themselves did not (contrary to the calls of some radical elements in the Kurdish leadership).
        1. -1
          15 October 2019 09: 53
          Read. Assad agreed with autonomy because he had no choice at that moment, and now the situation is changing and he does not need strong Kurds.
          1. +4
            15 October 2019 10: 07
            Now the situation is changing and he does not need strong Kurds.

            And for this, he asked a Turkish friend Erdgan to attack his country? Well, the fact that Turkey will grow territory at the expense of Syria is the associated costs, the main thing is to shut up the Kurds. Something does not converge here, don’t you?
            1. 0
              15 October 2019 10: 19
              I find, but the CAA as well, in no hurry to rush to help the Kurds.
              1. +6
                15 October 2019 10: 28
                I repeat, the CA protects its sovereignty and security of its citizens, including the Kurds. They will have to stand up for them or worthless Assad as ruler. Which he did by pushing the technique. But he only advanced technology not against the Kurds, but in the hope of cooling the ardor of the northern neighbor, thereby showing that he would not be left out. At the same time, Assad is well aware that even if the forces of his army and Kurdish paramilitary forces are combined, they will not be enough to stop the Turks. But he cannot do otherwise. This is still Syrian land, it is still Syrian people and 8 years of war have not changed that.
  5. +7
    15 October 2019 06: 31
    The only thing that the author did not indicate is that Turkey began military operations against the Kurds, together with the forces opposing Damascus ... "But how, yours ..., I apologize, to understand?"
    1. +2
      15 October 2019 08: 16
      and this is such a "fig leaf" in the causal place of the Turks
  6. +3
    15 October 2019 07: 40
    Oh, well done, Ilya! How he is their "prickly friends"! And so, and so ... and in other poses! And rightly so! Russia may have "fellow travelers", "loyal" ... but friends !? belay Russia is too big for many ... and close by! Whatever one may say, but the interests of "many" now and then bump into the interests of Russia ... in general, how sideways Russia does not turn, how someone's evening kefir falls from the nightstand ... And Turkey is a special case! Does anyone remember when Turkey was Russia's "ally"? In my opinion, never ... but the enemy, as much as you like! And throughout the history of the Russian state!
    1. +2
      15 October 2019 08: 38
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Does anyone remember when Turkey was Russia's "ally"?

      Late 18th century. Against France. And that is typical of one of the few allies who "did not put a spoke in our wheels" during this alliance.
      1. +2
        15 October 2019 09: 03
        Quote: Less
        Late 18th century. Against France. And that is typical of one of the few allies who "did not put a spoke in our wheels" during this alliance.

        Yeah, the Greeks asked for such an ally from Russia. A whole delegation was sent to Ushakov. And when one French captain left at night from under their nose, the Turks refused to pursue him. And our ships simply could not catch up with the Frenchman. With us they were slower, and the Turks had ships of French construction, they could catch up, but refused. In addition, the Turks chopped the heads of the captured French, to which our people were indignant. They demanded to terminate this business.
        1. 0
          15 October 2019 09: 25
          Quote: Mordvin 3
          Yeah, the Greeks asked for such an ally from Russia.

          What do you mean by that? That the Turks did not fulfill allied obligations? And I could be wrong, but it seems that the Greek Republic was created on the Ionian Islands. I don’t remember just how long it lasted.
          Quote: Mordvin 3
          In addition, the Turks chopped the heads of the captured French, to which our people were indignant. They demanded to terminate this business.

          And again - yes, they chopped it. Yes, they demanded to stop - the Turks stopped. Has this somehow affected the allied relations?

          Quote: Mordvin 3
          And when one French captain left at night from under their nose, the Turks refused to pursue him

          It was also possible. I just don’t know about this episode. Did it really hurt us?
          In any case, the issue of persecution was resolved on the spot, and when I said "stick in the wheels" I meant the actions of politicians of higher rank, and not special cases.
          1. +2
            15 October 2019 10: 52
            Quote: Less
            It was also possible. I just don’t know about this episode. Did it really hurt us?

            The Turks were supposed to block this Frenchman. So they did not fulfill their obligations. In addition, for the landing they had to provide several thousand soldiers. For this, Ushakov even sent a diamond snuffbox to one of their pasha. He promised, but did not fulfill his promise. Ali Pasha Yaninsky promised to send 3 thousand people, and sent 2 thousand. And then they all fled at the sight of the island. They refused to go on the assault.
            Quote: Less
            I just don’t know about this episode. Did it really hurt us?

            The captain of the Genero, Lajual, escaped from under Corfu on Christmas Day, December 25, Ushakov ordered the Turkish admiral Fetihbey to catch up with the Frenchman. He refused: "Let him run! Blow his sails!"
            Our "Epiphany" chased after him, but could not catch up, "Genero" left.
            And during the storming of Vido and Corfu, Russian ships were in the first line. But the division of production - in half. These are the allies. They didn’t know how to shoot, they hit Ushakov’s flagship a couple of times. Through our ships it was necessary to shoot at the fortress.
      2. +1
        15 October 2019 13: 08
        Quote: Less
        Late 18th century. Against France. And that is typical of one of the few allies who "did not put a spoke in our wheels" during this alliance.

        And how long were the Turks "allies" of Russia in the 18th century? And how long were they enemies of Russia in the same 18th century? And in the 17th century? And in the 19th century. ? And in the 20th century. ?
        1. -1
          15 October 2019 13: 30
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Does anyone remember when Turkey was Russia's "ally"? In my opinion, never


          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          And how long were the Turks "allies" of Russia in the 18th century? And how long were they enemies of Russia in the same 18th century? And in the 17th century? And in the 19th century. ? And in the 20th century. ?

          A history book to help you.
          1. +1
            15 October 2019 13: 46
            Quote: Less
            A history book to help you.

            Ahhh ... got it! You do not know ! Only the history textbook is in the "course"!
            1. +2
              15 October 2019 16: 30
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              Ahhh ... got it! You do not know ! Only the history textbook is in the "course"!

              Nikolaich, our people were very much surprised when they concluded an alliance with the Turks against France. The mentality is very different. An alliance with France would look more logical, they are much closer to us in mentality. And this 74-gun Genero looked so much better when it escaped the blockage past our and the Turkish ship at night, painting the sails black. And this Turkish admiral simply did not give a damn about the order of Ushakov, who commanded the combined forces. By the way, the Ionian Islands were made a republic precisely at the suggestion of Ushakov. And the Turks then tried to rob the Sicilians, received a rebuff from them, and quickly sailed home. Deserted in full force, in short, allies. Well, nowhere did they manage to rob. wink
  7. -3
    15 October 2019 07: 54
    Turkey conducts hostilities not against the Kurds, but against a specific political group - the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). It was against the PKK that Turkey fought in Iraqi Kurdistan during the civil war between the Democratic Party of Kurdistan and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.
  8. +5
    15 October 2019 07: 59
    Let's try to figure out if this is really so?

    Interestingly, the article is an American order or the author really "sees this way"?
    Why should Russia have a different attitude to the enclave that chose the patronage of the United States, who sent Assad to the negotiations in 2017-2018 (when it was possible to peacefully return to Syria as a broad autonomy), who stormed the base of government forces in Hasak (2016)? They decided to try independence, but chose the wrong side, who is their doctor?
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. +6
    15 October 2019 08: 29
    I will refrain from komenty, for it is contraindicated to praise the Kurds.
    1. +10
      15 October 2019 08: 59
      On the next branch, I condemned the Turks and got the very best ... I did not know that we have so many "Turkish citizens!"
      1. +2
        15 October 2019 09: 47
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        Didn't know that we have so many "Turkish citizens!"

        Here is the identity! Better not say anything.
        1. +3
          15 October 2019 09: 50
          Quote: tihonmarine
          keep silent.

          I can not ! I do not tolerate injustice. My nature is such, even to the detriment of myself ...
        2. +1
          15 October 2019 13: 05
          Walking is slimy
          On pebbles other
          So, that is close,
          We better keep silent.

          © A.K. Tolstoy
      2. 0
        15 October 2019 09: 48
        Well then, praise not the Turks or Kurds, but the author. In my professional opinion, this is a brilliant analytical article that the Military Review has been lacking for so long. All these subjective opinions of under-experts, presented as deep analytics, in the complete absence of a causal relationship in them, have already set the teeth on edge. Right there we see a solid attempt to consider the events taking place not only from the standpoint of several sides, but also in historical retrospect, for which the author, from me personally, has a huge "+". good
        1. -2
          15 October 2019 20: 18
          In my professional opinion

          journalist? political scientist?
          1. +1
            15 October 2019 22: 38
            The second and quite a bit the first))) Although still not ... I have a very indirect relationship with the journalist fraternity. Yes, and to those "political scientists" who broadcast from the blue screen, please do not refer me, because, unlike them, I have a corresponding state diploma of the Russian Federation, and even two: a specialist and after some time a master, both with honors ( although it's not my fault - the stars just came together). In a nutshell, I am a representative of that modest class of researchers who are engaged in the academic analysis of politics and the political process as a social science discipline. The first diploma was devoted to the evolution of ideological paradigms in the foreign policy of the Russian state in the late 19th - early 20th centuries, the second - to the theory of neo-feudalism, where he gave not only the definition of this concept, but also substantiated this phenomenon through a powerful economic and political base (which neither before me nor after that no one did). In principle, this topic could be studied further, for example, in graduate school, but being at the junction of political economy and modern political theories, it was of little interest to anyone in my department, because the bias was made towards the political process (and specifically elections, parties and everything connected with it), while my topic was nevertheless closer to political philosophy. And you will not be full of science, so the break with it was a matter of time. Now I work in an ordinary civil service position as a public relations specialist. Something like that in general ... It's even funny how capaciously you can fit your life path and your sphere of interests)))
      3. +6
        15 October 2019 10: 05
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        Didn't know that we have so many "Turkish citizens!"


        It is very difficult to maintain your opinion in the rapidly changing relations of GDP and Erdogan. laughing
        From love to hate, one step and vice versa
        1. +4
          15 October 2019 13: 06
          Quote: Silvestr
          It is very difficult to maintain your opinion in the rapidly changing relations of GDP and Erdogan.

          The ancient art of hesitation along with the line of the party and its highest manifestation is lost - the prediction of hesitation. smile
  11. +2
    15 October 2019 08: 30
    Thanks to the author. Very interesting article. I learned some historical facts only here.
  12. +6
    15 October 2019 08: 33
    Firstly, the very Bashar Assad, who is considered the most faithful Russian friend in the Middle East, has already stood up for the Kurds and sent government troops to the north of Syria.
    Why should Assad not do this? On the contrary, this is a completely logical move. Assad’s troops are not facing resistance there, and if the Turks had not begun the invasion, Assad would have to take control of these territories by force. Or, at best, negotiate with the Kurds. And to offer the Kurds something beyond what has already been proposed, there is nothing. As a result, Assad simply uses the current situation for his own purposes.
    Secondly, Ankara threatens Damascus with a direct clash. That is, Turkish troops are ready to start a war against the Syrian government army,
    I would like this moment in more detail ... And even not a single quote from Erdogan or the Turkish Foreign Ministry was given as a justification ...
    1. +3
      15 October 2019 10: 06
      Quote: Less
      As a result, Assad simply uses the current situation for his own purposes.

      Kurds from Syria will not disappear, it’s better not to live with enemies, but at least to live in good neighborliness.
    2. -1
      15 October 2019 10: 24
      Or, at best, negotiate with the Kurds.

      Not with the Kurds, but with the Americans, and those would send him far and long.
      The USA cannot afford to lose Turkey as an ally (control of the straits), the attempt to resolve the issue through a coup failed, we have to concede to Erdogan.
  13. +7
    15 October 2019 08: 41
    Assad stood up not for the Kurds, but for the sovereignty of Syria and against Turkish aggression. As they say did not manage to keep the territory, please be kind enough to free it for those who can do it
    1. +3
      15 October 2019 08: 56
      Quote: gafarovsafar
      Assad stood up not for the Kurds

      The Kurdish people have a DREAM ... they paid a lot for it and still have to pay quite a lot, with an unclear end result, besides.
      Assad has a GOAL, in the fulfillment of which much more will be accomplished, of different kinds.
      We will not talk about the "sultan", minke whales, "chosen ones, everything is clear there ...
      And what is the GOAL of our leadership? If that is understandable, then far from everything!
  14. +5
    15 October 2019 08: 57
    on the other hand, there was an obvious threat of an attack from Turkey, which only now materialized, but could have come true much earlier.

    As far as I understand, the author does not know or did not decide to indicate that the "Source of Peace" is the third operation of the Turks against the PKK. The first "Shield of the Euphrates" and the second "Olive branch". The Kurds have already lost most of the land in northern Syria, the third operation was a matter of time. And by the way, the CAA entered Tabbaka, and this is a strategically important point (a large dam on the Euphrates)
  15. +8
    15 October 2019 09: 06
    The nod at Russia's 1999 refusal to shelter Ocalan is ridiculous. In 1999, Russia itself was essentially an occupied territory, where the quasi-elite, oriented to the West, gazed into their mouths to the "advisers" from the American Kaganate. Today we have "our own" bar, but then the question was about the existence of Russia itself as a state within its current borders. This time. It should be clear to any sane figure that the Kurdish issue will no longer be the same as before. Sooner or later, with little or big blood, preserving the general alignment of forces in the BV or breaking everything to hell into chaos, and okurda will still create their own national state. These are tens of millions of people who are nationally aware of themselves. If politicians are silent about this, then they are either empty-headed "half-poker" (there are a lot of such in our time in various "international structures") running after their momentary reputation, or quieter clever people who prefer not to open their mouths ahead of time. Kurdish national education - to be, however and whoever likes it. Objective process. These are two. And the third thing. For too long, Russia tried to pull Turkey out of the "Western coalition" against Syria, which was partially (no more) successful at the moment. But even this is enough not to rush to "save" the Kurds, having lost all the developments in Turkey, and having failed the main task - the protection of Syria and Assad as the guarantor of Syrian stability. There is no pipe. First, Russia is simply not able to "save" the Kurds purely humanly - this is essentially a declaration of war on Turkey on the former Syrian territory, where several "masters" (the United States, Kurds, SDF, ISIS) have been sharing the skin for many years. Second, the Kurds are now "paying" for an alliance with the United States, and it is unclear why Russia should "pay" instead. Let them go under the wing of Assad, if the Kurdish leaders have lost their brains. No? - Well, woe to the people with such leaders. Russia can cover the Kurds in only one way - through Assad, because at the invitation of the Syrian government, the Russian Armed Forces are operating there, the Kurds did not call us, they "worked" for amers by their own decision and seized territory under the guise of "fighting ISIS," created. Now the payback for the old performance, a new "Turkish show" begins. The only option that Russia sees as acceptable is to wait for the Turks to stall and understand the impossibility of a "victory" over the Kurds, and the Kurds will understand that without a "Syrian-Russian roof" not only statehood (in the future) does not shine for them, but not even autonomy. Sadly, it looks like the "Turkish-Kurdish war" cannot be stopped right now until both sides inflict unacceptable losses on each other. Sorry for the peaceful population. But this is NOT OUR war.
  16. +3
    15 October 2019 09: 06
    The mistake is at the level of considering the Kurds as one people. Their ethnogenesis is not yet complete, and how Turzani and Talabani hate each other in Iraq - no Turks even dreamed of.

    Kurds cannot have their own state, since there is no unity. And as for the Americans or someone else - the Kurds are used by all and sundry in the Middle East.
    1. 0
      15 October 2019 09: 31
      I am by no means a lawyer for the Kurds, but, in general, "Ethnogenesis is complete" is when an ethnos ceases to exist (assimilation and dissolution in neighbors), or drags out its survival in the form of a relic, also until complete and final "evaporation". Ethnogenesis of a living people is ALWAYS NOT COMPLETED. In addition, the creation of your own State is the upsurge phase in ethnogenesis. Now tell me, how can the "phase of development" be the "cause of non-development"? - Warm and soft do not need to be compared ..
      1. +2
        15 October 2019 09: 43
        You, first, determine the terminology, and then criticize. According to Gumilev, in his passionate theory of ethnogenesis, the process does not end as long as there are people.

        I talked about the classical understanding of ethnogenesis as the composition of a people, there we are talking about the end of ethnogenesis as a stage when a people has already formed. Now the Kurds are like the Slavs, i.e. never a single nation, a linguistic community, nothing more. And between Kurmanji and Zazaki there is much less in common than between Russian and Polish.

        What are you talking about "phases of development" and "reasons for underdevelopment" do you mean - xs.
        1. 0
          15 October 2019 13: 40
          Then, please, explain your point of view: A) the Kurds ALREADY dispersed forever to different consortiums or B) is still going / is possible the addition of the Kurdish community -? If (A), then you are right - in this case, a unified Kurdish state is unlikely to ever be - only enclaves. If (B), then the Kurds will not ask our highly intelligent opinions, the process will sooner or later lead to centralization, whether we want it or not.
          1. 0
            16 October 2019 08: 42
            No need to do nonsense here, dear. I explained to you in white Russian to my position.

            If you want to discuss the intricacies of Kurdology, then this is for you at the Institute of Asian and African countries of Moscow State University or at YSU, there is also a strong faculty of oriental studies.
  17. +4
    15 October 2019 09: 18
    If the author is right, then this is the failure of the foreign policies of Putin and Lavrov. Soon we will find out. Turkey only craps us. And what Putin is counting on, we will soon find out too. Although the current government has never recognized mistakes, it has only shown concern.
  18. +2
    15 October 2019 09: 19
    The keynote of the article are the messages:
    - Russia has betrayed the Kurds.
    - Not everything is so simple.
    Thank you for the article!
    But every master of his own destiny.
    Do what you should and be what happens.
    And wagging, especially with obstacles and at a high speed of events, with a high degree of probability leads to disaster.
    What was to make the Kurds all rejected?
    Fight terrorists and build relationships with Syrian authorities.
    At the end, with a high degree of probability, get wide autonomy.
    Alliance with striped ephemeral, with rare exceptions, never leads to real sovereignty.
    Played, from the illusions of the proximity of the treasured carrots.
    They made a strategic mistake.
    1. +1
      15 October 2019 09: 58
      The keynote of the article are the messages:
      - Russia has betrayed the Kurds.

      Russia did not betray the Kurds, you can betray the one with whom you are in any relationship. The Kremlin, on the other hand, has always ignored the Kurds, preferring them to less "marginalized elements" (although, for me, Erdogan is still a political scumbag, something like Pinochet) and thereby pushed them into the arms of the United States. At the same time, there were no grounds for such an attitude of Moscow towards the Kurds, but for some reason she chose this particular version of behavior. This is what the author is talking about.
      1. 0
        15 October 2019 10: 35
        Quote: Dante
        Russia did not betray the Kurds, you can betray the one with whom you are in any relationship. The Kremlin has always ignored the Kurds

        Well then, the Kurds did not betray Russia, it turns out.
        1. +1
          15 October 2019 16: 08
          Well then, the Kurds did not betray Russia, it turns out.

          Exactly!
          Only for some reason, a different position prevails in our domestic media. And I guess why ... The reason is Assad, who cannot but respond to foreign intervention. So a conflict with the Turkish military is inevitable. But that is not all. We Russians will also be drawn into this confrontation, since they were invited by the Syrian leadership, including to prevent the collapse of the Syrian state. And in this vein, the behavior of the Russian media is beginning to make sense. We are prepared in advance for the idea that everything that happens is someone else's conflict, in which we should not participate. And the fact that this contradicts the undertaken obligations is not a problem. It does not quarrel with the Turks for the sake of negligent and unstable Kurds, even if the ally who invited us takes this step. And it doesn’t matter that for Assad this is not a question of Kurdistan or a Kurdish ethnic group, it is primarily a question of state sovereignty.
  19. NBV
    -5
    15 October 2019 09: 57
    Putin and Erdogan are similar in that they are both authoritarian rulers. They both put their power over the law, eliminate their political opponents and the free press. They both oppose a free and democratic world and seek support in each other. Russia sold Erdogan the freedom to attack the Kurds against the C 400 bought from him. Now he is discussing the purchase of Su 35 with Turkey. Do they need Turks with 400 and Su 35 ?! No. They need freedom to beat out over the Kurds!
    1. -1
      15 October 2019 10: 10
      Russia is selling equipment.
      Never sells allies.
      Let us know if you know for certain such historical facts.
      Often, Russia sacrificed its people to save others.
      This side of Russian politics causes ambiguous attitude in Russian society itself.
      However, the Russians democratically chose their power, including the Supreme Commander.
      And further on the same principle.
      "Do what you must and come what may."
      It is this worldview that has led Russia to be the most extensive country on planet Earth.
      And yes.
      Ours is all.
      "Either the chest is in the crosses, or the head is in the bushes."
    2. 0
      16 October 2019 00: 43
      Quote: NBV
      liquidate their political opponents and free press.

      Oh, the Bulgarian pepper smelled ... laughing And for you, the news: from last night a new stronghold of racism appeared in the geyrop. But, after all, literally the day before yesterday it was impossible to even imagine such a thing. wassat
  20. +1
    15 October 2019 09: 57
    Everything is very difficult. And to judge that yes as with our level of awareness is foolish. Not the first year there has been a large chess game with a bunch of players. If Erdogan is a friend of Putin, then where is the guarantee that everything that happens is not stipulated? Someone may exclude the option: the Turks will give the Kurds in the horns, Syria will intervene for them, the mattresses from the Kurds will leave, and then Syria and Turkey will destroy everything between themselves. And there will be no Merikos, stimulating Kurds, nor Kurds jerking at the Turks and peace and prosperity will enter into the pre-war borders. I think it will suit Turkey if they will control the border on the one hand, on the other, Syria and there will be no active Kurdish enclave at their side
    1. 0
      15 October 2019 10: 13
      On this site we do not judge.
      We express ourselves and exchange opinions.
      Sometimes, agreeing with the opinions of others, sometimes, having received well-founded arguments, we change our own position on events, sometimes we remain at our own.
      This site is not a court.
      The bottom line is a discussion club.
    2. 0
      15 October 2019 10: 20
      And to judge that yes as with our level of awareness is foolish

      Excuse me, what is wrong with the level of awareness of modern citizens? For some reason, this level of awareness at one time allowed me to predict with an accuracy of 97,99% how the situation with Syrian chemical weapons would develop, two months before our leadership came out with its, as the media will later write, "brilliant" and " the only true "initiative. I even shared my vision here on the site with the members of the forum, but then they ridiculed me, they said that I did not represent the volumes and that it would be difficult not only to dispose of, but corny to transport Syrian chemical weapons. The same people then shouted an enthusiastic "Hurray" when Moscow came up with its proposal and no longer remembered the possible problems and complications that might accompany this process. So whatever you ask, it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you, for everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Your knowledge (not specifically yours, but of people in general) stems from your own laziness - no more and no less.
  21. +6
    15 October 2019 10: 13
    "... from the Americans it was possible to get high-quality weapons, funding, help from military instructors. And the Kurds took full advantage of this, thanks to which they were able to turn the militia into a more or less combat-ready structure. Is it necessary to accuse the Kurds of lack of principle? Russia, by the way, is itself deliberately distanced herself from helping the Kurds " - "and the Cossack is sent" (C), pours water into the American mill.

    Syrian Kurds stuck a knife in the back of our ally, Syria, and sold the United States with giblets. Moreover, representatives of other national minorities living in northeast Syria and much more affected by ISIS repeatedly noted that the Kurds provided comprehensive assistance to ISIS militants in organizing the genocide of these national minorities. Moreover, the vast majority of local militants are Kurds - Sunnis.

    Therefore, after the introduction of government troops into the north-eastern regions of the country, Syria needs to carry out mass arrests of the leadership of Kurdish terrorists, and the Kurds themselves in full force to be deported to Iraqi Kurdistan as a punishment for cooperation with ISIS. The last measure will be supported by both Turks and Iranians.
  22. -1
    15 October 2019 10: 16
    Politics is a dirty business, especially in BV. Situational unions, the interests of ethnic groups and elites, large players, there is porridge. Turks fired at the Americans (maybe the fact itself (!) Accidentally.
    The Kurds pursue their own goals (like everyone else), and to make them sheep or the only noble knights in the region on the part of the author is very naive. Assad also uses the situation, the Kurds will survive with the help of the Turks. It looks like an agreement from all sides: the Yankees simply leave and react languidly, the Sultan nags the PKK’s tails, Assad regains sovereignty on de facto breakaway lands, the Russian Federation observes and reacts languidly. And the Kurds should ultimately get normal autonomy within Syria, not a confederation.
    1. 0
      15 October 2019 15: 53
      Quote: Rafale
      And the Kurds should ultimately get normal autonomy within Syria, not a confederation.

      Well, actually, all the talk about autonomy is rather an attempt by the Kurds to wishful thinking. Russia, Iran and Turkey have only recently agreed on the composition of the constitutional council, which will have to develop a new constitution for Syria and so far nothing has been heard about the departure from unitarity.
  23. NBV
    -7
    15 October 2019 10: 29
    Quote: Livonetc
    Russia is selling equipment.
    Never sells allies.
    Let us know if you know for certain such historical facts ..

    If you knew more about your own history than interpretations of the historical facts of the political situation, you would remember at least three examples from the last 100 years.
    1. The withdrawal of all all the instructors and Russian officers from the Bulgarian army and the inspiration of the Serbian invasion of Bulgaria in 1885.
    2. The partition of Poland between Russia and Germany with the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact.
    3. The annexation and occupation of Crimea and the war in the Donbass, despite the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.
    And UTB on prima Vista.
    1. +1
      15 October 2019 12: 58
      1 And what, it was assumed that Russian instructors and officers would fight with the Serbs? Well it was naive.
      2. Do not confuse the liberation of Western Belarus and Ukraine from the Polish occupation with the Munich agreement and the partition of Czechoslovakia by Germany and Poland.
      3. The Budapest Memorandum concerned Ukraine before its change of course. After the coup and the stated goal of joining NATO in the constitution, talking about the memorandum is ridiculous. As well as about annexation when it is supported by 90% of the "occupied" population.
      1. NBV
        -2
        15 October 2019 13: 07
        And, as the answer shows, you cannot overcome the complex of “interpretations of the historical facts of the political situation”.
        You always confused liberation and occupation.
        1. +1
          15 October 2019 16: 06
          No "interpretations". Only historical facts. Poland in 1920, due to the weakness of Russia, illegally occupied parts of Ukraine and Belarus. At the moment of her weakness in 1939 she lost.
          Poland, given its current attitude towards Russia, it is extremely important to remain strong and not lose US support. And then in an attack of Russophobia, the Poles again risk losing statehood.
    2. +1
      15 October 2019 13: 50
      Quote: NBV
      2. The partition of Poland between Russia and Germany with the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact.

      Poland was an ally of the USSR? belay
      The same Poland, which throughout the interwar period was considered the main enemy of the USSR in the European theater of war? The same Poland, which, along with Germany, divided Czechoslovakia related to the USSR agreement (after having previously blocked all the possibilities for the USSR to help it)?
      Quote: NBV
      3. The annexation and occupation of Crimea and the war in the Donbass, despite the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

      And Ukraine for 2014 with its "... for a hoot!"And"we will never be brothers!"was an ally of Russia?
  24. +1
    15 October 2019 10: 39
    It is extremely stupid to blame any of the politicians for unscrupulousness, there is only expediency in it, which cannot be understood by patriots.))
  25. 0
    15 October 2019 11: 14
    As far as I know politics, this is the achievement of the desired result, and if you choose between those territories that held the Kurd’s, we would have to knock them out and not the Turks, or for example the Turks, it would be better if the Turks. Moreover, the result is that the Kurds abandoned autonomy, are forced to agree to all the conditions that Russia and Syria have put forward to them, Turkey also gets a place for its Syrian refugees and a buffer against the Kurds and the Americans were able to leave (Almost) keeping the Person all interests were met, well, except for the Kurds Well, who cares?
  26. +1
    15 October 2019 11: 18
    The site has finally turned into a military instagram. Incomprehensible people, called experts, but for me, so simply amateurs, let's say "talk". It's like teaching singing and solfeggio without having a voice or hearing, but a great desire to realize your complexes. The good news is that they grappled with imported trolls. I really hope that their trolls are printed for money, the money of our enemies, and our heroes are printed exclusively for patriotism and for nothing. Then, honor and praise to them, destroy the enemies.
  27. +1
    15 October 2019 11: 36
    Author, Russia does not owe Kurds anything, from the word "in general". And it is true that by agreeing to go under the wing of the Americans, the Kurds also accepted all the risks arising from this. Resentments and emotions in politics greatly interfere, therefore, they did not prevent the rapprochement of Turkey and Russia. What matters is not what the Turks did once, but what they can be useful for now. At the same time, there is no need to tell a lie: nowhere is there officially any talk of an alliance with Turkey. Situational partnership, no more. The fanaticism of some on this score is the fantasy of some. Kurds were offered to negotiate with Assad. But since the Americans are having dinner for the Kurds, who do not need an end to the conflict, the Kurds danced as they wanted in the United States. Refusing the offers of the Syrians. And then the Americans threw the Kurds. At the same time, this is already the fifth kidok since 1991, and still does not reach the giraffe. And there is no need to shed tears over the fate of 40 million people. Separatism and attacks on soldiers and policemen around the world are considered terrorism. So the Kurds are terrorists. Not all, but not all in Chechnya were terrorists. Reasoning fairly, the Turks have every right to defend the territorial integrity of their state.
  28. -1
    15 October 2019 12: 47
    A very correct approach in the article. No betrayal. The Americans helped the Kurds survive the confrontation with ISIS, and for this the Kurds should be grateful to the Americans. But in the case of the Turks, the Americans cannot help the Kurds. As we are in the confrontation of Assad with Israel and Turkey.
    Therefore, the Kurds took a completely logical step - to give the border to Assad. Of the two evils, the lesser was chosen. Of course, they were more comfortable with the Americans - more autonomy, but with Assad it is still better than with the Turks. And while they have independence, they have little strength. So there are 40 million of them, but they are very fragmented and cannot agree among themselves. It is a pity of course that they missed such a great chance to create their own state.
  29. 0
    15 October 2019 12: 48
    Quote: Rafale
    Politics is a dirty business. It seems like an agreement from all sides: the Yankees just leave and react sluggishly, the sultan nags the PKK’s tails, Assad regains sovereignty on de facto breakaway lands, RF observes and reacts languidly.


    If you believe what is being broadcast on news feeds, the Russian Federation does not react so sluggishly.



    It seems that Putin decided to crank out an operation similar to occupying the Pristina airport.
  30. +1
    15 October 2019 13: 09
    Of course, there is no need to blame the Kurds for unscrupulousness. Once they came to Syria as refugees. And now they want to make their country from part of Syria and part of Turkey, having thrown out both Turks and Syrians. These wonderful people and good neighbors want to take away parts of other people's houses, building their own there, and spit on the inconvenience of the owners.
    So do not blame them for anything. From Syria, you just need to establish tight positions, and shoot all men of draft and post-draft age without figuring out who they are and where they are going. And also shoot everyone, regardless of gender and age, who comes with weapons. From the Turkish side, the Turks themselves will cope.
    This is the only and unique HUMAN way to resolve the Kursk issue. Otherwise, in the end it will be necessary to do the same, but after millions of victims among the Turks and Syrians, who are not at all to blame for the fact that the tribes that had been engaged in the slave trade for thousands of years (it is impossible to calculate how many Slavs went into slavery without leaving through Kurdish hands), suddenly state itself.
    1. +1
      15 October 2019 13: 39
      I don’t know in what century the Kurds ended up in Syria and under what circumstances.
      Arabs conquered the territory of Syria in the first millennium AD.
      And Kurds in Syria live 9% of the total population.
      By the way.
      In the chain of resale of the Slavs into slavery, Christian Armenia was diligently noted.
      1. +1
        15 October 2019 13: 47
        A lot of people were noted, but the conversation is about Kurds. To find out the facts, just start the Kurdish search engine, it’s not difficult. Distant historical events unnecessarily, the slave trade, I generally mentioned by the way.
        1. 0
          15 October 2019 14: 14
          I did not find information on the network about how they ended up in Syria.
          And as for the "brutal" customs of antiquity, the Slavs themselves often cut out the settlements of the Slavs clean.
          So it’s worth leaving memories of the atrocities of the antiquity of history.
          1. +1
            15 October 2019 16: 32
            It's funny to read) The atrocity ... Hehe. In general, hereditary criminals (we are not talking about military takeovers, carvings of each other, which, incidentally, is usually a nonsense of concerned historians), united in tribes that are actually ethnic organized crime groups, were not concerned about state building. You see, they didn’t need it, they are bandits, not state builders. Yes, it happens that a gangster builds a state. But this is not the rule, this is the exception.
            That's why I mentioned the main Kurdish specialization. And you joyfully clung to the opportunity ...
            1. 0
              15 October 2019 16: 53
              Joy is not my motivation in this case.
              The reasons for classifying Kurds as gangsters are unclear to me.
              The first legal education does not allow. wink hi
              1. 0
                15 October 2019 16: 56
                That is, slave traders are not criminals? Cute...
                1. 0
                  15 October 2019 16: 57
                  When did these facts take place?
                  1. 0
                    15 October 2019 16: 57
                    Troll? Well, have fun ...
                    1. 0
                      15 October 2019 16: 59
                      Just punched a topic on the Internet.
                      I did not find anything like it.
  31. +1
    15 October 2019 14: 28
    If we talk about who betrayed whom, the first and most high-profile fact of political betrayal related to the Kurds and their national movement was the story of the arrest of the Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan, the “founding father” of the Kurdistan Workers Party, who is now seventy years old and twenty of them he is in prison on an island in the Sea of ​​Marmara.

    Recall that Ocalan was captured by Turkish intelligence 20 years ago, on February 15, 1999, in Kenya.

    So who betrayed Ocalan?
    Who gave the Turks information about Ocalan’s presence in Odintsovo, Moscow Region, after intercepting his conversation by satellite phone?
    Who tapped to Amsterdam and Minsk about the attempt of the citizen of the Republic of Cyprus Lazaros Mavros to cross through Belarus to the Netherlands?
    Who insisted on sending Ocalan from Athens to the Greek embassy in Nairobi, where, by a strange coincidence, are the regional centers of the CIA and Israeli intelligence Mossad?
    Is it really all Russia? winked
  32. 0
    15 October 2019 14: 41
    Well then, it is necessary to support the Kurds around the world, declare the Turks aggressors to attack them all over the world and give to neighboring countries those parts of Turkey that belonged to them and rename the European part of Istanbul to Constantinople.
    1. 0
      15 October 2019 15: 46
      attack the whole world

      too vague, announce the exact list.
      1. 0
        15 October 2019 19: 11
        Greece, Cyprus, Bulgaria, Georgia and finally Muslims fenced off by Christians by the Bosphorus Europe wins and Russia deprives the Crimean Tatars of the eternal instigator in the person of Turkey and, at the same time, of Caucasian extremists.
        Seljuk Turks must go where they came from
        1. 0
          15 October 2019 20: 08
          your "whole world" is not great. all the poor fellows you listed are not rivals to the Turks, history has proven.
  33. 0
    15 October 2019 14: 42
    Everything is very simple: as soon as Erdogan tries not to understand us, the Kurds will receive a certain degree of support from us.
    To support them at the same time as the Americans in terms of dismembering Syria - we also could not and cannot do this.
    So they will have to become one of the builders of the new Syrian state. Albeit involuntarily.
  34. 0
    15 October 2019 15: 24
    International politics is a human dirty thing. But you need to think with fundamental interests. That is why Turkey is more important to us than 40 million Kurds. Unfortunately. Better to let them agree there somehow.
    Not so long ago, the Kurdish president was in Turkey. And it was all the same.
  35. 0
    15 October 2019 15: 43
    Recall that at a time when Russia refused to provide asylum to Ocalan, Turkey openly supported terrorist groups in the North Caucasus.

    Recall that at a time when there were no terrorist groups in the North Caucasus, the Soviet Union supported the workers' party of Kurdistan in Turkey. for this reason жcalan and wanted to escape in Moscow.
  36. 0
    15 October 2019 16: 00
    Quote: Dr. Hub
    I think it will suit Turkey if they will control the border on the one hand, on the other, Syria and there will be no active Kurdish enclave at their side

    no, it won’t work, for the reason that the Assads have already been fined and there is no trust in them - at one time they provided comprehensive support to the RPK on their territory and only the threat of an open war with Turkey forced them to translate this support into more hidden forms. Now Bashar is stepping on the same rake, confident that between him and Turkey, Iran and Russia will not give offense. but the Kurds did not help the Americans in Normandy, and the Syrians in Stalingrad ...
  37. +2
    15 October 2019 17: 07
    The Syrian Kurds at one time found themselves in a very dangerous situation - on the one hand, they were threatened by ISIS militants (banned in Russia), on the other hand, there was an obvious threat of an attack from Turkey, which only now materialized, but could have come true much earlier. And the Kurds had no choice but to look for a strong patron. By chance, such a patron was the United States, in whose interests at that time it was to support the Kurds.

    Well, do not distort the facts like that.
    Firstly, the Kurds were initially offered to negotiate with Assad and jointly fight ISIS. Let's not forget that these Kurds are primarily citizens of Syria and live on Syrian soil. Therefore, Ojallan does not need to be pulled here. They primarily violated the laws of Syria. They were given the opportunity to peacefully get out of the situation, but they continued to violate.
    Secondly, the United States invaded Syria, and by law, Kurds supported the aggressor, helping to seize lands that were never Kurdish.
    Thirdly, while in the lands of the Arabs, Kurdish groups staged real ethnic cleansing, again under the patronage of the United States.
    Fourth, the Kurds took part in the looting of oil fields and the smuggling of oil into Turkey. Which is also a crime.
    So the Kurds inherited so that there can be no pity for them. And what once again to Ojallan - so where is the price from Russia? This is an intra-Turkish showdown, we are sideways (and right) there, and, in general, why do we quarrel with Turkey and why do we need thanks to part of the Kurds, who have been behaving from century to century so that no one doubts that their state has will they never be?
  38. 0
    15 October 2019 18: 10
    Kurdish tribes asked for money and weapons and did not want any restrictions. The proposal of Russia and Syria did not make the leaders of the tribes rich, so they chose the United States. Everything is like in the old days - for beads for the leader they were bought. In all the old countries where they live they don’t like them ... And you don’t need to wind up high politics here.
  39. 0
    15 October 2019 18: 24
    The policy of our leadership is completely devoid of logic. No clear positions. Solid blablabla.
  40. 0
    16 October 2019 03: 46
    A rather stupid attempt to drag Russia to the Kurdish issue.

    First, we are not obliged to all peoples to "make" their countries. Have already done - Bulgaria, Romania, Israel, etc., and what, got gratitude? Especially in the latter case. If in the first two cases, at least the peoples are more or less loyal to Russia, then in Israel both the Jewish people and the elite in a single ecstasy would gladly liquidate Russia, even despite the fact that many were born, grew up, learned, etc. P. So let the Kurds deal with their own state, or even better, let them be law-abiding citizens of other countries. All the same, all peoples have their "diasporas" in other countries, even if there is "their own" country.

    Secondly, what will happen there in the north of Syria is still a grandmother wondering in two. Erdogan said he would respect the integrity of Syria and withdraw his troops. Of course, who will believe him, but who will believe Ilya Polonsky that this is not so? So far, Russia has been quite successful, for example, in moderating the situation in Idlib. And when the Syrians were sniffing at the Turks, who were trying to deliver supplies and reinforcements to their barmaley, they very quickly reassured the "partners" with the help of a pair of Su-35s and turning on the S-400 radars in Latakia. So we will look and there is no sense in alarming ahead of time, especially since NOTHING depends on US.

    Thirdly, one might think that Assad himself took and gave the order to his troops to move to the Kurdish-held areas. Without even asking Russian "advisers". Yeah, found a fool too. Bashar is a hardened person, I suppose he also stocked up with a paper permit to, if necessary, poke him in the face if the GDP turns on the "back" in front of Erdogan.

    Fourth, and in general, who said that the Kurds in Syria should have something "broken off"? Well, they fought against ISIS - well done, as soon as the Syrian troops approached, lay down your arms, get orders and medals and return to a peaceful life. Who wants to join the CAA. No, damn it, bald shit, this is our land now, Syrian, stay where you are, otherwise I'll complain to "Uncle Sam". And who is "Uncle Sam" there, what is he doing there, on the sovereign Syrian territory? Protects against ISIS? Well, well done, defended it and go back to California, gray belly in the sun. We at the UN will say "thank you" and in general we will remember for a century, just like the East Europeans of Russia, "I swear by my mother."

    The problem of the Kurds is that they tried to build their own state on someone else's grief (and on their own too, of course). Moreover, they "forgot" to ask Damascus about this, if he wants to give these territories? But they "asked" the amers. Well, we got it. Honestly speaking, I, in the place of Assad, would not have regretted several kilometers of land near the border, glad that the Turks staged a kurdicide there, so that everyone else would be discouraged to try to overthrow the government in Damascus. However, Dr. Assad is not as bad as I am and will protect whom from "his" Kurds
  41. +1
    16 October 2019 15: 16
    Is it worth blaming the gypsies that they like to live at someone else’s expense and, in any case, will not work normally? And Kurds are something like Muslim gypsies with all the ensuing consequences.
    1. +3
      21 October 2019 10: 47
      Quote: NF68
      And Kurds are something like Muslim gypsies with all the ensuing consequences.


      Not "something like", but real gypsies, as well as the (once migrated) Hai tribes. Did you know?
  42. 0
    20 October 2019 13: 28
    There was nothing for them to listen to and do as Israel offered them.
  43. 0
    21 October 2019 07: 57
    For some reason, the author puts forward a certain moral aspect. We have already had examples of "moral" politics: in the USSR the ideology of "aid", in the USA the idea of ​​certain "values". The practice of the last 25 years has shown that both concepts were not viable. There remained only specific interests, expressed in tangible assets, as well as tools to achieve and ensure these. It makes no sense today to approach from moral standards if we want to get a complete picture of what is happening in the world. Otherwise, we will all the time be faced with unrealistic prediction.
    The next moment. The Syrian company is often seen as some part of the big chess game. But why chess? Do we have other strategic games? Most try to evaluate this campaign as a multi-table game with a set of traditional figures. But this is not so. If we compare this campaign with the game, then here is a complete analogue of Go's game or its truncated version of Reversi. Only many players play at once. And the chips are not removed from the board, but are surrounded and turned over. You can either Turkey or Russia at one point turn over the whole block in the game, and then in one turn you will turn over the last win and half more from the top. And vice versa. Since the rules are different, then the assessment of the region and the processes in it are unrealistic.
    And now the author approaches the analysis of the Kurdish issue in Syria from the traditional positions of chess and morality, however, unfortunately, in many respects he misses the history of the issue and the specific content of the subject problem nodes, for example, and what exactly is the current ideology of the Workers Party, why a significant part of the Kurdish population does not share it, what kind of system was built in Syria and why it is a threat to both Turkey and Damascus, how the economic model is built and so on and so forth ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"