Because so far as I know the Taliban are Sunni fundamentalists of the Wahaabist/Salafist/Qubtism/Arabic Supremacy stripe and therefore, like, not a fan of those heretical Shia Persians
It has always been darkly amusing to me that the US, NATO etc are so vehemently anti Islamist extremists but at the same time are allied with... the biggest backer of those extremists in the region? And are devoted enemies of Hezbollah and Iran who also kind of hate those extremists? Like it's so fucked up, it's anti-intuitive.
I've read that there are increasing contacts between Iran and Taliban leaders in western Afghanistan, in Herat Province in particular. It makes sense, since in some areas the Taliban hold power or influence and thus must be dealt with for Iran to be at all involved in the region. And the Taliban leadership is capable of pragmatism and doesn't seem to be interested in sectarian war with the Shia. Whatever relationship the two have is probably based on political/economic factors more than religious ones, IMO.
The fact that the Taliban continue to bleed the US in Afghanistan is probably a significant plus in Tehran's eyes, too.
Kaputa on
+6
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Iran's primary goal is keeping them the fuck out of Iran, presumably.
Because so far as I know the Taliban are Sunni fundamentalists of the Wahaabist/Salafist/Qubtism/Arabic Supremacy stripe and therefore, like, not a fan of those heretical Shia Persians
It has always been darkly amusing to me that the US, NATO etc are so vehemently anti Islamist extremists but at the same time are allied with... the biggest backer of those extremists in the region? And are devoted enemies of Hezbollah and Iran who also kind of hate those extremists? Like it's so fucked up, it's anti-intuitive.
I've read that there are increasing contacts between Iran and Taliban leaders in western Afghanistan, in Herat Province in particular. It makes sense, since in some areas the Taliban hold power or influence and thus must be dealt with for Iran to be at all involved in the region. And the Taliban leadership is capable of pragmatism and doesn't seem to be interested in sectarian war with the Shia. Whatever relationship the two have is probably based on political/economic factors more than religious ones, IMO.
The fact that the Taliban continue to bleed the US in Afghanistan is probably a significant plus in Tehran's eyes, too.
I've read over the past year that Iran is backing the Taliban, though to what degree I don't know.
Back in the day I used to look at the sectarian makeup and say no of course Iran wouldn't fund sunni jihadists, of course not. But I've read a lot since then, and its a truism that war makes strange bedfellows.
Herat in particular is within Iran's sphere of influence; I'd expect Iran to have pull not just with the Taliban but with the official government, with business links and more.
This makes me wonder how the hazara are doing. (They're an ethnic group in central afghanistan which are mostly shia; you can tell them by their more east-asiatic features.) I can see Iran backing the Taliban, but I think it's less likely if the Taliban are also killing their co-religionists in a serious way. Kaputa you know anything about this?
Iran has a much more pragmatist view of operations, especially the Qods, than I think many here (in the US) give them credit for. Discounting the importance of their faith would be wrong, but assuming that they are driven only by their faith would introduce a significant bias when looking at past and attempting to predict future actions.
Apparently, the days of countries launching military air campaigns over Syria without either a declaration of war or any form of permission may gradually be coming to the end.
In more news from NATO in Syria, Donald Trump can now join his two predecessors as a leader who repudiated nation-building prior to his election, and embraced it afterwards: American troops and other personnel will likely remain in Syria for the remaining future. Whether this means the Kurdish forces come to some sort of settlement with the Syrian government in the future--or if they draw the US into (further) conflict with Damascus remains to be seen, but American deployment to their territory seems likely in either event.
Turkey is a complete wild card in both NATO and Russian camps. Hates Kurds, Syria, and Iran, but wants to play the US and Russia off against each other.
Russia is allied with Syria and Iran.
The Kurds and Syria are pragmatically supporting each other.
The US is giving some support to the Kurds and SDF rebels.
The US wants Assad out, somehow, and some magical democratic peace settlement. No fucking idea.
I have no idea what the fuck Tillerson is thinking sticking US dick into this mess except that Israel and the Sunni monarchs are somehow blackmailing the admin into it.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Turkey is a complete wild card in both NATO and Russian camps. Hates Kurds, Syria, and Iran, but wants to play the US and Russia off against each other.
Russia is allied with Syria and Iran.
The Kurds and Syria are pragmatically supporting each other.
The US is giving some support to the Kurds and SDF rebels.
The US wants Assad out, somehow, and some magical democratic peace settlement. No fucking idea.
I have no idea what the fuck Tillerson is thinking sticking US dick into this mess except that Israel and the Sunni monarchs are somehow blackmailing the admin into it.
Syria is way less a powder keg now than at most times over the past many years. Its actually starting to re-gain a little bit of stability now.
Turkey hates a lot of things, but I don't think Iran is on that list yet. They're natural rivals but they've not come into conflict.
The Kurds are not supporting each other, unless I missed something dramatic in the last couple months. The SDF(YPG) and the PKK are marxist groups, while the KDP in Iraq is decidedly not. The KDP, under Barzani was very friendly with Turkey, including letting Turkey conduct anti-PKK air strikes and raids inside Iraq. Since that referendum maybe things have changed though.
And as far as the US dick being in Syria, well, its been there since the very start, when the US ambassador was marching alongside protesters. Trump took the Obama-era plan for Syria and just ran with it (taking all the accolades, of course). Where it goes from here, who knows. But there hasn't been a coherent long term plan for Afghanistan or Iraq since, ever, so I don't expect one for Syria either.
Turkey is a complete wild card in both NATO and Russian camps. Hates Kurds, Syria, and Iran, but wants to play the US and Russia off against each other.
Russia is allied with Syria and Iran.
The Kurds and Syria are pragmatically supporting each other.
The US is giving some support to the Kurds and SDF rebels.
The US wants Assad out, somehow, and some magical democratic peace settlement. No fucking idea.
I have no idea what the fuck Tillerson is thinking sticking US dick into this mess except that Israel and the Sunni monarchs are somehow blackmailing the admin into it.
Syria is way less a powder keg now than at most times over the past many years. Its actually starting to re-gain a little bit of stability now.
Turkey hates a lot of things, but I don't think Iran is on that list yet. They're natural rivals but they've not come into conflict.
The Kurds are not supporting each other, unless I missed something dramatic in the last couple months. The SDF(YPG) and the PKK are marxist groups, while the KDP in Iraq is decidedly not. The KDP, under Barzani was very friendly with Turkey, including letting Turkey conduct anti-PKK air strikes and raids inside Iraq. Since that referendum maybe things have changed though.
And as far as the US dick being in Syria, well, its been there since the very start, when the US ambassador was marching alongside protesters. Trump took the Obama-era plan for Syria and just ran with it (taking all the accolades, of course). Where it goes from here, who knows. But there hasn't been a coherent long term plan for Afghanistan or Iraq since, ever, so I don't expect one for Syria either.
The Trump government's behavior in Syria has, in this last year, been very predictable on the whole--especially in contrast to his own rhetoric (no surprise there), and especially in contrast to the rhetoric critical of him: he has Russian paymasters, so naturally he'll leave Russia free hand to carry on military operations in the country that invited it to do so (within international norms anyway), instead of jamming an American dick into their way at every possible turn (which is one way of putting it). Except he's kept jamming said dick anyway, with a steady increase in the Obama government's deployment, the occasional attacks on the Syrian military (though to both his and Pres. Obama's credit, I get the impression that it's a hard for the American government to resist bombing a target that is too terrified of further retaliation to attempt to defend itself), the political and military backing of the Rojava more generally.
The last category seems innocuous enough, even praiseworthy, but it's worth remembering that the Russian government has pretty consistently been backing Rojava politically at the negotiating table (in fact, at this point it seems hard to believe that Moscow hasn't been pressuring Damascus into being more amenable towards Kurdish autonomy in the north). Rojava counted on the PKK support in the early days, and will probably only count on it more if things go worse with Turkey, given their past experience. And here's something that I think is easily overlooked: the PKK's well-established Marxist and Communist revolutionary ideology is known, as are its enduring ties to the USSR and to contemporary Russia, but the Syrian government backed the PKK too despite being not-that-keen on its own Kurdish minority, because they sought to undermine Turkey, because of a shared Marxist ideology, and because putting aside their own differences was a logical thing to do. Now you have Armenian politicians and officials who harken back to Armenia's early support to the PKK (Turkey believes said support never ended), Russian officials who would naturally increase their support of the PKK as they're warming up to Rojava as a whole (offering to represent Rojava at the negotiating table if they're not invited), and even Syrian positioning itself as necessary to Rojava's own security. It's very easy for them to get on the same page. For NATO, which still considers the PKK a terrorist organization, it's a lot harder to stay on the same page.
So the US and Russia have both made noises implying they won't back the YPG against Turkey in Afrin Canton, which Turkey is apparently preparing to invade. Erdogan threatens to attack the SDF every few weeks, so at first I was betting it would be the usual bluster. But they did invade and occupy the abutting territory in northern Aleppo a year ago ("Operation Euphrates Shield"), so anything seemed possible. Now, judging by the reactions of other countries, I fear it's actually going to happen this time.
Russia:
Russia has started moving military observers away from an area in northwestern Syria where Turkey is planning an offensive against Kurdish fighters, a Turkish official told Al Jazeera.
Moving the observers comes as Turkey's defence minister on Friday said his country would go ahead with the offensive in the enclave of Afrin, saying Syrian Kurdish fighters there pose a "real" threat to his country.
US (according to a Turkish news agency) :
Syrian Kurdish fighters previously armed by the United States are no longer part of the battle against ISIL and the US-led coalition doesn't support them, a US military official said on Tuesday.
The comments were the first indication by American officials that US-led forces may not intervene if Turkey follows through with a promised cross-border military operation to wipe out the group known as YPG, which controls the Afrin region along Turkey's southern border.
Syria:
But Syria's deputy foreign minister warned that a Turkish military incursion would be "no picnic" and that the Syrian Air Force was "ready to destroy Turkish air targets in the skies of Syria".
"We warn the Turkish leaders that if they start fighting in the region of Afrin, it will be seen as an aggression by the Turkish army against the sovereignty of Syria," Mr Mekdad added.
While I regard the statements of Turkish media/officials with some skepticism on issues like this, I'm concerned that it might be true. I'd rather neither the US or Russia be militarily involved in Syria, but at the same time I'll be disappointed if both powers give Turkey the green light to do this, when either could probably prevent an invasion if they wanted to. Invading Afrin, one of the three main Kurdish regions in northern Syria, would trigger a real war with the YPG, with whom they have merely skirmished in the past. The YPG would likely respond at other points along the border - I can't see Kobane and Cizire just sitting back and watching Afrin get crushed - and suddenly you have a major escalation in a war that finally seemed to be approaching its conclusion. And it could easily spread to/exacerbate violence in southern Turkey as well, where the PKK is usually at war with the government. YPG and PKK are basically sister organizations, so if major fighting did break out it could engulf the northern Syria/southern Turkey region without distinction.
To say nothing of the Syrian government's threats to respond. I don't know if the Syrian air force is actually prepared to fight Turkey at the moment - but they might be able to down some planes with AA depending on what Russia has been giving them lately.
Overall I think it's going to be a total clusterfuck if Turkey follows through with a real attack on Afrin. Fuck Erdogan and his neo-Ottoman land grabs.
edit - also, I suspect that the Syrian government's current advance through the rebel-held Idlib region, which has already reclaimed a large swathe of territory, is what triggered Erdogan's move, rather than any change in the situation with the YPG. Just speculation on my part, but this is pretty much Turkey's last chance to pull shit like this.
Because so far as I know the Taliban are Sunni fundamentalists of the Wahaabist/Salafist/Qubtism/Arabic Supremacy stripe and therefore, like, not a fan of those heretical Shia Persians
It has always been darkly amusing to me that the US, NATO etc are so vehemently anti Islamist extremists but at the same time are allied with... the biggest backer of those extremists in the region? And are devoted enemies of Hezbollah and Iran who also kind of hate those extremists? Like it's so fucked up, it's anti-intuitive.
I've read that there are increasing contacts between Iran and Taliban leaders in western Afghanistan, in Herat Province in particular. It makes sense, since in some areas the Taliban hold power or influence and thus must be dealt with for Iran to be at all involved in the region. And the Taliban leadership is capable of pragmatism and doesn't seem to be interested in sectarian war with the Shia. Whatever relationship the two have is probably based on political/economic factors more than religious ones, IMO.
The fact that the Taliban continue to bleed the US in Afghanistan is probably a significant plus in Tehran's eyes, too.
I've read over the past year that Iran is backing the Taliban, though to what degree I don't know.
Back in the day I used to look at the sectarian makeup and say no of course Iran wouldn't fund sunni jihadists, of course not. But I've read a lot since then, and its a truism that war makes strange bedfellows.
Herat in particular is within Iran's sphere of influence; I'd expect Iran to have pull not just with the Taliban but with the official government, with business links and more.
This makes me wonder how the hazara are doing. (They're an ethnic group in central afghanistan which are mostly shia; you can tell them by their more east-asiatic features.) I can see Iran backing the Taliban, but I think it's less likely if the Taliban are also killing their co-religionists in a serious way. Kaputa you know anything about this?
I don't know much about how things are for Hazaras in Afghanistan nowadays, or how much influence Iran has in Hazara communities, but I don't think the Taliban is going out of its way to slaughter them. However I assume most Hazaras fighting in Afghanistan are doing so on the side of the ANSF or independently against the Taliban, so it could still be seen the way you put it. Afghan Analyst's Network has a few related articles that you might want to look at, but not a lot. I'm not sure whether any Hazara live under Taliban rule, or what Taliban rule over Hazara communities looks like if so.
One thing I've wondered about is the Fatemiyoun, an Afghan Shia militia recruited from Afghan refugee camps in Iran and sent to Syria to fight for the government. I usually see estimates of ~10k for their numbers and they're armed, trained, and funded by Iran, so the Fatemiyoun could potentially be another means of Iranian leverage or influence in Afghanistan.
edit - goddamn I need to proofread before hitting submit, sorry people
So the US and Russia have both made noises implying they won't back the YPG against in Afrin Canton, which Turkey is apparently preparing to invade. Erdogan threatens to attack the SDF every few weeks, so at first I was betting it would be the usual bluster. But they did invade and occupy the abutting territory in northern Aleppo a year ago ("Operation Euphrates Shield), so anything seemed possible. Now, judging by the reactions of other countries, I fear it's actually going to happen this time.
Russia:
Russia has started moving military observers away from an area in northwestern Syria where Turkey is planning an offensive against Kurdish fighters, a Turkish official told Al Jazeera.
Moving the observers comes as Turkey's defence minister on Friday said his country would go ahead with the offensive in the enclave of Afrin, saying Syrian Kurdish fighters there pose a "real" threat to his country.
US (according to a Turkish news agency) :
Syrian Kurdish fighters previously armed by the United States are no longer part of the battle against ISIL and the US-led coalition doesn't support them, a US military official said on Tuesday.
The comments were the first indication by American officials that US-led forces may not intervene if Turkey follows through with a promised cross-border military operation to wipe out the group known as YPG, which controls the Afrin region along Turkey's southern border.
Syria:
But Syria's deputy foreign minister warned that a Turkish military incursion would be "no picnic" and that the Syrian Air Force was "ready to destroy Turkish air targets in the skies of Syria".
"We warn the Turkish leaders that if they start fighting in the region of Afrin, it will be seen as an aggression by the Turkish army against the sovereignty of Syria," Mr Mekdad added.
While I regard the statements of Turkish media/officials with some skepticism on issues like this, I'm concerned that it might be true.
...
I got the same vibe today. Erdogan threatening military action is like a boy crying wolf at this point, its hard to take seriously. But apparently there were some big rounds of artillery strikes today, and there's a bunch of miltia-types ready to roll.
If they do I'd be genuinely concerned at ethnic cleansing
Erdogan is a nutter who is supported by people that don't care if all the Kurds die, and Turkish troops can't pacify Kurdish territory without anything other than overwhelming violence. The US is comparatively weak at the moment, lacks soft power options and Turkey is a NATO ally, Russia can't provide actual military support to Assad against Turkey because again, NATO ally... If Turkey sends tanks into the Afrin Canton then the civilian casualties could skyrocket, local leaders dragged away, this could become really bad.
Turkey attacks Kurds in Syrian territory.
Syria defends Kurds, asks Russia for support. If Russia stays out of it we're ok at this point, if not:
Russia decides to support Syria against Turkey.
Turkey calls in NATO.
Then its up to NATO to decide whether Turkey should be supported against Syria and Russia, or if its an unjust aggressor and ignored.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Turkey attacks Kurds in Syrian territory.
Syria defends Kurds, asks Russia for support. If Russia stays out of it we're ok at this point, if not:
Russia decides to support Syria against Turkey.
Turkey calls in NATO.
Then its up to NATO to decide whether Turkey should be supported against Syria and Russia, or if its an unjust aggressor and ignored.
NATO will probably do as it's done in the past, and say that it is either an internal matter, or them attacking the Canton counts as foreign aggression and thus is not eligible for Article 5 consideration
Turkey attacks Kurds in Syrian territory.
Syria defends Kurds, asks Russia for support. If Russia stays out of it we're ok at this point, if not:
Russia decides to support Syria against Turkey.
Turkey calls in NATO.
Then its up to NATO to decide whether Turkey should be supported against Syria and Russia, or if its an unjust aggressor and ignored.
Its more like a powder keg that's been left out to get damp.
I mean, Kaputa already said this, but Turkey already invaded Syria, and is still occupying the place. The world didn't blow up. Most people didn't even notice it happened. Lots of shit could happen, but Syria has survived crazier stuff already.
Turkey attacks Kurds in Syrian territory.
Syria defends Kurds, asks Russia for support. If Russia stays out of it we're ok at this point, if not:
Russia decides to support Syria against Turkey.
Turkey calls in NATO.
Then its up to NATO to decide whether Turkey should be supported against Syria and Russia, or if its an unjust aggressor and ignored.
Its more like a powder keg that's been left out to get damp.
I mean, Kaputa already said this, but Turkey already invaded Syria, and is still occupying the place. The world didn't blow up. Most people didn't even notice it happened. Lots of shit could happen, but Syria has survived crazier stuff already.
Yeah, I'm mainly upset that one of the few regions that hasn't been razed to the ground could end up attacked in a needless prolongation and escalation of violence. I don't think it will cause World War 3 either, because I don't think Russia, the US, or even Iran give enough of a fuck about the YPG or Afrin to risk a major conflagration. Turkish occupation of northern Syria isn't ideal for Iran, but neither is a US-armed militia, and both deny Damascus and its allies control over the territory, so I doubt Tehran would consider intervention.
The worsening of the Turkish-Kurdish conflict in Turkey and the Syrian government possibly responding are the major risks for further escalation in my opinion, but even then I'd be surprised if a Syrian-Turkish war broke out over Afrin.
We're gonna end up with Turkey attacking Kurds, Syria attacking Turkey, one of Iran/Russia backing Syria?
What a shit show erdogan
That seems entirely reasonable on Syria's part. Does Turkey actually have any legitimate justification for their belligerence towards Syria?
Not really; in the past Syria supported the PKK, but that was decades ago, and prior to the civil war I don't think relations were all that hostile.
But this belligerence is mainly directed toward the YPG, the US-backed Kurdish faction in control of northern Syria, not toward Damascus itself. The YPG is essentially the sister organization of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party) in Turkey, which has fought a decades-long insurgency against the Turkish state for control of mostly Kurdish regions in the southeast/south (along the Syrian and Iraqi borders). So a PKK-affiliated army taking control of the region bordering the hotbed of the PKK's insurgency is actually a problem for Turkey in the context of the war with the PKK. Ankara's anxiety about the situation and their frustration with the US is understandable.
But I'm of the opinion that "Turkey kills the PKK" is not a good or viable solution to the Turkish/Kurdish conflict, and I think attacking the YPG in Afrin, who aren't attacking Turkey as far as I know, will only make things worse.
Gunmen on Saturday launched an attack on Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul, according to Najib Danish, a spokesman for Afghanistan's interior ministry.
Special forces have arrived at the scene and are battling the attackers, Danish said. He did not provide details on the number of attackers or casualties.
I have very little reason to believe that Erdogan is going to stop at the Afrin region. He's gonna grab as much territory as he possibly can.
He's stated (and has been saying for a long time) that the Manbij area is also on the hit list. Possibly he'd go into Rojava east of the Euphrates, but that would be a lot to chew on all at once and would face stronger opposition from the US.
The Ottomans were very much a relic that fell apart for a reason. I think that Turkey is doing this because they want to be a big powerful tough nation that nobody fucks with. It's a pretty typical move from Erdogan, who is essentially a thug.
The Ottomans were very much a relic that fell apart for a reason. I think that Turkey is doing this because they want to be a big powerful tough nation that nobody fucks with. It's a pretty typical move from Erdogan, who is essentially a thug.
I wouldn't be surprised if, like Russia or the UK or France at certain points, there's very much an element of "recapturing the glory days when we were big and powerful and respected" here.
So UAE backed separatists in Yemen are vowing "overthrow" the southern Yemeni government.
A group of separatists in southern Yemen, backed by the United Arab Emirates (UAE), have declared a state of emergency in the port city of Aden and vowed to overthrow the country's internationally recognised government within the next week.
Aidarous al-Zubaidi, the leader of the Southern Transitional Council (STC), said Yemen's parliament would be barred from convening in Aden or anywhere else in southern Yemen unless President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi replaced Prime Minister Ahmed bin Daghr and his entire cabinet.
...
"The Southern Resistance Forces (SRF) declare a state of emergency in Aden and announce that it has begun the process of overthrowing the legitimate government and replacing it with a cabinet of technocrats," a statement issued by the STC said.
Not sure where this is headed.
Kaputa on
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
So UAE backed separatists in Yemen are vowing "overthrow" the southern Yemeni government.
A group of separatists in southern Yemen, backed by the United Arab Emirates (UAE), have declared a state of emergency in the port city of Aden and vowed to overthrow the country's internationally recognised government within the next week.
Aidarous al-Zubaidi, the leader of the Southern Transitional Council (STC), said Yemen's parliament would be barred from convening in Aden or anywhere else in southern Yemen unless President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi replaced Prime Minister Ahmed bin Daghr and his entire cabinet.
...
"The Southern Resistance Forces (SRF) declare a state of emergency in Aden and announce that it has begun the process of overthrowing the legitimate government and replacing it with a cabinet of technocrats," a statement issued by the STC said.
Not sure where this is headed.
The phrasing of that whole thing sounds very Terry Gilliam.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
The European Union's foreign policy chief assured President Mahmoud Abbas at a meeting in Brussels on Monday that the EU supported his ambition to have East Jerusalem as capital of a Palestinian state.
Abbas in return repeated his call for East Jerusalem as capital as he urged the EU member nations to recognize a state of Palestine immediately, arguing that this would not disrupt negotiations with Israel on a peace settlement for the region.
Historically, any serious possibility of engaging any NATO military sets off alarms in parts of the Russian General Staff and MoD (which it should)--and Syria has been a sign of this from time to time, with NATO's upswing in one area leading to a Russian and Syrian downswing in the same area. Accordingly, NATO reserves the right to bomb the Syrian military, and avoids Russia's deployment.
The Erdogan government knows this (every NATO member does). Now they're hammer home this ugly truth that the PKK and the other parties in Rojava are, in fact, connected to varying degrees. Because they are, even if they don't always agree, even if a few did fight during the Kurdish Civil War. Just look at how convoluted the treaties between recognized state actors have been in Syria at times, much less non-state actors. But NATO's the one who designated the PKK a terrorist group, and to more than one member, if you're an occasional ally of a terrorist group, you're the same.
This was a flashpoint waiting to happen. The surprise, at least for me, is that Russia (and the US) blinked, not Turkey. Syria might to, weighing the risks of self-defense against a NATO military and neutralizing their Kurdish rivals versus the possibility of a long-term Turkish occupation--or they might decide they've had their fill of NATO bombing raids and actually attempt to do something about it. If Turkey can swing more of NATO to their side, I don't think they'll have a choice.
Synthesis on
+1
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
edited January 2018
A "progressive" Zionist astroturfing campaign called "Zioness" did a trace job of a Getty stock image that was mislabeled as an "Afro-American woman", lightening her skin, erasing a tattoo of Jesus on her bicep, and giving her a Star of David pendant.
Only whoops, turns out she's from South Africa, and thanks to the magic of the Internet was made aware of the manipulation and use of her image to drum up support for Israeli apartheid. In a twist nobody could have seen coming, being a black person from Capetown, South Africa; she isn't terribly amused.
Historical implications and shared struggles aside, it's especially gross right now because not content with slowly genociding the Palestinians, Israel is also busy doing a racism to African refugees right now.
The use of an African woman’s image to promote Israel is particularly crass given the extreme government-backed racism against asylum-seekers and refugees from African states who are currently facing mass expulsion or jail if they resist.
"I was asked to submit something by The New York Times op docs, a new section on the website that published short video documentaries. I am known for short video documentaries about the right wing in the US, and extremism in Israel. They solicited a video from me, and when I didn’t produce it in time, they called me for it, saying they wanted it. So I sent them a video I produced with my colleague, David Sheen, an Israeli journalist who is covering the situation of non-Jewish Africans in Israel more extensively than any journalist in the world.
We put together some shocking footage of pogroms against African communities in Tel Aviv, and interviews with human rights activists. I thought it was a well-done documentary about a situation very few Americans were familiar with. We included analysis. We tailored it to their style, and of course it was rejected without an explanation after being solicited. I sent it to some other major websites and they have not even responded to me, when they had often solicited articles from me in the past." - Max Blumenthal
Israeli authorities should abandon a new policy that could lead to the indefinite detention of thousands of Eritrean and Sudanese nationals for refusing to leave Israel for Rwanda or Uganda, Human Rights Watch said today. The policy is the latest in a series of coercive measures against these groups aimed at thwarting their legitimate right to seek protection and would almost certainly result in mass unlawful asylum seeker detention.
Eritreans and Sudanese in Israel have been unable to obtain protection because, according to the United Nations refugee agency, Israel’s unfair asylum system has either prevented or discouraged them from lodging asylum claims or has unfairly dismissed their claims. Israeli authorities categorize them, along with all irregular border-crossers, as “infiltrators” and have recognized fewer than 1 percent of asylum applicants as refugees, compared with acceptance rates in the European Union of 90 percent for Eritreans and 60 percent for Sudanese.
“In the latest chapter of its longstanding quest to dodge its refugee protection duties, Israel is threatening to lock up thousands of asylum seekers who refuse to leave,” said Gerry Simpson, associate refugee director at Human Rights Watch. “Instead of jailing them, Israel should fairly identify and protect refugees among them.”
On January 1, 2018, Israel’s Population, Immigration and Borders Authority (PIBA), under the Interior Ministry, announced plans to indefinitely detain thousands of Eritrean and Sudanese men if they refuse to leave for Rwanda or Uganda by March 31. Although the first phase applies only to some men, later phases could extend the policy to others and to women and children.
There were 27,018 Eritreans and 7,731 Sudanese in Israel as of March 2, 2017, according to the PIBA. Since 2013, about 14,000 have left Israel, including as a result of government measures against asylum seekers involving prolonged or indefinite detention, which Israel’s High Court has twice ruled unlawful.
Additional info about Zioness from the above article spoilered to keep this from becoming too huge.
Zionist feminist astroturf
Zioness was cofounded by Amanda Berman, an executive of The Lawfare Project.
The Lawfare Project is an Israel lobby group that uses litigation to harass supporters of Palestinian rights and its director claims that “there is no such thing is a Palestinian.”
Zioness is being promoted by Chloé Valdary, an African American Christian Zionist long groomed by Israel lobby groups as a spokesperson for the anti-Palestinian cause:
(Tweet stripped and inline below spoiler.)
Zioness has generated opposition to its presence in the Women’s March held across the US this weekend a year after the inauguration of Donald Trump.
“The Zioness is progressive, Zionist and proud,” the group’s website proclaims. “Rooted in Jewish values, she stands for justice and fights against all forms of oppression.”
But as Palestinian American organizer Nada Elia points out in a commentary for Mondoweiss, “Obviously, Zionesses do not view Israel’s 70 years of the violation of Palestinian human rights as a form of oppression.”
Elia notes that Zioness is one of a number of efforts by pro-Israel forces to reassert their presence in what are being claimed as progressive spaces.
The Palestinian American Women’s Association and several US solidarity groups withdrew their endorsement from the Los Angeles Women’s March in protest of the organizers’ invitation to actor Scarlett Johansson to address the rally.
Johansson was at the center of controversy several years ago because of her role as spokesperson for Sodastream, an Israeli company that was located in and profiting from Israel’s military occupation and colonization of the West Bank.
Amid global protests, Johansson ended her role as humanitarian ambassador for Oxfam, after the international development charity criticized her endorsement deal with SodaStream.
Elia welcomes the growing resistance to this kind of whitewashing that attempts to manufacture grassroots feminism in support of Israel.
“Palestinian women and our allies have long pointed out the erasure of our oppression from mainstream feminist discourse,” she writes. “Hopefully 2018, and the grassroots insistence that Palestine must be included in intersectional struggles for justice, will put an end to that.”
Turkey's offensive is gaining ground. Hard to tell exactly whats going on, but it seems like they've taken a number of villages. Tanks seem to be inside Syria now.
There were apparently some quick talks with Russia that went nowhere.
Opposition to this little invasion is pretty unanimous. Russia, the US, EU, Egypt, Iran. I haven't heard from the Gulf states yet, I don't know what they'd think about it.
Turkey is also shelling areas east of the Euphrates.
The Kurds in the Afrin Canton getting support from Assad is about as much as they're going to get.
Well the YPG is fighting back hard. They've had a lot of time to dig in so it probably isn't a cakewalk for the Turks and their allies. Supposedly the YPG beat back some of the offensives, but who knows.
I'd say outside support really depends. Right now nobody wants to get too involved. What the US and I think Russia has done before is place their troops and raise their flags in SDF locations. Attacking a place flying the stars and stripes is a bad idea.
If we start seeing video on CNN of Turkish soldiers bayoneting babies, well I think other powers will take a bigger role. If the SDF folds and Turkey takes control of the whole area inside a week, I think the response will be a collective shrug.
The Kurds in the Afrin Canton getting support from Assad is about as much as they're going to get.
The Syrian military has done almost entirely shit about all the NATO aircraft (and sometimes ground interventions so far), right up to Syrian pilots and ground troops being killed.
We'll see if anything changes, I guess.
EDIT: Multiple stories coming up about Russian envoys warning their Kurdish counterparts of the impending attack yesterday. Talk about a little late, and I can see why some Kurdish PR statements are screaming betrayal, but it seems pretty clear Russia still prefers their Kurdish allies to their Turkish frenemies, even if they're not willing to risk making a Tom Clancy novel real life to stop the later. At least one source (AP) is reporting that the Russian envoys gave the Kurdish forces in Afrin a "choice": surrender/return/whatever Afrin to the Syrian government to defend, or defend against the Turkish attack on their own (without Russian support), and they unanimously took the later.
Posts
The fact that the Taliban continue to bleed the US in Afghanistan is probably a significant plus in Tehran's eyes, too.
I've read over the past year that Iran is backing the Taliban, though to what degree I don't know.
Back in the day I used to look at the sectarian makeup and say no of course Iran wouldn't fund sunni jihadists, of course not. But I've read a lot since then, and its a truism that war makes strange bedfellows.
Herat in particular is within Iran's sphere of influence; I'd expect Iran to have pull not just with the Taliban but with the official government, with business links and more.
This makes me wonder how the hazara are doing. (They're an ethnic group in central afghanistan which are mostly shia; you can tell them by their more east-asiatic features.) I can see Iran backing the Taliban, but I think it's less likely if the Taliban are also killing their co-religionists in a serious way. Kaputa you know anything about this?
Of the dozen countries bombing Syria, Turkey may be crossing a line. Damascus announced the Syrian Arab Air Force would intercept and destroy Turkish aircraft unwelcomed in Syrian airspace, including those that seemed poised to make good on existing threats to strike Kurdish forces in the northern part of the country. Syria would be acting within international norms to strike any armed aircraft in its airspace without its invitation (which has only been extended to military aircraft from Iran and Russia), and has made these threats in the past, though they usually are hallow.
In more news from NATO in Syria, Donald Trump can now join his two predecessors as a leader who repudiated nation-building prior to his election, and embraced it afterwards: American troops and other personnel will likely remain in Syria for the remaining future. Whether this means the Kurdish forces come to some sort of settlement with the Syrian government in the future--or if they draw the US into (further) conflict with Damascus remains to be seen, but American deployment to their territory seems likely in either event.
Turkey is a complete wild card in both NATO and Russian camps. Hates Kurds, Syria, and Iran, but wants to play the US and Russia off against each other.
Russia is allied with Syria and Iran.
The Kurds and Syria are pragmatically supporting each other.
The US is giving some support to the Kurds and SDF rebels.
The US wants Assad out, somehow, and some magical democratic peace settlement. No fucking idea.
I have no idea what the fuck Tillerson is thinking sticking US dick into this mess except that Israel and the Sunni monarchs are somehow blackmailing the admin into it.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Syria is way less a powder keg now than at most times over the past many years. Its actually starting to re-gain a little bit of stability now.
Turkey hates a lot of things, but I don't think Iran is on that list yet. They're natural rivals but they've not come into conflict.
The Kurds are not supporting each other, unless I missed something dramatic in the last couple months. The SDF(YPG) and the PKK are marxist groups, while the KDP in Iraq is decidedly not. The KDP, under Barzani was very friendly with Turkey, including letting Turkey conduct anti-PKK air strikes and raids inside Iraq. Since that referendum maybe things have changed though.
And as far as the US dick being in Syria, well, its been there since the very start, when the US ambassador was marching alongside protesters. Trump took the Obama-era plan for Syria and just ran with it (taking all the accolades, of course). Where it goes from here, who knows. But there hasn't been a coherent long term plan for Afghanistan or Iraq since, ever, so I don't expect one for Syria either.
Like there's no real defined win condition... So they can just stay till whenever.
The Trump government's behavior in Syria has, in this last year, been very predictable on the whole--especially in contrast to his own rhetoric (no surprise there), and especially in contrast to the rhetoric critical of him: he has Russian paymasters, so naturally he'll leave Russia free hand to carry on military operations in the country that invited it to do so (within international norms anyway), instead of jamming an American dick into their way at every possible turn (which is one way of putting it). Except he's kept jamming said dick anyway, with a steady increase in the Obama government's deployment, the occasional attacks on the Syrian military (though to both his and Pres. Obama's credit, I get the impression that it's a hard for the American government to resist bombing a target that is too terrified of further retaliation to attempt to defend itself), the political and military backing of the Rojava more generally.
The last category seems innocuous enough, even praiseworthy, but it's worth remembering that the Russian government has pretty consistently been backing Rojava politically at the negotiating table (in fact, at this point it seems hard to believe that Moscow hasn't been pressuring Damascus into being more amenable towards Kurdish autonomy in the north). Rojava counted on the PKK support in the early days, and will probably only count on it more if things go worse with Turkey, given their past experience. And here's something that I think is easily overlooked: the PKK's well-established Marxist and Communist revolutionary ideology is known, as are its enduring ties to the USSR and to contemporary Russia, but the Syrian government backed the PKK too despite being not-that-keen on its own Kurdish minority, because they sought to undermine Turkey, because of a shared Marxist ideology, and because putting aside their own differences was a logical thing to do. Now you have Armenian politicians and officials who harken back to Armenia's early support to the PKK (Turkey believes said support never ended), Russian officials who would naturally increase their support of the PKK as they're warming up to Rojava as a whole (offering to represent Rojava at the negotiating table if they're not invited), and even Syrian positioning itself as necessary to Rojava's own security. It's very easy for them to get on the same page. For NATO, which still considers the PKK a terrorist organization, it's a lot harder to stay on the same page.
Russia:
US (according to a Turkish news agency) :
Syria:
While I regard the statements of Turkish media/officials with some skepticism on issues like this, I'm concerned that it might be true. I'd rather neither the US or Russia be militarily involved in Syria, but at the same time I'll be disappointed if both powers give Turkey the green light to do this, when either could probably prevent an invasion if they wanted to. Invading Afrin, one of the three main Kurdish regions in northern Syria, would trigger a real war with the YPG, with whom they have merely skirmished in the past. The YPG would likely respond at other points along the border - I can't see Kobane and Cizire just sitting back and watching Afrin get crushed - and suddenly you have a major escalation in a war that finally seemed to be approaching its conclusion. And it could easily spread to/exacerbate violence in southern Turkey as well, where the PKK is usually at war with the government. YPG and PKK are basically sister organizations, so if major fighting did break out it could engulf the northern Syria/southern Turkey region without distinction.
To say nothing of the Syrian government's threats to respond. I don't know if the Syrian air force is actually prepared to fight Turkey at the moment - but they might be able to down some planes with AA depending on what Russia has been giving them lately.
Overall I think it's going to be a total clusterfuck if Turkey follows through with a real attack on Afrin. Fuck Erdogan and his neo-Ottoman land grabs.
edit - also, I suspect that the Syrian government's current advance through the rebel-held Idlib region, which has already reclaimed a large swathe of territory, is what triggered Erdogan's move, rather than any change in the situation with the YPG. Just speculation on my part, but this is pretty much Turkey's last chance to pull shit like this.
One thing I've wondered about is the Fatemiyoun, an Afghan Shia militia recruited from Afghan refugee camps in Iran and sent to Syria to fight for the government. I usually see estimates of ~10k for their numbers and they're armed, trained, and funded by Iran, so the Fatemiyoun could potentially be another means of Iranian leverage or influence in Afghanistan.
edit - goddamn I need to proofread before hitting submit, sorry people
I got the same vibe today. Erdogan threatening military action is like a boy crying wolf at this point, its hard to take seriously. But apparently there were some big rounds of artillery strikes today, and there's a bunch of miltia-types ready to roll.
Nice and complicated if Turkey does go in.
Erdogan is a nutter who is supported by people that don't care if all the Kurds die, and Turkish troops can't pacify Kurdish territory without anything other than overwhelming violence. The US is comparatively weak at the moment, lacks soft power options and Turkey is a NATO ally, Russia can't provide actual military support to Assad against Turkey because again, NATO ally... If Turkey sends tanks into the Afrin Canton then the civilian casualties could skyrocket, local leaders dragged away, this could become really bad.
Turkey attacks Kurds in Syrian territory.
Syria defends Kurds, asks Russia for support. If Russia stays out of it we're ok at this point, if not:
Russia decides to support Syria against Turkey.
Turkey calls in NATO.
Then its up to NATO to decide whether Turkey should be supported against Syria and Russia, or if its an unjust aggressor and ignored.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
NATO will probably do as it's done in the past, and say that it is either an internal matter, or them attacking the Canton counts as foreign aggression and thus is not eligible for Article 5 consideration
We're gonna end up with Turkey attacking Kurds, Syria attacking Turkey, one of Iran/Russia backing Syria?
What a shit show erdogan
That seems entirely reasonable on Syria's part. Does Turkey actually have any legitimate justification for their belligerence towards Syria?
Its more like a powder keg that's been left out to get damp.
I mean, Kaputa already said this, but Turkey already invaded Syria, and is still occupying the place. The world didn't blow up. Most people didn't even notice it happened. Lots of shit could happen, but Syria has survived crazier stuff already.
The worsening of the Turkish-Kurdish conflict in Turkey and the Syrian government possibly responding are the major risks for further escalation in my opinion, but even then I'd be surprised if a Syrian-Turkish war broke out over Afrin.
But this belligerence is mainly directed toward the YPG, the US-backed Kurdish faction in control of northern Syria, not toward Damascus itself. The YPG is essentially the sister organization of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party) in Turkey, which has fought a decades-long insurgency against the Turkish state for control of mostly Kurdish regions in the southeast/south (along the Syrian and Iraqi borders). So a PKK-affiliated army taking control of the region bordering the hotbed of the PKK's insurgency is actually a problem for Turkey in the context of the war with the PKK. Ankara's anxiety about the situation and their frustration with the US is understandable.
But I'm of the opinion that "Turkey kills the PKK" is not a good or viable solution to the Turkish/Kurdish conflict, and I think attacking the YPG in Afrin, who aren't attacking Turkey as far as I know, will only make things worse.
Erdogan says the invasion has "de-facto started" whatever the fuck that means. I'll wait for solid reports of troop movements before I believe it.
edit: the YPG says it has repelled a few ground assaults, but I won't believe that either without confirmation.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/01/free-syrian-army-launches-ground-operation-afrin-180121062038046.html
He's stated (and has been saying for a long time) that the Manbij area is also on the hit list. Possibly he'd go into Rojava east of the Euphrates, but that would be a lot to chew on all at once and would face stronger opposition from the US.
The Ottomans were very much a relic that fell apart for a reason. I think that Turkey is doing this because they want to be a big powerful tough nation that nobody fucks with. It's a pretty typical move from Erdogan, who is essentially a thug.
I wouldn't be surprised if, like Russia or the UK or France at certain points, there's very much an element of "recapturing the glory days when we were big and powerful and respected" here.
Not sure where this is headed.
The phrasing of that whole thing sounds very Terry Gilliam.
Abbas wins EU backing for Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem
Historically, any serious possibility of engaging any NATO military sets off alarms in parts of the Russian General Staff and MoD (which it should)--and Syria has been a sign of this from time to time, with NATO's upswing in one area leading to a Russian and Syrian downswing in the same area. Accordingly, NATO reserves the right to bomb the Syrian military, and avoids Russia's deployment.
The Erdogan government knows this (every NATO member does). Now they're hammer home this ugly truth that the PKK and the other parties in Rojava are, in fact, connected to varying degrees. Because they are, even if they don't always agree, even if a few did fight during the Kurdish Civil War. Just look at how convoluted the treaties between recognized state actors have been in Syria at times, much less non-state actors. But NATO's the one who designated the PKK a terrorist group, and to more than one member, if you're an occasional ally of a terrorist group, you're the same.
This was a flashpoint waiting to happen. The surprise, at least for me, is that Russia (and the US) blinked, not Turkey. Syria might to, weighing the risks of self-defense against a NATO military and neutralizing their Kurdish rivals versus the possibility of a long-term Turkish occupation--or they might decide they've had their fill of NATO bombing raids and actually attempt to do something about it. If Turkey can swing more of NATO to their side, I don't think they'll have a choice.
Only whoops, turns out she's from South Africa, and thanks to the magic of the Internet was made aware of the manipulation and use of her image to drum up support for Israeli apartheid. In a twist nobody could have seen coming, being a black person from Capetown, South Africa; she isn't terribly amused.
Historical implications and shared struggles aside, it's especially gross right now because not content with slowly genociding the Palestinians, Israel is also busy doing a racism to African refugees right now.
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/fake-feminist-group-zioness-used-rappers-image-without-her-approval
Additional info about Zioness from the above article spoilered to keep this from becoming too huge.
Zioness was cofounded by Amanda Berman, an executive of The Lawfare Project.
The Lawfare Project is an Israel lobby group that uses litigation to harass supporters of Palestinian rights and its director claims that “there is no such thing is a Palestinian.”
Zioness is being promoted by Chloé Valdary, an African American Christian Zionist long groomed by Israel lobby groups as a spokesperson for the anti-Palestinian cause:
(Tweet stripped and inline below spoiler.)
Zioness has generated opposition to its presence in the Women’s March held across the US this weekend a year after the inauguration of Donald Trump.
“The Zioness is progressive, Zionist and proud,” the group’s website proclaims. “Rooted in Jewish values, she stands for justice and fights against all forms of oppression.”
But as Palestinian American organizer Nada Elia points out in a commentary for Mondoweiss, “Obviously, Zionesses do not view Israel’s 70 years of the violation of Palestinian human rights as a form of oppression.”
Elia notes that Zioness is one of a number of efforts by pro-Israel forces to reassert their presence in what are being claimed as progressive spaces.
The Palestinian American Women’s Association and several US solidarity groups withdrew their endorsement from the Los Angeles Women’s March in protest of the organizers’ invitation to actor Scarlett Johansson to address the rally.
Johansson was at the center of controversy several years ago because of her role as spokesperson for Sodastream, an Israeli company that was located in and profiting from Israel’s military occupation and colonization of the West Bank.
Amid global protests, Johansson ended her role as humanitarian ambassador for Oxfam, after the international development charity criticized her endorsement deal with SodaStream.
Elia welcomes the growing resistance to this kind of whitewashing that attempts to manufacture grassroots feminism in support of Israel.
“Palestinian women and our allies have long pointed out the erasure of our oppression from mainstream feminist discourse,” she writes. “Hopefully 2018, and the grassroots insistence that Palestine must be included in intersectional struggles for justice, will put an end to that.”
Edit: I tried to insert a string of barfing emojis here but I guess the forum doesn't support Unicode phone emojis. Visualize it.
There were apparently some quick talks with Russia that went nowhere.
Opposition to this little invasion is pretty unanimous. Russia, the US, EU, Egypt, Iran. I haven't heard from the Gulf states yet, I don't know what they'd think about it.
Turkey is also shelling areas east of the Euphrates.
Because if not the opposition is just wind.
The Kurds in the Afrin Canton getting support from Assad is about as much as they're going to get.
Well the YPG is fighting back hard. They've had a lot of time to dig in so it probably isn't a cakewalk for the Turks and their allies. Supposedly the YPG beat back some of the offensives, but who knows.
I'd say outside support really depends. Right now nobody wants to get too involved. What the US and I think Russia has done before is place their troops and raise their flags in SDF locations. Attacking a place flying the stars and stripes is a bad idea.
If we start seeing video on CNN of Turkish soldiers bayoneting babies, well I think other powers will take a bigger role. If the SDF folds and Turkey takes control of the whole area inside a week, I think the response will be a collective shrug.
That they're fighting back hard should surprise no-one, they are hard. Very tough troops.
The Syrian military has done almost entirely shit about all the NATO aircraft (and sometimes ground interventions so far), right up to Syrian pilots and ground troops being killed.
We'll see if anything changes, I guess.
EDIT: Multiple stories coming up about Russian envoys warning their Kurdish counterparts of the impending attack yesterday. Talk about a little late, and I can see why some Kurdish PR statements are screaming betrayal, but it seems pretty clear Russia still prefers their Kurdish allies to their Turkish frenemies, even if they're not willing to risk making a Tom Clancy novel real life to stop the later. At least one source (AP) is reporting that the Russian envoys gave the Kurdish forces in Afrin a "choice": surrender/return/whatever Afrin to the Syrian government to defend, or defend against the Turkish attack on their own (without Russian support), and they unanimously took the later.