In blow to U.S.-Turkey ties, Trump administration approves plan to directly arm Syrian Kurds ...

[DonViejo]

Source: The Washington Post



In blow to U.S.-Turkey ties, Trump administration approves plan to directly arm Syrian Kurds against Islamic State

By Thomas Gibbons-Neff May 9 at 1:40 PM

President Trump has approved a plan to directly arm Kurdish forces fighting in Syria as part of a U.S. military plan to capture Raqqa, the Syrian city that is the Islamic State’s defacto capital, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.

The decision, which was first reported by NBC, is sure to anger Turkey, the NATO ally that views the Kurdish People’s Protection Units, or YPG, as a threat and has rebuked the United States for partnering with them in its fight against extremists in Syria.

Two officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plan had not been announced, confirmed that a decision had been made but declined to provide further details.

The YPG dominates a group known as the Syrian Democratic Forces, which also includes Arab, Christian and Turkmen fighters that have been the Pentagon’s premier proxy force fighting the Islamic State in Syria.





Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/05/09/in-blow-to-u-s-turkey-ties-trump-administration-approves-plan-to-directly-arm-syrian-kurds-against-islamic-state/?pushid=59120193fdd5491d00000030&tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.1eec5631a012

[nycbos]

1. The Kurds have been the most effective fighters against ISIS.

Wouldn't be surprised if the Obama administration was leaning toward taking this action.

[karynnj]

2. Depends what "arm" means"

As the article says, the US has provided air support for them and INDIRECTLY helped them get some US arms from Arab allies. The concern here, as with all the Syrian "moderates" is that the US both needs them on the front lines in Syria, because, unlike in Iraq, they do not have a government they could work with AND they are concerned with what they will do with arms in the future.

That is why the US has given them some non military assistance and allowed the Arabs to give them some weapons. In particular, they have NOT allowed them to give them anti aircraft weapons, though they, like other rebels, continually ask.

As you said, this does not sound like a major change -- and it might be that Obama/Carter/Kerry would never have announced something like this - these were always the people who were going to attack Raqqa as or after Mosul fell. What I don't know is how this and US air cover is going to be impacted by the Russia/Turkey/Iran safe zones plan - where the US opted not to be at the table. (After Aleppo, Russia moved away from diplomacy with the US, but encouraged Trump to join them when he took office.

Tillerson, with major gaps in support because no one has been nominated for key positions, means the US has not been involved. I suspect that when he does show up, he has neither the long history on issues that Secretary had, nor the staff that Kerry repeatedly praised as being critical for his successes.

[nycbos]

4. No doubt

The issue is the situation is highly complex as you noted. Obama was able to grasp the complexity m.

So was Clinton

Trump can't

[karynnj]

5. Totally true -- even as Clinton would not necessarily have made the same decisions as Obama,

both would have listened to the defense and state departments. Listened to the alternatives, heard the pros and cons and made a decision - often as to what would be the least bad thing to do. In Trump's case, the State Department has been decimated and Tillerson seems out of touch. While McMasters and Mattis are respected, just consider how many more intelligent people would have been in the room in 2016 vs now - including both Obama and Biden. Neither Trump or Pence or Jared Kushner have much background here.

[Jno_Gilmor_]

3. I trust the Kurds more than I trust Turkey. n/t