Pattaya sees rise in independent Chinese tourists amid decline in group tours

[webfact]

Assad sets sights on Kurdish areas, risking new Syria conflict

By Tom Perry, Ellen Francis and Laila Bassam

 

FILE PHOTO: Syria's President Bashar al-Assad speaks during an interview with AFP news agency in Damascus, Syria in this handout picture provided by SANA on April 13, 2017. SANA/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo

 

BEIRUT (Reuters) - With Islamic State near defeat in Syria, Damascus is setting its sights on territory held by Kurdish-led forces including eastern oil fields, risking a new confrontation that could draw the United States in more deeply and complicate Russian diplomacy.

 

President Bashar al-Assad and his Iranian allies appear to have been emboldened by events in Iraq, where Kurdish authorities have suffered a major blow since regional states mobilised against their independence referendum, analysts say.

 

Rivalry between the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), supported by the United States, and the Syrian government backed by Iran and Russia is emerging as a fault line with their common enemy - Islamic State - close to collapse in Syria.

 

Syria's main Kurdish groups hope for a new phase of negotiations that will shore up their autonomy in northern Syria. Assad's government, however, is asserting its claim to areas captured by the SDF from the jihadist group, known in Arabic by its enemies as Daesh, in more forceful terms.

 

On Sunday, Damascus declared Islamic State's former capital at Raqqa would be considered "occupied" until the Syrian army took control - a challenge to Washington which helped the SDF capture the city in months of fighting.

 

And the eastern oil fields seized by the SDF in October, including Syria's largest, will be a target for the government as it tries to recover resources needed for reconstructing areas it controls, according to a Syrian official and a non-Syrian commander in the alliance fighting in support of Assad.

 

"The message is very clear to the SDF militants and their backers in the coalition, headed by America: the lands they took from Daesh are rightfully the Syrian state's," said the non-Syrian commander, who requested that his name and nationality be withheld.

 

"Regarding the resources of the Syrian people in the east - oil and so on - we will not allow anyone to continue to control the country's resources and to create cantons or to think about self government," added the commander, who is part of a military alliance that includes numerous Iran-backed Shi'ite militias from across the region.

 

The Syrian official said the SDF could not keep control of oil resources. "We won't permit it," said the official, speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity as he was giving a personal view.

 

The United States has not spelt out how military support for the SDF will evolve after Islamic State's defeat, a sensitive point due to the concerns of its NATO ally Turkey.

 

Ankara regards Syrian Kurdish power as a threat its national security as its forces are fighting Kurdish PKK rebels over the border in Turkey.

 

The U.S.-led coalition, which has established several military bases in northern Syria, has been helping the SDF shore up control of the recently captured al-Omar oil field in Deir al-Zor province.

 

"Many people will say that will help them with (political) negotiations, but only if the United States remains with them, otherwise they are going to get clobbered," said Joshua Landis, an expert on Syria and head of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma.

 

"I think the Syrian government is going to push on some of these oil wells, in the same way as Iraq just pushed to get Kirkuk oil, and in the same way the Iraqi push is going to embolden the Syrian army," he said.

 

KIRKUK "LESSON"

 

Iraqi Kurds took control of large areas outside their autonomous region during the fight against Islamic State. However, last month's independence referendum prompted Western opposition and fierce resistance from Baghdad, Ankara and Assad's Iranian allies, and the Kurdish authorities have since lost much territory to Baghdad, including oil producing areas around the city of Kirkuk.

 

The Syrian official said this should serve "as a lesson for the Kurds in Syria, so they think about the future".

 

Regional sources say the U.S. unwillingness to stop Iraqi government forces, backed by Shi'ite militias, from recapturing Kirkuk sent an encouraging message to Assad and his Iranian allies to retake the SDF-held oil areas in Syria.

 

With critical military support from Russia and the Iran-backed militias, Assad has recovered swathes of central and eastern Syria from Islamic State this year, having defeated many anti-Assad rebel factions in western Syria.

 

The Kurdish YPG militia, the dominant force in the SDF, controls the second largest chunk of Syrian territory - around a quarter of the country. Syrian Kurdish leaders say they are not seeking secession.

 

The YPG and Damascus have mostly avoided conflict during the Syrian civil war, setting aside historic enmity to fight shared foes. Kurdish-led regions of northern Syria have meanwhile focused on establishing an autonomous government which they aim to safeguard.

 

Moscow has called for a new "congress" of Syrian groups that may start work on a new constitution. The Russian Foreign Ministry published on Tuesday a list of 33 groups and political parties invited to a meeting in the Black Sea resort of Sochi on Nov. 18.

 

A Syrian Kurdish official told Reuters the administration in northern Syria had been invited to the congress. Kurdish officials said they discussed their political demands with the Russians as recently as last month.

 

A senior Kurdish politician said government statements directed at the Kurdish-led regions of northern Syria were contradictory, noting that the Syrian foreign minister had said in September that Kurdish autonomy demands were negotiable.

 

"One day they say we are willing to negotiate and then someone else denies this or puts out an opposing statement," Fawza Youssef said in a telephone interview with Reuters. "One of them declares war and the other wants to come negotiate. What is the regime's strategy? Dialogue or war?"

 

After the final defeat of Islamic State in Deir al-Zor, "the situation will drive all the political sides and the combatants to start the stage of negotiations", Youssef said.

 

The SDF has also pushed into Arab majority areas, including Raqqa and parts of Deir al-Zor, where it is working to establish its model of multi-ethnic local governance.

 

Analysts believe the Syrian Kurdish groups could use the SDF-held Arab areas as bargaining chips in negotiations with Damascus.

 

"There is no other option than to negotiate," Youssef said. "Either a new stage of tensions and attrition will start - which we are 100 percent against - or a stage of dialogue and negotiations will start."

 

(Additional reporting by Yara Bayoumy in Washington; Writing by Tom Perry; editing by David Stamp)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-01

[craigt3365]

Who here has been saying the Syrian civil war is over? LOL

[Morch]

13 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Who here has been saying the Syrian civil war is over? LOL

 

The civil war is pretty much over, yes. Not tomorrow, not next month. But it's pretty obvious where it's heading. ISIS is gone. Rebel groups (Islamic and others) still exist, but are being ground down. The Kurds military effort vs. ISIS ended with them over-extended into territories which they have no claim for. There might be some fighting, as was the case in Iraq, but guess it would not go beyond taking back the area in question.

 

Of course, being the ME, someone or something could snap and all hell will break loose. But getting into yet another long war vs. the Kurds (and with winter approaching) doesn't work out all that well for most sides involved.

[ilostmypassword]

13 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Who here has been saying the Syrian civil war is over? LOL

The Syrians pose an existential threat to this Kurdish "canton." The reverse is not the case. And the Syrians need that oil to help rebuild the country. The Turks don't want it to exist, either. It's dubious that the US is going to go to war on behalf of the Kurds and antagonize the Turkish government and the Iraqi government. Not to mention the Iranian government.

[Grouse]

We can rely upon the great USA to stand up for their ally who did all the boots on the ground, heavy lifting

 

How honourable! The gun toting heavy metal yanks wouldn't dare lift a finger.

 

Iran will be the winner....

 

Pathetic really! No statesmen left. The yanks don't have a Sykes or a Picard Just chancers!

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

We can rely upon the great USA to stand up for their ally who did all the boots on the ground, heavy lifting

 

How honourable! The gun toting heavy metal yanks wouldn't dare lift a finger.

 

Iran will be the winner....

 

Pathetic really! No statesmen left. The yanks don't have a Sykes or a Picard Just chancers!

 

Would you rather that the USA support a non-starter proposition of a country, get the ME turmoil going on again - just that some poster could go on about "meddling" later on? Can't win this one, I guess.

 

It's not honorable, it's politics, realism and interests.

 

Iran is not necessarily the big winner in this one, and not exactly sure why the gentlemen mentioned were brought into this. By the way did you mean Picot?

 

This is Picot:

 

 

This is Picard:

 

 

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Would you rather that the USA support a non-starter proposition of a country, get the ME turmoil going on again - just that some poster could go on about "meddling" later on? Can't win this one, I guess.

 

It's not honorable, it's politics, realism and interests.

 

Iran is not necessarily the big winner in this one, and not exactly sure why the gentlemen mentioned were brought into this. By the way did you mean Picot?

 

This is Picot:

 

 

This is Picard:

 

 

Sorry for the error. Blame Grouse.

[Scott]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

We can rely upon the great USA to stand up for their ally who did all the boots on the ground, heavy lifting

 

How honourable! The gun toting heavy metal yanks wouldn't dare lift a finger.

 

Iran will be the winner....

 

Pathetic really! No statesmen left. The yanks don't have a Sykes or a Picard Just chancers!

The Kurds have known the US policy on independence for a very, very long time.   The policy is to respect the territorial boundaries of the existing countries.  

 

I spoke with a very good and well informed Kurdish friend (living in the US) prior to the vote and his feelings echoed an underlying feeling with a lot of Kurds.   He said we would like independence, but now is not the time.   There are just too many enemies around for a landlocked country to exist in that region.

 

I think the prevailing attitude of a lot of people in Western gov'ts that they would get it, but anyone openly supporting them is going to have problems with all the neighbors.  

 

There is no seaport and free airspace to even get weapons into them.  

 

We are drifting off-topic a bit, but unless the Turkmen make an alliance with the Kurds, we are not going to see anything even closely approaching Independence in either Iraq or Syria.  

 

Perhaps the next time all hell breaks lose in that part of the world, they should/could do it.  

[Stargeezr]

I guess the Kurds will head back to NW Iraq and rebuild their part of that country, and hopefully they will get support from the USA for at least that much.

Geezer

[Scott]

We are straying off-topic a bit.   The Kurds in Syria will likely get little or no help from Washington due to the scale back in such humanitarian assistance and because it is Syria.   That might result in it being a place for continued resistance and more war.

 

The Kurds in N. Iraq had their villages all reconstructed and huge amounts of humanitarian aid after the 2nd Gulf War.   At the time, the UN was spending more per person in N. Iraq than any where else on the planet.   It largely paid off.   Within a very short time, they were back on the land and farming and kept relatively safe by the no-fly zone.   They were producing enough wheat that they were able to export some to Iran.

 

A fair amount of the money expended was also spent on displaced people, including Arabs who had fled Saddam.   I suspect if the Kurds can hold any ground in Syria, they will also have a large number of the non-Kurdish resistance fighters.   They won't, however, have any assistance from western gov'ts.  

 

[craigt3365]

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The civil war is pretty much over, yes. Not tomorrow, not next month. But it's pretty obvious where it's heading. ISIS is gone. Rebel groups (Islamic and others) still exist, but are being ground down. The Kurds military effort vs. ISIS ended with them over-extended into territories which they have no claim for. There might be some fighting, as was the case in Iraq, but guess it would not go beyond taking back the area in question.

 

Of course, being the ME, someone or something could snap and all hell will break loose. But getting into yet another long war vs. the Kurds (and with winter approaching) doesn't work out all that well for most sides involved.

It all depends on Assad.  If he does set his sights on retaking all territory now held by others, this war is far from over.  It will be very interesting to see what happens when the last IS stronghold is taken.  When that does happen, Assad will be in control of roughly 1/2 of what use to be Syria.

[Scott]

There is another thread indicating Iraq is considering military action against the Kurds on the issue of independence.   It's a long shot, but if the Syrian Kurds were to join up, or get help from Turkish Kurds, this could be far from settled.  

[Morch]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

It all depends on Assad.  If he does set his sights on retaking all territory now held by others, this war is far from over.  It will be very interesting to see what happens when the last IS stronghold is taken.  When that does happen, Assad will be in control of roughly 1/2 of what use to be Syria.

 

The Kurds were not directly opposed to Assad during the civil war. Most of their fight was vs. ISIS etc. So the reference to the civil war being decided, or coming to an end, relates more to areas still under rebel (Islamic and others) control. With regard to these, there isn't much doubt as to the outcome.

 

How things will be sorted with Syria's Kurds is a somewhat different question, perhaps better seen as more of an offshoot of the civil war rather than an integral part of it.

 

The only real issue is dealing with the Kurds on "their" turf. Areas which were taken by the Kurds during the fighting will return to Assad's control one way or the other. 

[craigt3365]

19 minutes ago, Morch said:

The only real issue is dealing with the Kurds on "their" turf. Areas which were taken by the Kurds during the fighting will return to Assad's control one way or the other. 

That's my concern.  If it ends up like Iraq, the Kurds aren't going to let go.  Easily....

[Morch]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

That's my concern.  If it ends up like Iraq, the Kurds aren't going to let go.  Easily....

 

Depends which areas you refer to. The newly gained territories taken from ISIS - they can't realistically hold on to these, certainly not without USA support, and they do not have a real claim anyway. Their aim, if I get it right, is more about using these as a bargaining chip to get a better deal out of Assad. Driving off the Kurds from these part is one thing, and shouldn't prove beyond Assad's capabilities (with the aid of allies). 

 

I don't think this is about attacking the Kurdish territory proper. At least not at this stage.