Sorry for slow postings, but I have been down with a bad cold. Feeling a little better today.
The New York Times, among many other major news papers, has been soundly bashing Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Kurdish controlled regions in Syria.
But, like everything else in the middle east there is no clear black and white, good or bad, here. Let’s recap this situation. First the area in dispute has been a conflict zone between Turkey, Syria and Kurds for about two hundred years or more. Second, there are some problems in the world that the USA can’t solve, we can only manage them.
For the last 15 years have helped us in Iraq and later with ISIS. The was a mutually beneficial arrangement that guaranteed them more autonomy and security. So they go something and we got something from our arrangement.
The number of US troops that had to be removed from Kurdish dominated areas of Syria was less than a 1000.
President Erdogan of Turkey told Trump they were invading to create a safe zone between Syria and Turkey. The US had the option of remaining and watching the invasion and possibly becoming part of the conflict or leaving. Trump chose to leave, rather than engage a NATO ally.
Of course the Kurds wasted no time in turning to Bashir Assad for help and in turn the Russians and now they are marching to confront the Turks.
This is a real complex, messy situation and we could spend billions for a fix and have nothing to show for it. If anyone says Trump blundered they aren’t looking at all sides. Don’t misunderstand, Trump’s decision could turn out very bad for us and the world, but only time will tell.