Syria's Kurds in Biden-Putin Summit
June 6, 2021, 1:17 pm

Jwan Dibo

The US president will hold two separate summits during this month. One of them is with Russia’s president on 16^th June, and the other is with Turkey’s president on 14^th June. Indeed, Kurdish issue in Syria will be an essential part of the talks in these summit meetings. It can, even, be said that the Kurds in Syria are the common subject between the two distinct meetings. Syria's Kurds

For the Kurds in Syria, the US-Russia summit is more important than the US-Turkish one. There are numerous reasons behind this belief. First, the US and Russia are two great powers involved in Syria, and any potential solution for Syria’s impasse, must be approved by the two states.

Second, the possibility of reaching a common understanding between Washington and Moscow on the rights of Syria’s Kurds is much greater than between Washington and Ankara. Third, Biden-Putin summit is pre-scheduled and will be held independently, while Biden-Erdogan's meeting will be held on the sidelines of NATO summit in Brussels on 14th June.

Fourth, the Kurds no longer have any hope of a positive change in Turkey’s position on their rights. On the contrary, pessimism prevails and dominates these days, because of the open war that Erdogan's Turkey is waging against the Kurds, whether inside Turkish Kurdistan, Iraqi Kurdistan, or Syrian Kurdistan.

The US and Russia are on opposite sides in Syria. Russia has supported Bashar al-Assad’s regime, while the U.S has backed Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). A slew of thorny dossiers between both superpowers including political future of Syria await the two leaders. The problem was, and still is, that the Kurdish role throughout the Syrian crisis has been a subject of a sharp dispute between Washington and Moscow. Syria's Kurds

Russia has always wanted the Kurds to work for the Syrian regime, while the US has always urged them to stay away from al-Assad regime. The biggest problem was, and still is, that both countries want to use and co-opt Syria’s Kurds for free. Both countries, especially the US, has not, even, protected them against successive Turkish invasions and occupations.

It is true that the Kurdish-led SDF are backed by the US, but the US has not adequately protected them against Turkey's threat, nor has not worked to mitigate the effects of the stifling economic crisis plaguing their regions. This reflects the absence of a clear American strategy in Syria. Moreover, it shows that the future of the Kurds in Syria is not a big matter to US and is not one of its priorities.

The Kurds in Syria were and still are the weakest player in the Syrian conflict. Their enemies are much more than their friends. The US and Russia have used them more than once to blackmail Turkey. On the other hand, Russia has threatened and intimidated the Kurds more than once by encouraging Turkey against them. Turkey, in turn, has several times invaded and occupied their territories by concluding secret deals with the US and Russia together. The Syrian regime and Iran were and still are igniting unrests in the areas of the Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, through their militias. In addition, political forces of the Syrian Kurds are divided and not united.

There are many direct and indirect outstanding issues between the two superpowers, including the future of the political settlement in Syria. But it seems that the Syrian issue does not occupy an important place in the context of those pending problems, and more precisely the Kurdish issue in Syria.

All countries, especially the major ones, act according to their interests only, and solving the Kurdish issue in Syria does not serve the interests of U.S. and Russia together. In other words, it is not an issue of importance to US foreign policy. In addition, the two countries can reach temporary or semi-permanent settlements for some important issues by making some bargaining at the expense of minor issues, for them, such as the rights of the Kurds in Syria.

The hopes that some or most of the Kurds have held for the administration of Democratic President, Joe Biden, seem to be illusory. The recent Turkish escalation against the Kurdistan region of Iraq under the pretext of fighting PKK fighters without any reaction from the U.S. is sufficient evidence. Note that Turkey cannot invade and occupy more of the lands of the Kurdistan region without obtaining the American green light. All U.S. did, so far, was that its ambassador to the United Nations expressed its concern about the recent Turkish escalation against the Kurdistan region of Iraq. Syria's Kurds

The rights of the Kurds in Syria were not and will not turn into a point of disagreement between Washington and Moscow. On the contrary, it may turn into a bargaining between the two sides in order to reach settlements for other outstanding issues, of course, at the expense of the Syrian Kurds. levant

by: Jwan Dibo levant

Jwan Dibo

If backed, El Salvador would be first in the world to formally adopt Bitcoin Qatar’s curriculum is still far from standards of peace and tolerance, a study says

Upon arriving to participate in the summit of the European Political Community, which includes around forty heads of state in Budapest, he said, "I look forward to sitting with the elected U.S. president and seeing how we will collectively ensure we meet challenges, including the threats from Russia and North Korea." He also noted that the strengthening of ties between Russia and North Korea poses a threat to the United States as well, according to reports from Agence France-Presse.

Before Trump's victory, Rutte expressed confidence that a united Washington would remain part of the defensive alliance, even if Trump became the 47th president of the United States. In an interview with German public broadcaster ZDF last Monday night, he stated that both Republicans and Democrats understand that NATO serves not only the security of Europe but also that of America. He added that both candidates are aware that the security of the United States is closely tied to NATO.

On Wednesday, NATO congratulated Trump on his victory but did not address the Ukrainian issue.

It is noteworthy that the relationship between the elected U.S. president and the defense alliance was not the best during his first term in the White House. Trump criticized NATO member states multiple times and even hinted at withdrawing from the alliance unless they increased their financial contributions.

Additionally, the issue of the Russian-Ukrainian war is one of the matters that complicate relations between the two sides, especially since Trump has repeatedly stated that he can end this ongoing conflict, which began in 2022, quickly. He implied that he had a peace plan between Kyiv and Moscow, while his vice president, JD Vance, revealed aspects of that plan, which stipulated Ukraine's commitment not to join NATO, thereby sending reassuring signals to the Russians.

Furthermore, many NATO member states in Europe fear that Trump might halt military aid to Ukraine after he previously criticized the U.S. for pouring funds into supporting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.