KoTeMoRe wrote:Kurds are political animals. They will play this conflict to gain more "autonomy". "Joining" FSA doesn't preclude them on having peace with "regime". People say it's a way to arm the Kurds, claiming they arm the FSA.
Formerly Seen Alive can't fight ISIS or JAN. Kurds are never going to accept Sunni arab rule, because it would be a "majority" rule. With the other minorities, they can in order to have a counterweight.
And don't forget, the US is changing plan right now. It's better to "share" Syria with Russia than have another Libya Afghanistan Hybrid with Russian military assets in country to boot. They aren't fast learners, but they learn eventually. The trouble is the other idiots.
Kurds might be forced/used by the US and that looks like their game plan. In North Eastern Syria they are supporting the Kurds mainly coz they want to have an influence in Syria and also coz of the oil fields and want to keep off any Russian influence.
From the looks of it, Russia/SAA will only be taking up eastern front once their western sector job is complete. This is where the western supported and well armed terrorists are concentrated, once they have softened the area and sealed off the border, they will likely concentrate more on the eastern sector. Destroying the well armed western supported terrorists has to be the primary objective and has to be done at the earliest coz as time goes, things can get much more complicated. So completing that job at the earliest is what I feel Russia/SAA is doing now.
I'm about to sound Machiavellian here, but here's a clever and powerful strategy to keep the Kurds in line.
With the eventual end of the crisis's in Syria, and Iraq, they're'll be the eventual 'Kurdish Question'
which needs to be answered. Will the Kurds be reasonable, or will they be yet another front of destabilization? It's more likely they'll rebel in Iraq than in Syria, so this leaves the question, how to prevent another front of destabilization?
Here's my strategy, a dual-pronged soft power/hard power gambit, which should be sufficient in preventing a Kurdish led destabilization: Soft Power
wise they could use the oil in Northern Iraq/Syria as a way to quell rebellion by allowing the profits to rebuild the infrastructure in modest and reasonable autonomous Kurdish states in Northern Iraq/Syria....so long as they don't declare a military backed independence.
For a Hard Power
(Russia, Syria, Iraq, and Iran's govt's) could cut a secret deal between the Turks, in which if the Kurds violently rebel than those 4 govt's will give the Turks the secret go-ahead (while looking the other way) to carry out airstrikes against the Kurds without impunity, and it'll be behind the cover that "Because they (Kurdish secessionists) decided to secede from Syria and or Iraq, they contractually voided the right of being under the constellation of Russian designed EW radars, SAM's, and ECM warfare assets guarding the sky's over the Syrian and Iraqi airspace."
That'll be stated by a public press conference, which will be the secret 'nod-and-a-wink'
for the Turks to carry out airstrikes the very next day. If the Kurds want to end the airstrikes, then they'll have to negotiate not to secede from Syria and or Iraq, and don't expect America to come to the rescue, because they've done very little to prevent the airstrikes at the hands of Neo-Ottoman Caliph Erdogan.