Publications /
Opinion

Back
Russia, Turkey, Syria, the kurds, American troops and…no end in sight
Authors
February 7, 2018

Once again, dramatization and theatrical work on the world stage. Once again, a crisis turning into dramatic art, just to impress the audience, with exaggerated threats and statements. This was not a rehearsal of stage craft, but crude politics, a verbal confrontation of two egos - the President of the United States vs the President of Turkey. During a UN meeting in September of last year, Donald Trump stated that Recep Tayyip Erdogan “has become a friend”, and said he was convinced that now both are as close as they’ve ever been. Possibly those were just words, a sort of diplomatic backslap which the self-centered Erdogan certainly treasured. Now, between the two, there are rather confrontation, words of war and even the menace of a conflict. 

One NATO member is actually marching his infantry, artillery and rocket launchers towards the positions of another Nato member, which was protecting the eternal enemy, the Kurds of the YPG (“People’s Protecting Units”). The YPG is a militant group related to the Kurdish PKK, the Revolutionary Workers Party, which for decades has been fighting for an independent state of Kurdistan. Turkey sees the presence of the Kurds on both sides of its 900 kilometers border with Syria as a threat to its territorial sovereignty. 2000 American soldiers, some of them members of the highly trained and motivated Special Forces, are trying to block or slow the advance of Ankara’s troops towards the northeastern  Syrian  town of Manbidj. The US soldiers are loyal, at least for now, to the courageous Kurds with whom they fought the evil Islamic State, liberating Raqqa street by street, house by house. The Pentagon was impressed, and even promised these gallant fighters to keep them under arms, incorporating them in a new force ready to contain Iran’s conspirators, the Hizbollah, or, if possible, the last survivors of  al Qaeda or of the Islamic State. 

Even if Washington changed its mind about the Kurdish force, Erdogan insisted that the GIs should get out of his way. For the moment, Ankara’s planes continue to attack other areas of Syrian territories, wherever they suspect the Kurdish enemy to be, and knowing that Damascus tolerated its illegal intrusions. Russia nodded its agreement, since none of Moscow’s planes went into action, and since the antiaircraft missiles of Moscow were not fired at Turkish jets either.  Assad reacted only verbally to the invasion, since Syrian and Russian jets were, despite the peace gathering in Sochi, dropping bombs and possibly gas on its enemy from within—the enemy being stubborn and determined rebels, which are not ready to raise the white flag of surrender. The Syrian resistance fighters, near the town Marrat al-Numan (province of Idlib), hit a Russian fighter jet, a Suchoi Su 25, with a portable Anti aircraft missile. The plane crashed, and the pilot, a major, committed suicide with a hand grenade, which he exploded before his captors could approach him.

Turkey’s President was, for once, not involved. Erdogan, dressed in a combat jacket, encouraged his troops near the front lines on Syrian soil and threatened to extend his operation “Olive branch” if needed, sweeping  all over the foreign land to crush the Kurdish  secessionists. His tanks advanced to Afrin (25 miles north of Aleppo), much to the chagrin of another Nato member (Germany) which suddenly, through TV images, realized that Turkey moved into battle with tanks that Germany had delivered to the country ( 354 since  2005), the sophisticated “Leopard 2-A”. To avoid cries of indignation at home, the government in Berlin announced to the Turks and to the world that they were upset enough not to modernize these tanks as promised, and would not work on 120 American build M60 either. Trump, in the meantime, had given Ankara his word that the Pentagon would retake   sophisticated arms the US  had given to the Kurds, but apparently he forgot to tell his generals. Russian Foreign secretary Sergey Lavrov declared that the American support of the Kurds is “either a lack of understanding of the situation, or an absolutely conscious provocation”. Moscow therefore rejoiced Ankara, who was angered by Berlin and Washington (its Nato-Allies after all) and was in need of new friends. Not long ago Moscow was so upset with Turkey that it called all its tourists back home, because the Turks shot down a Russian fighter jet which intruded into national airspace. But that is now history, downgraded from criminal act to an unfortunate incident. 

The “New York Times” noted that as often in Syria, ”the US seemed mostly a bystander (…) and since it has receeded, Russia has filled the vacuum, gaining influence and rehabilitating its relationship with Turkey”. Moscow stabilized its presence in the Middle East, and that was for decades one of their goals. This issue has already been documented in June 2016 by Abdelhak Bassou,  in a document published by the OCP Policy Center : ”La Russie et la crise syrienne: le comeback de l’héritier de l’URSS et le changement de la donne en Syrie”. The obvious attempts by the Soviet Union president Vladimir  Putin to make Russia great, feared and respected once more on the global scene through the annexation of the Crimea and the partial occupation of Ukraine were just  the “hors d’oeuvres”. While Erdogan’s soldiers moved towards Manjib, where American Gis, the militants of the YPG and 10 000 members of the “Syrian Democratic Front “are entrenched (many of them are Kurdish fighters as well), Mr Putin tried his luck as a peacemaker in his city of Sochi. The Russian President invited the actors of the seven year long war in Syria, to his stage in Russia, and most delegates reached the conference hall- the largest Syrian opposition group though declined after they discovered regime symbols and the flag of the Assad regime. They were also upset about the continued bombings of rebel held towns and regions, which were, to them, if not directed by the Kremlin directly, certainly were by their satellite guidance systems. The conference ended, as the British “Guardian” judged, as “tethered on farce”. At the end Putin conceded that the United Nations were still responsible for drafting a new constitution and the mediation process. He has other immediate and more   important matters to attend -intensify his electoral campaign for the Presidency. 

Officially, Moscow intervened into the Civil war in the fall of 2015 to stabilize its faltering ally Assad. Yet , the Russians did not send almost 50 000 soldiers into battle, or direct their jets onto rebel targets in more than 28 000 aerial missions,  or complete 90 000  air strikes onto targets on the ground, only to save Mr Assad, their only Arab ally in the Middle East. The cold war complicities of Moscow with nations like Algeria or Libya are now gone. Apparently, Putin is dreaming of returning to glorious Cold war days of the Soviet Union, and to its power. That’s one reason why he could not  afford to lose neither Russia’s  only naval base at the Mediterranean sea (Tartous), nor its  major airbase Khmeimim,   in striking distance of  Nato -ally Turkey. But more important, Moscow remains determined to expand its influence in the region and the world. Russia projects power: it’s the second largest nuclear nation   on earth, member of the UN Security Council and major producer of oil and gas. In his thoughtful “Policy Paper”, published in June 2016, author Abdelhak Bassou noted that  the intervention of Moscow in Syria, supporting a beleaguered and struggling Assad with its own troops, signified a  fundamental change in  Moscow’s foreign policy-since it is ”only to Russia, and not the USSR, to intervene for the first time this far from its borders”. The question raised by author Bassou remains, so far, unanswered and this questions is: ”do they have the means for their politics of grandeur?”. Washington, rather passive in its Middle East involvement (except the recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel) apparently will challenge a belligerent Moscow as Ronald Reagan did during the infamous Cold War years. He armed the US and armed again, driving the enemy in Moscow into despair, forcing the communist enemy  to compete and risking the nation’s economic collapse. Donald Trump, in early days, charmed or impressed by Vadimir Putin, has obtained a dramatic defense budget of 639.1 dollars for 2018, and is projecting 716 billion for the fiscal year 2019.  

The equally planned and massive modernization of the nuclear arsenal of the US will require, between 2017 and 2026, an estimated 400 billion dollars. Will Moscow follow, or limit itself to childish and yet dangerous games of provocation (buzzing American fighter jets, or Navy destroyers in the Black Sea, deploying their spy ship ”Viktor Leonov” off the Eastern coast of the US ,eavesdropping off an American submarine base..). Abdelhak Bassou argued that the involvement in the Syrian war “carries great risks: in case of success the rewards are substantial and important, but in failure as well”. Putin demonstrated his determination to remain reliable to his allies, unlike Washington, which changes its foreign policy positions since Trump is in power, as often as the President’s nightly twitter announcements. Yet, is the devastation of a noble and historic nation, the destruction of its villages and towns, resulting in  ten million tormented Syrian refugees, the reflection of the human spirit, or just the expression of barbaric, crude power, used in an attempt to recapture the spirit of history ,the assumed greatness of the Soviet Union ? Obviously we re-enter a vicious cycle. Democracies had put ad acta, the Cold War. The Pentagon just notified the world in a 75 pages document about its newest and expected plan of deterrence: the development of smaller, tactical, nuclear warheads to be used for limited war. North Korea comes to mind, but Russia, as the document explains, was the real reason for the   modernization. The Pentagon planners believe its enemies, among   them   Iran and China, are not sufficiently afraid of the present aging nuclear arsenal, since Washington would probably shy away from a big bang, which could mean the end of our  world. The blitz will be smaller, enough to annihilate Pyongyang…or St. Petersburg.  

RELATED CONTENT

  • Authors
    October 3, 2017
    Traiter de la dynamique du prix des matières premières impose de caractériser trois phénomènes auxquels ils sont soumis : les tendances de (très) long terme, les cycles de moyen/long terme et la variabilité/volatilité à court terme (Jacks, 2013). Influençant fortement les économies des pays exportateurs, chacun d’entre eux appelle à la mise en œuvre de stratégies spécifiques, notamment en termes de politiques publiques. Ainsi, alors que la volatilité interroge sur la disponibilité d ...
  • Authors
    October 3, 2017
    Dealing with the dynamics of commodity prices requires the characterization of three phenomena to which they are subject: (very) long-term trends, medium / long-term cycles and short-term variability / volatility (Jacks, 2013). As they strongly infuence the economies of exporting countries, each of these phenomena calls for the implementation of specifc strategies, particularly in terms of public policies. Thus, whereas volatility raises the question of availability of hedging tools ...
  • Authors
    Can ÖĞÜTÇÜ
    Mehmet ÖĞÜTÇÜ
    September 29, 2017
    This paper discusses the expanding links between China, Central Asia and Russia over the past quarter a century, most recently via the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), in geopolitics and trade/ investment, as well connections in oil, gas and electricity. These links that continue to expand are likely to change the current economic, political and energy landscape beyond recognition. They are forging mutual economics dependencies and reducing security risks. The paper also assesses wh ...
  • Authors
    Yassine Msadfa
    September 21, 2017
    Les chaînes de valeur mondiales offrent de nouvelles opportunités de transformation structurelle pour les pays en développement. Aujourd’hui la vision des chaînes de valeur mondiales se limitant à l’analyse des flux commerciaux et des IDE à l’échelle globale n’est plus suffisante pour répondre aux questions clés du positionnement et de la remontée dans ces chaînes de valeur, de la dynamique de la capture de la valeur et de sa pérennisation. La réponse à ces questions appelle un écla ...
  • Authors
    Lahcen Oulhaj
    September 20, 2017
    Le présent livre présente un ensemble d’outils et de notions mathématiques communément utilisés en économie appliquée. Il commence par rappeler les notions d’algèbre matricielle, et enchaîne avec l’étude des systèmes linéaires d’équations et les transformations de matrices, pour traiter de la décomposition des matrices, devenue un outil couramment utilisé en économétrie des séries chronologiques et des données de panel. Le calcul différentiel et intégral, de plus en plus utilisé en ...
  • Authors
    Dina N. Elshahawany
    Michael L. Lahr
    September 18, 2017
    This paper focuses on a proposed development corridor in Egypt, a main component of which is a desert-based expansion of the current highway network. The main beneficial features of this proposed transport investment are travel time reductions and improved accessibility. We use a spatial computable general equilibrium (SCGE) model to estimate the economic impacts of changes in transportation costs from this new roadway. To effect this, we integrate the model with a stylized geo-code ...
  • September 17, 2017
    Les fonds souverains africains sont pour certains d’entre eux des fonds anciens, comme le Pula Fund du Botswana créé en 1994, d’autres fonds vont suivre, dont les plus importants en actifs sous gestion sont les fonds algériens et libyens. Et si la majeure partie d’entre eux, huit sur les onze analysés ici, sont financés par des recettes provenant d’hydrocarbures, tel n’est pas le cas du fonds botswanais (diamant), du fonds sénégalais (actifs transférés de l’état) et du der ...
  • Authors
    September 15, 2017
    After a strong rising tide starting in the 1990s, financial globalization seems to have reached a plateau since the global financial crisis. However, that apparent stability has taken place along a deep reshaping of cross-border financial flows, featuring de-banking and an increasing weight of non-banking financial cross-border transactions. Sources of potential instability and long-term funding challenges have morphed accordingly.      Financial globalization is morphing after its ...
  • Authors
    September 8, 2017
    The aim of this work is to contribute to the empirical literature on employment-GDP elasticities in four main ways. First, it provides a set of employment-GDP elasticities for a sample of emerging and developing economies, including 11 sub-Saharan countries, based on the GGDC 10-sectors database. Second, it assesses the extent to which manufacturing activities are inclusive compared to the rest of the economy, in terms of employment creation. Third, it explores the determinants of c ...
  • September 4, 2017
    India and Morocco have enjoyed a steady and fruitful relationship that continues to grow thanks to the trade opportunities between both countries. Indeed, the various agreements between India and Morocco yielded effective results for both countries who set a model of South-South cooperation that is also a win-win partnership.  Both countries share many common challenges as both are middle income countries. They have been enjoying sustained economic growth in the past two decades. O ...