Turkey – USA Gov Policy

Despite the presence of global and regional powers, the most effective fighting force countering ISIS has been the Kurds, a people not even in possession of a state of their own.

Despite that reality, the U.S. continues to display reluctance to provide these proven fighters, who come far closer to western standards of human rights than most other participating groups, with the weapons they need to protect themselves and defeat ISIS.

Current White House policy for ground forces leans on two local powers, Turkey and Iran, neither of which offer an appropriate solution.

According to the Gatestone Institute “Apparently, for the government of Turkey, ISIS, which engages in mass murder, ethnic cleansing, mass rape and sexual slavery, is preferable to the Kurds, who resist ISIS and demand rights and liberties that have been taken away from them by the repressive regimes that rule over them…With its limited military power aided only by NATO planes and Peshmerga forces, the YPG are fighting against the immolators and decapitators, and trying to protect innocent people who would otherwise be massacred by ISIS….

The Kurdish militias — the YPG (A Kurdish “People’s Protection Unis” force in Syria) in Syrian Kurdistan and the Peshmerga in the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq — are the only Muslim forces truly resisting the ISIS on the ground. These Kurdish forces are mostly Muslim; at the same time, unlike the Arab regimes or radical Islamist armies in the region, they are secular and protective of minorities. On one side, there is Turkey, whose membership in the NATO has not prevented it from turning a blind eye to — or even facilitating the traffic of — ISIS fighters…”

According to the Council on Foreign Relations,“The Kurds are one of the indigenous peoples of the Middle East and the region’s fourth-largest ethnic group. They speak Kurdish, an Indo-European language, and are predominantly Sunni Muslims. Kurds have a distinct culture, traditional dress, and holiday… Kurdish nationalism emerged during the twentieth century following the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and the formation of new nation-states across the Middle East. The estimated thirty million Kurds reside primarily in mountainous regions of present-day Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey and remain one of the world’s largest peoples without a sovereign state… The Kurds are not monolithic[and]have a long history of marginalization and persecution, and, particularly in Iraq and Turkey, have repeatedly risen up to seek greater autonomy or complete independence.”
If you are currently taking a pill, it’s worth sildenafil overnight inquiring as to whether a generic type is accessible. Education is an interesting point when visit description viagra buy germany studying life satisfaction. Men who are starting with this treatment may confront some normal side effects like dizziness, viagra generico cialis indigestion, pain in head, diarrhea for short span. The medication enables a man to get firmer penile erections rather than erections that are just in the middle sildenafil price in india The middle erection can be just as bad as not getting an erection is associated with declining masculinity.
Part of the Administration’s reluctance to appropriately arm the Kurds rests with concerns about offending Turkey, a NATO partner. At least one portion of the Kurdish people lay claim to a portion of territory that currently belongs to Turkey. But Kurds also exist in numbers in northern Iraq, Syria, and Iran, and claim title to some territory of those nations.

In 2006, then-Senator Biden called for the establishment of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq, as part of a three-way split of the Iraqi nation. He appears to have moved away from that position.

Turkey has displayed no particular enthusiasm for the battle, leaving Iran, which is using the crisis as an excuse to expand its regional influence, as the best armed ground fighting force countering ISIS. ISIS has been, quite bluntly, a great benefit for Iran, even if the two entities are enemies. It has been a long term Iranian goal to place forces in and dominate portions of Iraq. It expands the Mullahs influence in the Middle East, and it serves as a bargaining chip in dealing with the West.

The failure to provide the Kurds, a western-friendly people interested primarily in their own survival with the support they need to confront ISIS is a significant policy error on Washington’s part, one that has led to great and worrisome gains for Iran.

The New York Analysis continues with its look at the sharp downturn in America’s economic, diplomatic, social and military fortunes. Today’s review will examine the area of diplomacy.

The White House’s deep embarrassment of an agreement with Washington about its supposed agreement to assist in the fight against ISIS was symptomatic of Washington’s increasingly strained relationship with our allies. Turkey is a NATO member.

Even the greatest of superpowers requires dependable allies. America’s NATO allies in Europe, Israel in the Mideast, and Japan and other East Asian and Pacific countries provided that asset, even if they didn’t spend as much on defense as they should have.

Current policies have weakened America’s relations with those nations. Upon assuming office, President Obama could barely conceal his disdain for the United Kingdom, and gave some of its nuclear secrets to Moscow during the New START negotiations. He reneged on an anti-ballistic missile agreement with Poland. He agreed to an arms control treaty with Russia that left Europe greatly vulnerable to nuclear blackmail, then pulled all American tanks out of Europe, leaving the continent vulnerable to conventional arms threats as well.

All this occurred in the shadow of the Kremlin’s massive arms buildup and aggressive actions.

With POTS’ drain on energy, simple tasks cheap levitra bought here can become difficult. The development of hairs end entirely, as you age valsonindia.com buy generic cialis and a bald patch is developed by you. sildenafil canada You can buy these herbal pills from reputed online stores with the help of a credit or debit card. This problem occurs due to many physical and buy bulk viagra psychological problems, but in many countries, the problem is linked with sleep deprived males. The downgrading of relations with Israel has been severe and inexplicable. The Jewish state has absorbed thousands of missile attacks against its civilians, and faces threats against its very existence from the same forces that also seek the destruction of America. Yet the White House has repeatedly and harshly demanded concessions from Israel while taking an overly tolerant position against those that wish it and the U.S. ill.

As the President seeks to gain support from allies in the fight against ISIS, the results of his prior failures become increasingly noticeable. A Washington Post op-ed recently opined: “…the most significant news of the day is a dramatic signal of our allies’ total lack of faith and even respect for the Obama administration.

The failure to support friends abroad applies not just to governments, but to movements that seek to bring democracy to oppressive and anti-American regimes. Writing about the failure of the Obama Administration to adequately support pro-western elements in the Ukraine , Charles Krauthammer noted: “As with Iran’s ruthlessly crushed Green Revolution of 2009, the hundreds of thousands of protesters who’ve turned out to reverse this betrayal of Ukrainian independence have found no voice in Washington. Can’t this administration even rhetorically support those seeking a democratic future, as we did during Ukraine’s Orange Revolution of 2004?”

In Asia, Japan, the Philippines, and others seek reassurance of Washington’s commitment to their defense. But when China’s navy sailed into the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone and claimed part of it for its own, Washington didn’t even launch a strict diplomatic protest. Ditto for Beijing’s aggressive actions against Japan.

The downturn in our diplomatic fortunes has also been seen closer to home. The growing influence of Iran’s Hezbollah, Moscow’s return to cold war bases in Cuba, and China’s rapidly increasing economic and military presence throughout Latin America is a worrisome trend.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.