Tag: YPG

  • SWEDEN and PKK/YPG Terrorist Organization

    SWEDEN and PKK/YPG Terrorist Organization

    Sweden harshly reacted to Turkey’s Operation Olive Branch which targeted the terrorist orga- nization in 2018. In this context, former Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallström canceled an official visit to Turkey.

    PKK/YPG supporters can freely conduct their activities and carry out terrorist propaganda in Sweden without encountering any restrictions. PKK/YPG sympathizers wave PKK/YPG flags ex- plicitly without any intervention by local security forces. Moreover, PKK/YPG members can even meet the country’s Foreign Minister.

    The Swedish government provide massive state of the art technology arms to the terrorist group. These weapons are used in terrorist attacks against Turkish security forces.

    Sweden, refusing to extradite PKK/YPG members, also safeguard members of Fethullah Terrorist Organization (FETO) being harbored in the country.
    Concrete Evidence Regarding the Relations Between the Swedish Government and the PKK/YPG Terrorist Organization

    Concrete Evidence Regarding the Relations Between the Swedish Government and the PKK/YPG Terrorist Organization

    SWEDISH DEFENSE MINISTER Peter Hultqvist met with Mazloum Kobani, one of the so-called commanders of the PKK/YPG. After the meeting, Kobani made a statement expressing that Sweden will closely cooperate with the terrorist organization.

    SWEDISH FOREIGN MINISTER ANN LINDE met with PKK/YPG members many times and declared some of such meetings on social media explicitly. The Turkish Foreign Ministry reacted to these meetings repeatedly, yet the Swedish side refused to cooperate.

    THE PKK/YPG RECEIVES MASSIVE ANTI-TANK weapon support from Sweden. Hence, the terrorist organization has a huge amount of AT4s, a Swedish Saab production anti-tank weapon, in its hands. During the operations conducted in rural Hakkari in southeastern Turkey in September 2021, and Operation Claw and Tiger which started on 17 June 2021, scores of AT4S were captured in caves and shelters of the terrorist organization by Turkish security forces.

    orsam sweden pkk ypg
    ORSAM

    As a region that shares deep-rooted historical, cultural and neighborhood ties with Turkey, the Middle East and North Africa region is going through a process of serious political and social changes. Therefore, it became necessary to follow these complex and dynamic developments as well as to interpret them. The Center for Middle Eastern  Studies (ORSAM) was established in January 2009 to inform the general public and the foreign policy community on the Middle East. ORSAM is a nonpartisan and non-profit research center based in Ankara.

    ORSAM provides information on Middle Eastern affairs and exposes the Turkish academia and political circles to the perspectives of researchers from the region. ORSAM, by facilitating the visits of Middle Eastern statesmen, bureaucrats, academics, strategists, businessmen, journalists, and NGO representatives to Turkey, seeks to ensure their knowledge and ideas are shared with the Turkish and international community. To that end, ORSAM carries out research on social, economic and political developments in the Middle East and shares these with the public. Striving for a healthier understanding and analysis of international politics and the Middle Eastern affairs, ORSAM produces stimulating and policy-relevant information for the general public and decision-makers.

    For that purpose, ORSAM offers projections that suggest alternative perspective on regional issues as well as analyzing regional developments. In order to provide comprehensive and solution-oriented analyses, ORSAM takes advantage of geographical proximity to pressings issues and hands-on research by competent researchers and intellectuals from diverse disciplines. ORSAM has a strong publishing line that transmits meticulous analyses of regional developments and trends to relevant audiences. Our center that is also in the process of re-organization is expanding its cadre and areas of research focuses on publication and teaching activities such as seminars on Middle East affairs and Arabic courses.

  • Syrian Kurdish groups deny responsibility for bloody Afrin bombing

    Syrian Kurdish groups deny responsibility for bloody Afrin bombing

    A truck explosion led to more than 50 deaths Tuesday in Turkish-controlled Afrin, Syria.

    Civil defense members work to extinguish a fire after a truck bombing in Afrin, Syria, on April 28, 2020.  Photo by Photo by White Helmets / Anadolu Agency via Getty Images.

    Apr 29, 2020

    Syrian Kurdish groups have condemned Tuesday’s bombing in Turkish-controlled Afrin and denied responsibility after Turkey accused them of carrying out the attack that killed more than 50 people.

    Mazlum Kobane, the commander of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), called the event a “terrorist act” and blamed Turkish-backed forces for it.

    “What happened in Afrin yesterday was a condemnable terrorist act resulting in the loss of innocent lives,” Kobane posted in Arabic on Twitter today. “This criminal act is the result of the policy of destruction carried out by the Turkish occupation and its mercenaries.”

    On Tuesday, an explosives-laden fuel truck blew up in Afrin in northern Syria, leading to at least 52 deaths, according to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. There were fighters, as well as civilians and children, among the dead, the observatory said. The blast caused a massive fire in the area of the explosion that engulfed nearby vehicles and structures.

    The Kurdish group the People’s Protection Units (YPG) took control of Afrin, which has a mixed Kurdish and Arab population, in 2012. Turkey considers the YPG an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers Party in Turkey that has long fought the Turkish state. The United States backed the YPG in its fight against the Islamic State, and Turkey grew anxious as the YPG took control of much of Syria’s border area with Turkey and established autonomous rule there. In 2015, the YPG joined with Arab and Christian groups to form the US-backed SDF to continue fighting in IS. YPG commanders lead the SDF, though it is a multi-ethnic force.

    Turkey and rebels it supports in the Free Syrian Army took Afrin from the YPG in 2018, causing Kurds to flee. The Turkey-YPG conflict continued in October 2019 when Turkey invaded northeast Syria, taking more areas from the western parts of SDF territory as part of Operation Peace Spring.

    Following Tuesday’s explosion, the Turkish Defense Ministry blamed the YPG for the attack.

    The YPG issued a statement saying claims of its involvement in the attack are “removed from the truth.”

    “Some of the parties that occupied Afrin attributed responsibility to the People’s Protection Units (YPG) before confirming that,” the statement read. “We have no connection to what happened.”

    The Syrian Democratic Council, which is the SDF’s political wing, likewise condemned the attack. “We in the Syrian Democratic Council condemn and denounce this cowardly terrorist act that targeted innocent civilians,” the statement read.

    The council also called on the international community to remove Turkish-backed forces from Afrin and other parts of Syria. “We also call upon the international community to carry out its responsibilities towards the Syrian issue and work to end the Turkish occupation of the city of Afrin and all other areas that it occupied,” the statement read.

    Major hostilities between Turkey and the YPG ended in November of last year. Some fighting continues, however.

  • Pentagon: Revenue from Syria oil fields going to Kurdish-led forces | TheHill

    Pentagon: Revenue from Syria oil fields going to Kurdish-led forces | TheHill

    What is obvious that ISRAEL is buying the oil and US is using stolen money to beef up Kurdish forces

    so they can carry on murdering turks in south east anadolia to make a homeland for PKK terrorists

    THIS THEY CALL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP IN NATO

    image001 1

    First the United States supplied arms to Kurdish terrorists for years, now it is going to give them oil revenue.
     
    Revenue which belongs to all of the Syrian people not just the Kurds, and which legally should be given to the Syrian government.
     
    More unlawful American nation-building of an eventual autonomous “Kurdistan” on Turkey’s southern border and an existential threat to Turkey.

     

    Pentagon: Revenue from Syria oil fields going to Kurdish-led forces

    By Ellen Mitchell –

    image002 1

    © Getty Images

    Revenue from oil fields that U.S. forces are protecting in northeast Syria will go to U.S. partner forces in the region and not the United States, the Pentagon’s top spokesman said Thursday.

    “The revenue from this is not going to the U.S., this is going to the SDF,” Jonathan Hoffman told reporters at the Pentagon, referring to the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces.

    President Trump last week gave the go-ahead for an expanded military operation to secure expansive oil fields in eastern Syria, and the Pentagon has already sent new troops and armored vehicles to the area.

    The new plan backtracks on Trump’s original desire to pull all U.S. forces from Syria, and now has hundreds of U.S. troops protecting a stretch of nearly 90 miles from Deir el-Zour to al-Hassakeh that is currently controlled by Kurdish forces.

    Trump on Friday still insisted that “we want to bring our soldiers home,” but left soldiers in the country “because we’re keeping the oil.”

    “I like oil. We’re keeping the oil,” he told reporters on the White House lawn.

    Later that day at a rally in Tupelo, Miss., Trump told the crowd the United States would distribute the oil to “help out the Kurds and we’ll help out other people. We’ll also help out ourselves if that’s OK.”

    Defense Secretary Mark Esper, when asked last week by reporters about Trump’s claims, said he interprets the president’s words “as, deny ISIS access to the oil fields, secure them so that they are denied access to the oil fields.”

    But details of that plan still remain unclear — as it raises the legal question of whether American forces would be able to attack Syrian or Russian forces if they threatened the security of the oil.

    “We work to ensure that no one approaches and shows hostile intent to our forces and if they do our commanders maintain the right of self defense,” Hoffman said on Thursday when asked repeatedly if U.S. forces were there to keep Syrian or Russian government actors from accessing the area.

    Pentagon officials also insisted that the U.S. mission in Syria still remains the defeat of ISIS.

    “The mission is the defeat of ISIS. The securing of oil fields is a subordinate task to that mission and the purpose of that task is to deny ISIS the revenues from that oil infrastructure,” said Joint Staff Vice Director Navy Rear Adm. William Byrne, who spoke alongside Hoffman.

    Hoffman and Byrne would not say if ISIS actually has the ability to seize the oil fields, given its lack of armor and aircraft, only offering that U.S. forces are focused on preventing that from happening.

    The comments add to an already confusing picture of the U.S. role in Syria following Trump’s order last month to pull all U.S. troops from the country ahead of a Turkish offensive into Syria. The move appeared to give Ankara the green light to attack the Kurds, who have been instrumental in the U.S. fight against ISIS.

    After condemnation from allies and massive pushback from congressional Democrats and Republicans alike, Trump imposed sanctions on Turkey but quickly lifted them as part of a cease-fire agreement brokered by Vice President Pence.

    There have since been reports of Turkish violations of the cease-fire, but Byrne said it is holding and while there have been some skirmishes, “it appears that all parties are adhering to the rules.”

    Hoffman added that the SDF are still “our partners and we are still working with them in our fight against ISIS and we’re still going to provide them with the support and ability to be able to continue that fight.”

    He also said that Washington expects Turkey to investigate reports of Ankara-backed forces allegedly committing war crimes in Syria and to “hold those people to account.”

  • Why Turkey is invading Syria

    Why Turkey is invading Syria

    Türkiye neden Suriye’yi işgal ediyor

    … and how it’s getting what it wanted.

    On Oct. 9, 2019, Turkey launched an attack in northeastern Syria. Turkey made the move shortly after the US announced it would remove some of its troops from the region.

    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan had his eyes on the region for years. Turkey, he argued, needed a “safe zone” to serve as a buffer against the Syrian War happening just across the border. Yet back home in Turkey, there were other factors at play that accelerated his calls for an invasion that involved Erdoğan’s own political survival.

    The move has recalibrated alliances in the Syrian War and added new uncertainty on the future of the region.

    To learn more, check out these additional resources:

    Vox’s previous reporting on the conflict:
    https://www.vox.com/world/2019/10/16/20908262/turkey-syria-kurds-trump-invasion-questions
    https://www.vox.com/world/2019/10/23/20928769/trymp-syria-turkey-doctrine

    The Institute for the Study of War’s reports on the US withdrawal from Syria:

    Vox Atlas demonstrates where conflicts occur on a map and the ways in which foreign policy shapes a region. Watch all the episodes here:

    Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what’s really driving the events in the headlines. Check out .

    Watch our full video catalog:
    Follow Vox on Facebook:
    Or Twitter:

  • An Impatient Turkey Gets Ready to Enter Northeastern Syria, Stratfor Enterprises, LLC

    An Impatient Turkey Gets Ready to Enter Northeastern Syria, Stratfor Enterprises, LLC

    Aug 7, 2019 | 09:00 GMT

    (DELIL SOULEIMAN/AFP/Getty Images)
    Highlights
    • Turkey has long warned of an imminent offensive into northeastern Syria, but its latest warnings suggest an incursion is imminent this time.
    • A combination of Turkish impatience and a narrowing window for action could drive Ankara to finally launch the military operation.
    • But given that a unilateral operation would greatly displease the United States, Washington would likely respond with significant retaliation.

    Editor’s Note: This assessment was published shortly before the United States and Turkey reached a last-minute deal to jointly coordinate the establishment of a safe zone in northeastern Syria. At present, the countries have not released any details regarding a timeline for the buffer zone’s implementation or its geographical scope.

    He’s made the threat before, but this time, it might just be the real thing. On Aug. 6, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reiterated his warnings that Turkey is poised to launch a military operation against the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) east of the Euphrates River in northeastern Syria. The latest note came two days after Erdogan said Ankara had already notified both the United States and Russia of its plans.

    This is certainly not Turkey’s first warning of an impending offensive in northeastern Syria. Turkey has long sought to push into the area, where the YPG-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) hold ground. Until now, Turkey has not made an incursion because of the presence of U.S. troops there, as well as Washington’s opposition to any such move. But Ankara’s patience appears to have run out, and several factors suggest Turkey will make an incursion sooner, rather than later — regardless of the economic cost that would entail.

    The Big Picture

    A number of events in recent years have strained the once-close partnership between the United States and Turkey. A Turkish offensive into northeastern Syria would further shake this battered alliance, resulting in drastic consequences, including potentially heavy economic sanctions on Turkey.

    See Middle East and North Africa section of the 2019 Third-Quarter Forecast
    See The Kurdish StruggleSee Turkey’s Resurgence

    Tired of Waiting

    One primary factor driving a potential Turkish incursion is the failure of U.S.-Turkish negotiations on the issue. For months, Ankara has held out hope that the two could agree to a substantial buffer zone in northeastern Syria that would permit its troops to enter the area without the unavoidable deterioration in bilateral ties that would accompany a unilateral Turkish operation. Turkey has pushed for a 32-kilometer-deep (20-mile) zone across the length of the Turkish-Syrian border east of the Euphrates River that would provide a significant buffer between YPG forces and Turkey, allow Ankara to resettle more Syrian refugees in the area and give Turkey a chance to establish allied Syrian proxies as it has done west of the Euphrates River. Unsurprisingly, the YPG has categorically rejected the proposal, countering that it would only agree to a 5-kilometer buffer in mostly non-populated areas of the border, as some of the region’s largest cities lie right on the Turkish border. Additionally, the YPG has said it will not accept any buffer zone under Turkey’s control.

    According to The Washington Post, a U.S. Department of Defense delegation arrived in Turkey on Aug. 5 for last-ditch negotiations on the impasse, offering a compromise proposal that includes a 14- to 15-kilometer-deep buffer zone along a third of the Syrian-Turkish border east of the Euphrates that would be jointly patrolled by U.S. and Turkish forces. While it is still possible that the two countries will reach an eleventh-hour deal, it is more likely the talks will fail given the sizable discrepancy between their positions on the size and scope of the proposed buffer. If the talks do collapse, Turkey — fed up with what it sees as both a lack of U.S. concessions and stalling tactics — is likely to proceed with a unilateral push into northeastern Syria with the tens of thousands of combat-ready troops that it has deployed to the border.

    The timing might also push Turkey to enter northeastern Syria sooner rather than later. Ankara is concerned that if it waits any longer, the United States will find the time required to bring in more allied troops to the area — something that would make it more politically costly for Turkey to intervene there. At the same time, Turkey has managed to hammer out another cease-fire deal with Russia covering their respective proxy forces and allies in Idlib in western Syria. But as evidenced by the Syrian army’s resumption of airstrikes against rebels on Aug. 5, that cease-fire is inherently fragile, meaning Turkey only has a limited window to launch an offensive in the northeast before fighting almost certainly resumes in the northwest, creating a distraction. Regardless of the prospect of a likely end to the truce in Idlib, the cease-fire itself suggests that Russia has given the green light to Turkey’s plans in the northeast, with Moscow undoubtedly all the more pleased to drive a deeper wedge between Ankara and Washington as a result of the operation.

    Turkey’s Soft Underbelly

    Of course, a Turkish offensive against the SDF east of the Euphrates would deal a hammer blow to U.S.-Turkish relations, which have already nosedived since Turkey purchased the Russian S-400 missile defense system, prompting Washington to retaliate by banning F-35 sales to Ankara. And then there’s the added risk of an accidental confrontation between the incoming Turkish troops and the U.S. troops currently embedded there. Equally concerning for the United States is the prospect that the pitched fighting between the Turks and the SDF could allow remnants of the Islamic State to take advantage of the chaos to regroup.

    Of course, a Turkish offensive against the SDF east of the Euphrates would deal a hammer blow to U.S.-Turkish relations.

    Until now, U.S. President Donald Trump has resisted imposing Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) stipulations and other sanctions against Turkey, but Washington would likely implement new sanctions against Ankara following any such Turkish operation, further spiking hostility between the two states. In response, Ankara may choose to retaliate against U.S. companies operating in Turkey, while it would likely seek even closer ties with Russia and China to counterbalance its eroding relationship with the United States.

    A renewed push into northeastern Syria would also present a great risk to the Turkish economy, which is heavily debt-ridden and only recently emerged from a recession that plagued the country at the end of 2018. Inflation and unemployment remain high, while the domestic consumption of goods and services has slumped. Apart from the looming threat of CAATSA sanctions, the White House has threatened to sanction Turkey if it does not comply with U.S. policy wishes in Syria; such a shock could heap more downward pressure on the fragile lira, which already experienced one currency crisis in 2018. In the end, for all his mercurial qualities, Erdogan has been consistent on one policy front: privileging national security over the concerns of the economy. And as Turkey prepares to strike at northeastern Syria, the country is about to learn how low its economy — and its relations with the United States — can go.

    globe color

    Connected Content

    Regions & Countries
    United States
    Syria
    Turkey
    Topics
    The Syrian Civil War
    The Kurdish Struggle
    Turkey’s Resurgence
    Companies
    the Washington Post
    son dakika turkiye ile abd guv manset 1