Turkey could cut off ISIS but world leaders not putting pressure on? Any truth?(10 Posts)
I read this today, is there any truth in it, do people think?
Oops posted to soon, meant to quite the last two paragraphs in particular - suggesting world leaders find it politically inconvenient to put any pressure on Turkey, even though this would be the most effective way to tackle ISIS - elsewhere in the article it is hinted that world leaders find other less effective ways to "wage war" on ISIS, such as boarder controls and restricting immigration, more politically expedient... :
"Had Turkey placed the same kind of absolute blockade on Isis territories as they did on Kurdish-held parts of Syria, let alone shown the same sort of “benign neglect” towards the PKK and YPG that they have been offering to Isis, that blood-stained “caliphate” would long since have collapsed – and arguably, the Paris attacks may never have happened. And if Turkey were to do the same today, Isis would probably collapse in a matter of months. Yet, has a single western leader called on Erdoğan to do this?
The next time you hear one of those politicians declaring the need to crack down on civil liberties or immigrant rights because of the need for absolute “war” against terrorism bear all this in mind. Their resolve is exactly as “absolute” as it is politically convenient. Turkey, after all, is a “strategic ally”. So after their declaration, they are likely to head off to share a friendly cup of tea with the very man who makes it possible for Isis to continue to exist."
FFS this is why I stopped reading newspapers. The ignorance (wilful misrepresentation?) in that article is shocking.
"... claiming those fighting Isis are “terrorists” themselves. It is true that the PKK did fight a sometimes ugly guerilla war with Turkey in the 1990s, which resulted in it being placed on the international terror list. For the last 10 years, however, it has completely shifted strategy, renouncing separatism and adopting a strict policy of never harming civilians"
Did it now? This PKK terrorist attack is from just a few months ago. 14 people died. This PKK terrorist attack is also from September. Two policemen died. This PKK terrorist attack is from just last month. And this PKK terrorist attack is from yesterday.
Isn't it wonderful to sit in comfortable Western European homes and pass judgement on how other countries must NOT fight terrorists killing their people? Just because terrorists killing them fight the terrorists killing us?
Daesh ( I refuse to dignify them by calling them ISIS, ISIL or IS) are being supplied from Turkey, whether that is with the express permission of the Turkish government is hard to ascertain as Turkey is arresting and jailing reporters by the dozen. Erdogan could hasten their end by diverting military effort from the PKK to Daesh certainly.
is there any truth in it, do people think?
Yes, I do.
I think there is truth in it. It is not only Turkey though. Also Turkey has understandable reasons for not helping the Kurds too much which is why other countries cannot put too much pressure on Turkey to change.
However, the article is wrong in implying that the Kurds could defeat Isis in Syria. The Kurds are only really interested in liberating their own areas of Syria which is understandable from their point of view. Unless France and other countries are prepared to put ground troops in to finish off Isis, which is what is required when Hollande says that France is at war with Isis, then the only ground forces able to defeat Isis are the Syrian Army, Hezbollah and the Iranian militias. A political deal will have to be reached so that all forces can combine and rid the world of the Isis Jihadis if there is a serious will to destroy them.
This is what Marine Le Pen is saying. It is common sense. Whether Hollande will do it, we will have to ait and see.
"There is more: the threat we face calls us to ally with those who fight fundamentalist Islam. For a long time, I have been calling for a revision of French diplomatic policy in Africa and the Middle East. Let’s stop undercutting sovereign states, as Nicolas Sarkozy did disastrously in Libya in 2011. We need to work with Russia, Syria and Iran as well as other foreign powers including the United States which are fighting radical Islam. Let’s bring to a halt the obsolete cold wars and incestuous relationships with untrustworthy countries—I mean specifically Turkey or Qatar."
I didn't read it as saying its all Turkey's fault, so much as saying the leaders of "comfortable western countries" are only "waging war" on ISIS in ways that are politically expedient to them personally, and putting pressure on Turkey is not among those ways - it suits our leaders better to find a "silver lining" in terror attacks in the form of a reason to reduce civil liberties and refuse to take in asylum seekers... A cynical but not unlikely idea I thought...
Cote I am absolutely sure you understand the situation far better than me, but if most of us don't read newspapers where are we supposed to get our news from? I doubt that your point is that TV news is more reliable/ unbiased!
Claig and Doctor that makes sense.
Aiding one side not leading to anything better is of course the risk in intervening with ground troupes and bombing, if both sides are actually terrorists, which seems depressingly believable... However surely cutting off the supply lines/ not supplying them directly would be something that should at least be on the table for discussion...?
"if most of us don't read newspapers where are we supposed to get our news from?"
I should have said "stopped reading UK newspapers about world events". If they are so wrong about the parts of the world I know well, how can I trust them with news from the rest of the world?
It's not only that they are biased but that they are factually wrong. Shockingly wrong.
So the answer imho is to read about other countries from their own news sources, written in English.
Join the discussion
Please login first.