And in the war with Iran, will the Kurds (in Iraqi Kurdistan) pay the price (and the bridegroom too), just like in Syria and in Turkey? What a harsh geography! Does anyone take it into account?

And in the war with Iran, will the Kurds (in Iraqi Kurdistan) pay the price (and the bridegroom too), just like in Syria and in Turkey? What a harsh geography!

Does anyone take it into account, or is it a case of “the end justifies the means”? Where the “end” is the subjugation of Iran, and the “means” is the Kurdish population in Iraqi Kurdistan — and perhaps not only there. Namely: North-Northwest: Turkey; East: Iran; West: the Syria; South: Iraqi Shiites and other anti-Western factions… Is #Iran preparing for a “preemptive” ground offensive into Iraqi Kurdistan? Or will it confront the Kurds after they invade Iran (if they ultimately manage to do so — for now they only have organized militias — but in any case they will pay a heavy price)? What will #Turkey do, even though it is a #NATO member that moreover hosted the Alliance’s latest Summit?Recently, U.S. President #Trump, while praising Turkish President #Erdogan, commended his stance of not getting involved in the war against Iran and not taking sides against … Iran. He even added, with the “assistance” of U.S. Vice President Vance, that Turkey might be more suitable than Israel (!!!!!) to undertake the confrontation against Hezbollah in #Lebanon, with the help of al-Jolani’s Syria! With the above question, I of course mean what Turkey will do openly in such a case, but especially what it will do secretly — because, as many Turkish analysts note, after Iran, their own turn will probably come next. In the last two days and nights, many Kurdish ammunition depots in the #Erbil province have been destroyed, while Iranian military forces have been reinforced and deployed in Khuzestan province — Iran’s energy heartland and the site of Saddam’s historic defeat — awaiting the “ground attack” on the long-suffering (and heroic in their own eyes) region of #Khuzestan. We recall one of our two articles on the Kurdish factor in the Middle East (written at the time on the occasion of the crisis in Syria — here is the first one) 👇: Article dated 30/10/2019 | 06:01 (updated 7 years ago) Militaire News Syria: a “school” for the “new” (?) reality in international relations #USA #SYRIA By Dionyssis Pantis, Attorney-at-Law, Geopolitical Analyst, Athens* Starting from the (pre-crisis) geopolitical and geo-economic (energy-related) revisionism of the Assad regime and its fateful consequences, the “fate” of Syria is sealed with the introduction of the “ideology” of Islamist extremism, which sweeps away every other ideology in its path (Baathism, Marxism, Gaddafism, etc.). Consequence: the destruction of the country is almost complete. The sudden, politically decisive and militarily sufficient projection of Russian power into Syria changes the facts on the ground (a game changer). It saves the Assad regime (allowing it victories on the ground) and “fills” the power vacuum in the region, altering the facts and forcing everyone to adapt. The threat of a conventional confrontation and containment of the Russian intervention (with the consent and invitation of the Assad regime) is averted by Russia’s clear demarcation of the red lines beyond which it is determined — and intends — to even use its nuclear arsenal. Result: the withdrawal of the reinforced 6th Fleet (strengthened precisely to achieve conventional containment of Russia during Obama’s presidency) and the limitation of strikes to special targets, mainly for psychological reasons. Russia, which decisively “got its hands dirty” by coming down to the ground itself, capitalizes on its action — focused on clear political objectives — even with Saudi Arabia, which signs agreements and wins contracts, forces the Saudi military band to learn the Russian national anthem, and receives questions from Saudi journalists asking President Putin whether he intends to … mediate in Iran. Iran is trying to extend its influence all the way to Lebanon, practically creating between Iran and Lebanon a zone that facilitates influence and the flow of military assets, thereby strengthening its deterrent strategy against a potential attack on its own territory. At the same time, this further strengthens Russia’s position, which now becomes a factor limiting Iran’s actions in the region (e.g., ensuring that the Iranian presence remains beyond 50 km from the Israeli border in Syria, etc.). Turkey, which 1) feels threatened by the generalized rearrangement attempted in the Middle East and believes that within this framework the creation of a Kurdish State (or, as it is usually called, a “Kurdish corridor” from Iraqi Kurdistan to the Mediterranean) is being promoted, and 2) is driven by neo-Ottoman and Turko-Islamist ambitions to reconquer the … lost territories, dreams of redefining its borders so that its actual borders (Treaty of Lausanne) coincide with those of its heart (initially those of the National Pact of the last Ottoman “assembly” before its collapse). It intervenes militarily wherever it finds a power vacuum (Iraq – Syria) and prevents (at least initially) the creation of a Kurdish State, thereby — in its own view — securing the cohesion of southern and southeastern Turkey. The United States are adapting to the new reality created by the Russian presence in Syria, giving President #Trump — after the impeachment process was initiated against him by Congress and now freed to wage his war against the Washington “establishment” ahead of the autumn elections — the opportunity to unfold his foreign policy (and for those who don’t understand words, here is a concrete example): The USA are no longer willing to get involved in “stupid” wars around the world, because such actions “cost” and burden the American taxpayer. Furthermore, President Trump stresses that it is unacceptable for the #USA to pay the bill for maintaining global security “for free.” That is why he demands — from the countries under its quasi-protection — the conclusion of new trade agreements that go beyond the traditional favorable arrangements for globalized capital (financial capital, insurance, IPR, financial services, etc.) and also include protections for American producers of so-called “tangible goods,” from the defense industry to every commodity produced in the USA that creates jobs for American citizens. He also demands that Europeans pay their “fair share” of military spending, since there is no longer any “free lunch” (security in this case).He also points out — in the, as we said, didactic case of Syria — that the USA are 7,000 miles away from Syria, whereas for Europe Syria is right next door. It is therefore “unfair” for the USA to pay for Europe’s security. And of course the “cunning” Europeans will now be checked to see whether their announced military expenditures are real and “adequate”: in addition to the quantitative criterion of 2% of GDP in defense spending, “qualitative” characteristics will be added, such as the requirement that 20% of military spending goes to “heavy” military equipment (naturally, the largest percentage coming from the USA) — a criterion that was first introduced in the Greek-American Strategic Agreement signed just a few days ago.He also “reminds” everyone how expensive it is to keep the ISIS murderers imprisoned, whose guarding is now the responsibility of the “wonderful” Kurds or the “tough leader” Erdogan (or whoever else might want the job…). And for those who still haven’t learned their lesson: almost simultaneously with the withdrawal of American troops from Syria, he announces and sends 3,000 soldiers to allied Saudi Arabia — which is obviously “good,” since it pays the bill with the above. #Israel is perhaps the only international actor that rapidly incorporates these messages (and adapts accordingly). After all, the great leaders who led them to the creation of the State of Israel taught them the importance of relying primarily on their own strength if they want to be free and sovereign. From the developments, Israel must rely on its own forces, Netanyahu publicly concluded. Ah… sorry, and one last thing: as far as the Kurds are concerned, the Turkish invasion and their defense against it is simply their problem. They are defending their lands. This is “their own business.” The USA helped them only as long as they were doing their own (which happened to coincide with a common) job: the extermination of ISIS.That goal was achieved 100% (according to President Trump, both the “objective” and the “result”). Mission accomplished, then! Lessons learned? To be continued… And here is the second article Article dated 28/11/2022 | 06:15 (updated 4 years ago) 👇 Militaire News The Kurds of Syria once again between Scylla and Charybdis #DIONYSIS PANTIS #KURDS #TURKEY As we have said many times in the past, especially in revisionist eras (great tectonic geopolitical rearrangements) like the present one, the only real currency in international relations — for a country, but even more so for an ethnic community without statehood, such as the Kurds, whose communities are divided among four state entities (Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran) — is power (as manifested on the ground, in the field). Written by DIONYSIS PANTIS Attorney-at-Law, Athens and geopolitical analyst. The Kurds of Syria once again find themselves between Scylla and Charybdis: on one side, the option offered by Russia to protect them from yet another barbaric attack by Islamo-Turkish military and paramilitary forces is to withdraw behind the M4 highway line and hand over the guarding and control of the quasi-“border” to Assad’s forces. The Kurds rejected this proposal. This “offer” appears to satisfy Turkey, which further implies that it was formulated with Turkey’s consent following “consultations.” If accepted, this proposal would definitively bury the so-called “Kurdish Corridor” from Iraqi Kurdistan to the Mediterranean Sea (Syria). Otherwise, Turkey will attempt to achieve it on the battlefield, carrying out yet another projection of power with messages addressed to all interested parties.And there are many recipients of these Turko-Islamist “messages,” including Greece and Cyprus. Of course, the Turks conceal the fact that they are acting against forces that are not organized as a regular state army — i.e., bodies with very limited capabilities and a complete lack of air power — in order to exploit their “successes” within the framework of psychological warfare against the states of the region. However, Turko-Islamism greedily fills any power vacuum the moment it is created! This is certainly a message for the states of the region, which we must evaluate by strengthening our deterrent capabilities and our mutual relations. On the other side, the USA are asking them for … patience and discipline within their “strategic” alliance and choice, while being either unable or, more accurately, unwilling to truly protect them (on the ground where they are under attack). Since the American withdrawal during the Trump era from the region — which was heavily criticized at the time — nothing seems to have changed in practice. As for the (non-existent) European “factor”, there is nothing to say: it is “dizzy” from expensive energy and the Russo-Ukrainian war. A very characteristic feature of today’s revisionist era is that the Turks are attempting — who knows, perhaps the fourth or fifth — “operation” against the Kurds of Syria (Syrian Kurdistan), despite the expressed opposition of the USA (counting the invasions with their characteristic names: “Euphrates Shield” 2016, “Olive Branch” 2018, “Peace Spring” 2019!, the still-unnamed current one, and the … intermediate operations). This certainly could not have happened in the 1980s or 1990s: back then, with the USA at the height of their power during the transition from the bipolar to the unipolar world of Pax Americana, they would never have allowed such large-scale military “clearance” operations against the will of the American factor. The complex geopolitical conditions of the new transition from the unipolar world — who knows to where (a multipolar system?) — which are indicatively shaped by the Ukrainian war and Russian involvement and possible attrition, the confrontation between the West and Russia and between the USA and China, China’s rapid economic and technological rise, the geopolitical dynamics in Central Asia where Turkism and Islamism may be the only factors the West can use to counter the Russia–China rapprochement and control of this important region, the redistribution of power following Russia’s interventions (at the invitation of Syria’s official authorities) and Turkey’s interventions in Syria and Syrian Kurdistan, and the attempted creation of an intermediate Islamic geopolitical space with two components (at least initially): Turkey (industrial and military-industrial production base) and the Gulf Kingdoms (petrodollars and Islamic investments), etc. — all create an extremely complicated and dangerous field in which the Kurds of Syria are called upon to maneuver, also bound by their previous choices. In such an environment, there is no room for mistakes by small states or, even worse, by ethnic communities without state organization — something the Kurds in all four regions (Turkish, Syrian, Iranian, and Iraqi) ardently desire. The #Kurds appear to have steadily chosen alliance with the USA, putting all their eggs in one basket. Time will tell whether this choice — made under pressure — was wise. However, given the data created by Turkey’s interventions so far in Northern Syria and its policy of oppression, economic bleeding, and demographic change in the areas it has occupied and illegally holds, there is a risk of a strategically permanent reduction of the Kurdish presence in the region. Their autonomous capacity (even with Western assistance) to prevent Turkish attacks aimed at occupying new Kurdish areas appears, from the results, to be unrealistic. And we know very well that the Turks do not go somewhere only to leave afterward (Cyprus, Alexandretta, Libya, northern Iraq, etc.). It therefore appears that the continuation for the Kurdish factor in Syria will be equally harsh… Unfortunately, in an article of ours more than three years old (also published in the hospitable Militaire), written even during the “Trump era,” some of the observations and positions presented there unfortunately remain timeless… The Kurds once again between Scylla and Charybdis, then… links for the two articles of 2019 and of 2022 https://www.militaire.gr/i-syria-quot-scholeio-quot-gia-ti-nea-pragmatikotita-stis-diethneis-scheseis/ https://www.militaire.gr/oi-koyrdoi-tis-syrias-gia-mia-akomi-fora-metaxy-skyllas-kai-charyvdis/