Why Does the Pentagon Support YPG (PKK) Elements in Syria?

Turkey has been continuing its fight against the separatist terrorist organization with increasing intensity for 40 years, since the Eruh Raid in 1984, a milestone. There is no need to even question this, the reason for this is obvious, since it is a threat as defined in the Red Book of the Republic of Turkey, or more precisely in the "National Military Strategic Concept" (MASK), this is the reason not only for its increase in violence but also for allocating resources. The problem is literally a survival problem. However, the area of this bloody struggle and the source of the threat is the Syria-Iraq border. Well? The area takes place on the southern flank of NATO, with which it has been an ally for 72 years. Turkey has never been able to get the West, in short the EU (E), on its side, despite the famous Article 5 of the NATO Establishment Treaty, which dictates that "NATO is one for all, all for one".

We should also emphasize that Turkey had to use only its own means and capabilities in the fight against terrorism. While the terrorists we are fighting against are depicted as aggressors and aggressors for Turkey, unfortunately, the separatist terrorist organization is described as freedom fighters for the West. However, it must be sadly stated that no matter what Turkey did, it could not come together with the West and close the ranks in the struggle to thwart the ideal of "Kurdistan in Four Parts" in terms of the fight against terrorism. This approach and expansion still continues. For this reason, the Republic of Turkey had to transfer the resources it should have spent on development to the fight against terrorism. To put it more accurately, he did everything he could to do what needed to be done during this period of struggle, and he did not leave out what he did not do.

In short, the State has done and has done almost everything that needs to be done. What hasn't been done? Based on international law, hot pursuit, cross-border operations, small and joint large-scale operations in Syria and Iraq have continued increasingly since the 1990s and continue to do so. As a result of these operations, thousands of terrorists have been neutralized and are still being neutralized. The terrorists' lairs and caves, where they felt extremely safe, were entered, and Turkish flags were planted in places they said could not be entered. Let's remember, in the beginning, when the operations were over, they returned and the terrorists occupied those areas again. Of course, the same regions continued to produce terrorism. For this reason, the importance of "Area Dominance" was understood and a different position was taken. After the "Area Domination Doctrine" was accepted, terrorists' lairs were not only entered one by one, but also base areas were created in the areas taken under control with the terrorist clearance, and elements of the Turkish Armed Forces were deployed in the region from time to time, regardless of the arctic climatic conditions, winter or winter.

The captured areas were not left to the terrorist organization at any cost. This is an obligation, even though opposing voices are voiced from time to time, this is the "requirement of military service", it has been fulfilled correctly and the requirements are still being fulfilled. More accurately, since 2019, with the "Operation Claw" series, a de facto security line has been established on the other side of the border, going down to a depth of 30-40 kilometers depending on the location of the geography. Beyond this line, 250 km from time to time, with MİT elements in Qandil, Asos, Suleymaniye and Qamishli in Syria. Pinpoint operations were carried out in deep areas, and new rings were added to the cross-border terrorist clearance.

On the other hand, another question that needs to be asked is this. Is it legal for Turkey to be in these regions? Yes it is legal. Let's explain. As mentioned above, Turkey's border with Syria and Iraq is a border that constitutes the southern flank of NATO. In other words, the issue is not only about securing Turkey's national borders, but also about providing NATO's southern flank with a structure that will not pose a threat. It is the safe establishment of a decided 20-mile (32 km) "security & safety zone". The security zone means that you will have both soldiers and blocking materials that ensure safety.

By the way, this issue should be emphasized. The region in question is definitely not in the status of a "buffer zone". The term buffer zone is used in a very wrong way, especially by media professionals who do not have in-depth knowledge. Buffer zone is an international relations phrase. Its pure meaning is "it means a piece of land along the border between two warring states where there are no troops", which is why the term buffer zone, which is frequently used, is completely wrong. We are not parties at war with either Syria or Iraq. Türkiye is based on international law in both Syria and Iraq. In other words, the issue is not only about securing Turkey's national borders, but also about providing NATO's southern flank with a structure that will not pose a threat. It is the safe establishment of a decided 20-mile (32 km) "security & safety zone". The security zone means that you will have both soldiers and blocking materials that ensure safety.

By the way, this issue should be emphasized. The region in question is definitely not in the status of a "buffer zone". The term buffer zone is used in a very wrong way, especially by media professionals who do not have in-depth knowledge. Buffer zone is an international relations phrase. Its pure meaning is "it means a piece of land along the border between two warring states where there are no troops", which is why the term buffer zone, which is frequently used, is completely wrong. We are not parties at war with either Syria or Iraq. Türkiye is based on international law in both Syria and Iraq. Our presence in Syria began in 2011, with the Syrian civil war, as an indicator of the opposition reflex of the people opposed to the regime, when the 'Free Syrian Army', as it was known at the time, was formed into a NATO 'training camp', which included the USA, France and Turkey. It is a requirement of the "equip" project.

What I am trying to say is that it is extremely important to use international relations jargon correctly. If used incorrectly, it becomes a "galat-ı sahih", that is, the correct use of a wrong, which you will have difficulty in correcting, you cannot correct. It is not the job of smart people either. You know, there is an expression. “A madman threw a stone into the pit, but forty wise men could not get it out.” No matter how hard you try to get that stone out of the pit, you won't be able to get it out. For this reason, it is one of the issues that I pay attention to, and I always bring this method to attention when clarifying an issue.

First of all, first the conceptual framework is put forward, secondly the issue is limited by the legal framework, and only then the issue is tried to be resolved through the theoretical framework in order to produce a solution. This is the way and procedure to do this. All studies and discussions without this will be more harmful than beneficial. That's why I always use the procedure of writing regulations and directives in the official gazette as an example. Sir, it is also legal for the Turkish Armed Forces to be in Iraq. Since the First Gulf Operation in 1991, Turkey has been in Iraq as part of the "Provide Comfort" operation. Because the Republic of Turkey bore the burden of the Halabja Massacre and supported our Kurdish brothers living in Iraq and became a part of the international structure established in Zakho.

The Turkey-US Strategic Mechanism was activated during the Washington visits of MİT President İbrahim Kalın between 3-4 March 2024 and Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan between 7-8 March 2024. From this point on, a more intense diplomatic traffic than ever has begun between the two countries focused on the fight against terrorism and defense cooperation. It is undoubtedly very important that positive developments occur. However, while these continue, it is not possible to understand why US Central Command (CENTCOM) General Micheal Erik Kurilla visited the terrorist leader Ferhat Abdi Şahin, codenamed Şahin Cilo (Mazlum Kobani), responsible for the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces, 28 times. Just a few days ago, US soldiers attended the commemoration ceremony held in Qamishli for the 9 PekaKa terrorists who died in two helicopters that crashed in Sulaymaniyah, Iraq last year. How should it be understood that a wreath consisting of the PeKaKa colors of yellow, red, green and white was laid on the monument built for terrorists, and that they embraced the terrorist leader and his minions?

Let's not forget that CENTCOM Commander himself issued a condolence message after the helicopter crash last year. Two or three months ago, CENTCOM soldiers and terrorists held a joint exercise in Qamishli. The name of the exercise is an exercise to develop capabilities against the common enemy. (one)

So now I ask you, who is the common enemy? Türkiye and Turkish Armed Forces. I think it's now clear who we are dancing with. Would you look at this consensus? When asked, US diplomats always say, very interestingly, "We cannot get any control over CENTCOM." How can we understand this fabrication as "They have an emotional bond with the Syrian PekaKa"? Alas, I can almost hear you say. One can't help but ask, isn't Biden the commander-in-chief? If it doesn't have influence on CENTCOM and the Pentagon, wouldn't one wonder what kind of a state this is and question the democratic structure of that country? Doesn't this mean direct military tutelage?

Now let's come to the analysis of the Iraqi PeKaKa. Here too, the USA is implicitly on the side of the PUK led by PekaKa and Bafıl Talabani. The meeting that Turkey held in Baghdad after a long time on March 14, 2024 was extremely productive. We are witnessing that, perhaps for the first time after a long time, the Iraqi Central government, in short the Baghdad administration, mentioned in the 7-article joint declaration text that the Iraqi section of the KCK/PKK structure was given the status of a "banned organization" for the first time. Undoubtedly, one of the most crucial points of the seven-article joint declaration is that the PKK has been made a "banned organization" within the scope of the fight against terrorism. Former Baghdad Ambassador Fatih Yıldız, on the I am of the same opinion. Let's explain this issue, or rather this important difference. As you know, the illegal organization's claim of "Kurdistan in Four Parts" and the Iraqi section of the KCK/PKK structure, in short, the Iraqi PKK, were not directly described as an "illegal organization" in the joint declaration. Its status is that of "prohibited organization". In order to fully explain this important difference, I think it would be useful to quote the said article verbatim:

“The parties underlined that the PKK poses a security threat to Turkey and Iraq and noted that the presence of the said organization on Iraqi territory means that it violates the Iraqi Constitution. Turkey welcomed the decision taken by the Iraqi National Security Council that the PKK was a "banned organization" in Iraq. "The parties consulted on the measures to be taken against the organizations and their extensions that target Turkey using Iraqi territory."

As can be noted, this is an extremely important description, but the Iraqi side stated in the joint statement that it remained at the consultative level. This statement clearly shows how the Republic of Turkey is pushing all doors to make Iraq, and even Syria, partners in its "counter-terrorism" strategy.

Parties in Iraq are working on a "memorandum of understanding" that will outline the strategic partnership until President Erdogan's visit to Baghdad in April, 12 years after the election. Steps are being taken carefully towards this.

It is thought that if a security corridor is created in an area of 30-40 kilometers towards the border on both the Syrian and Iraqi sides, the area of influence with "Firtina" howitzers and artillery will gain a reasonable depth. Thus, the PKK becomes inhospitable within this range. The series of Claw operations, which have been ongoing since 2019, have limited the PKK's mobility by increasing military bases, surveillance and checkpoints, but have not been able to fully prevent the terrorist organization from producing any impact. In this sense, the importance of common struggle reveals itself here.

The Iraqi structure of the separatist terrorist organization has spread over an area exceeding 200 km along the Turkey-Iraq and Iran-Iraq borders. Eliminating or cutting off campsites on different mountain ranges dictates an extremely careful and collaborative operation. It also means that thousands of villages and settlements planned to be built in the region will turn into battlefields. It is estimated that the number of villages currently vacated in the region is over 600. In addition, there are also residential areas such as "Mahmur Camp", where people were displaced from Turkey, which largely aided and abetted the terrorist organization. It is considered that removing these could also eliminate the threat to Turkey. Another issue is the severing of ties between PUK leader Bafil Talabani and the Syrian PKK, with the support of the USA and even Iran. It should be noted that, in addition to Fidan and Kalın, the Minister of National Defense Yaşar Güler and Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Münir Karaloğlu also attended the meeting held in Baghdad on March 14, 2024. On the other Iraqi side of the table, there were Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein, Defense Minister Mohammed al-Abbasi, National Security Undersecretary Qasim al-Araji, Hashd al-Shaabi Delegation Chairman Falih al-Feyyad, Kurdistan Interior Minister Rebwar Ahmet and Iraqi Undersecretary of Communications, whose name was not shared. (2)

The key element here is the inclusion of Hashd al-Shaabi elements in this common struggle front. Groups affiliated with Hashd al-Shaabi, which supports the Shengal Resistance Forces (YBŞ) in the war against ISIS, have repeatedly attacked the "Bashiqa" base of the Turkish Armed Forces. For this reason, relations with Fayyad, the influential name of Hashd al-Shaabi, continue on a suitable basis in order to break the resistance of Iranian-backed groups.

It is known that the tracking and hitting range of the Turkish Armed Forces has expanded thanks to the collaboration of the KDP administration with the UAV technology, electronic intelligence (ELINT), signal intelligence (SIGINT) and human intelligence (HUMINT) network in the field. During the meetings in Erbil and Baghdad, Ankara pointed out the increasing PKK presence in the Sulaymaniyah, Kirkuk, Makhmur, Mosul and Sinjar areas and put forward the thesis that "This struggle produces terrorism against all of us, the fight against this can only be achieved by acting together."

Another forgotten issue is the fact that Kubat Talabani, Deputy Prime Minister of the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government, is the brother of PUK leader Bafil Talabani. Former Iraqi President Berhem Salih, also of PUK origin, and his successor Abdüllatif Rashid are constantly sending messages to Ankara to solve the problems between the KDP and PUK. It is thought that if the problems between KDP and PUK are resolved in this way, Sulaymaniyah can move away from Iran. This is why President Erdoğan often suggests to KRG President Nechirvan Barzani, "Solve your problems with Talabani."

After emphasizing the importance of this meeting, the question that needs to be asked is what exactly is wanted from the parties. Although the details are not shared, it is possible to make some inferences based on the statements and leaked information. To put it in a few sentences,

1-) KDP is asked to deploy Peshmerga forces in a way that will narrow PeKaKa's maneuver area, take effective measures to close the crossings with Syria, and provide more intelligence support in the fight against PeKaKa elements.

2-) On the other hand, while it is demanded that PUK, under pressure, cut off relations with PeKaKa, take countermeasures and cooperate with MİT, it is persistently desired to end the relationship established between PUK and Syrian PeKaKa under the guidance of the USA.

To evaluate the possibility of joint work with Syria after a joint large combined operation in Iraq. The answer to this question is a straightforward yes. I am trying to say with great emphasis and special emphasis that the Republic of Turkey is pushing all doors to include Syria, especially Iraq, in its "counter-terrorism" strategy. These activities are not temporary activities, but ongoing activities. However, the US, indirectly the Pentagon, supports the Syrian PeKaKa, which illegally holds as much land as the country of Denmark. The USA is particularly silent about operations against PeKaKa on the Iraqi side in order to reduce its objections to the support they give to the Syrian PeKaKa in Syria and to ensure its own security in Iraq. It is experiencing the unbearable lightness of having other actors in the region provide its own security without allocating any force. Studies on possible joint work with Syria are, of course, continuing, and it is considered that they will inevitably continue. No one should doubt this. Because the Republic of Turkey is a country that agrees on the territorial integrity of Syria. As you know, there are no disagreements and red lines in international relations, and there should not be. As you know, there are no disagreements and red lines in international relations, and there should not be. This issue has already been clearly stated by Mr. President Erdoğan many times. However, it is a well-known fact that "the evening does not follow the morning in the Middle East", that is, the caravan is lined up on the road, dear readers.

Footnotes:

(1) Tunca Bengin, “Is Biden the puppet?” Milliyet Newspaper, 23 March 2024, p.11

(2) Fehim Taştekin, “Partner Wanted for Bloody Skating”, Duvar Newspaper, 18 March 2024