Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
We Know What’s Happening in Syria
Russian bombing is prompting a mass exodus of terrified Syrians from Aleppo to the Turkish border. Credible estimates suggest 70,000 have fled; they’re the lucky ones: Those who remain are apt to be starved to death. The Syrian army and allied militias, including Iranian militias, will soon cut rebel-held zones of Aleppo off from Turkish supply lines. Russian airstrikes have been hitting villages north of Aleppo on the road to Turkey. Aleppo is on the verge of encirclement, which means hundreds of thousands of souls will be unable to escape. What we’re about to watch live, if we wish to, will probably be the largest siege since the Second World War.
The news that the Syrian government is exterminating detainees is on the front page of The New York Times today. You can read the details here. At some point the world will issue a teary apology to Syrians and there will be memorials to the Syrians and lots of children will hear about the terrible first half of the 21st century, and everyone will ask how this could have happened. If anyone ever says, “We didn’t know what was happening to them,” tell them: Shut up. We did.
There are now at least 2.5 million refugees from Syria in Turkey. Angela Merkel has been in Ankara to plead for Turkish help in reducing the influx of refugees to Europe. The EU has promised to give Turkey $3.3 billion if it can somehow make the refugees stop coming. In the past 48 hours, 35,000 Syrians have arrived at the Oncupinar gate at the Turkish border. Turkey has given refuge to civilians fleeing Syria throughout the war, but it’s come under very heavy pressure from the United States and Europe to seal off its border entirely. The refugee camp on the Turkish side of the Oncupinar gate has been largely shut for nearly a year. New arrivals have been sent to camps on the Syrian side, which Turkey claims are safe, for now. Turkish aid agencies are delivering humanitarian aid to these camps. Erdoğan has sworn that “If needed, we will let those brothers in.”
Another boatload of refugees drowned in the Aegean yesterday, including eleven children. This is now almost-daily news.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psYg06pj1do
The Turkish deputy prime minister is warning that in a worst-case scenario, 600,000 will escape from Aleppo and wind up on the Turkish border.
And it’s like a bad joke: Just as every EU member state is doing its utmost to seal its borders so better to keep Syrian refugees out, Frederica Mogherini, the EU foreign policy chief, has called on Ankara to let them in. Turkey, she’s insisting sonorously, “has a moral if not legal duty to provide protection to these people.”
The Dutch Foreign Minister Bert Koenders (the Netherlands now holds the EU presidency), joined in the moralizing: “I look at these images of people standing at the Turkish border and I just wanted to underline the message people who are in humanitarian need should be allowed in.”
And the UN is joining the chorus: Turkey, it says, must open its borders to desperate Syrian refugees fleeing Aleppo, “in line with its international obligations to protect people fleeing conflict or persecution.”
I’m stunned by the moral blindness. The Turkish government has insisted — from the start, to its own very uncertain citizens — that Turkey has a moral duty to admit Syrian refugees. So I simply don’t know who Mogherini and Koenders are trying to persuade. Turkey closed its borders because Europe and the US pressured it to do so — chiefly because Europe doesn’t seem to be able to keep its own citizens from joining ISIS or turning into Nazis. And now Europeans are lecturing Turks about their moral and legal obligation to admit refugees?
Perhaps they should be trying to convince Europeans, instead? Or Americans?
Published in General
This would be a great deal to run if we actually controlled Syria, but we don’t. Unless you are proposing that we would threaten a third party to intimidate the Russians not to attack a fourth party. Right now the bases are secure and legitimate thanks to the Assad regime. We would have to topple that regime to be able to threaten the Russian bases. This would have been a viable plan 4 years ago. Now it seems well beyond our reach.
2014 estimate of Syria’s population was 17 million. Turkey is harboring 15% of Syria’s population? OK, if you say so, count me skeptical (I’m particularly skeptical of government and NGO reports of these kinds of numbers, not sure how you’d convince me otherwise).
Sorry, meant to say “…kept the refugees in Turkey.” Corrected in original comment. The point though is they’re not staying in Turkey which is a huge part of the crisis in Europe.
What we hear about rape gangs in Rotherham. Increase in anti-Semitism. People dispossessed of their property to harbor refugees. Riots and car-burnings in the banlieus. Honor killings. Government suppression of facts about migrant chaos. Honor killings and FGM. Etc., etc., etc. All nonsense? OK, if you say so. I stand corrected.
The United States is a glorious country today (notwithstanding Barack Obama’s efforts to pull it down to the level of Burkina Faso). I’d like its decline arrested for as long as possible. While “pull up the drawbridge” is a short-sighted solution, it seems like our least worst option. Especially with respect to taking in tens/hundreds of thousands of unassimilable Muslim immigrants and throwing them onto an already bankrupt social service infrastructure (sucking benefits away from people who’re already here), especially when experience is proving out that some 2nd and 3rd generation Muslim immigrants turn into the most virulent Islamists.
Given the totality of the situation, I think what has to be done is to admit that Syria is a lost cause. The opportunity to remove Assad and instill a friendly regime is gone. The Free Syria Army is in tatters and its most effective units are Al Queda fighters. Continued chaos only serves to strengthen ISIS’ position. At this moment ISIS is of more direct concern to us than Assad. Assad has won, we need to make his victory complete in order to deal with ISIS. The Syrian refugees have lost all. The best we might be able to do for them is to pay ransom to Assad and Russia to spare them, and end the killing.
I think the shame of this should not be left unsaid. The incompetence of the Western response to this situation is utterly complete, and should be laid squarely at the feet of this fickle US administration.
Sadly I don’t trust Obama to even handle our surrender in this matter, as he is likely to forfeit more than he must.
No. The Russians understand what they would hazard if we they did something to make us want those bases gone. Nor would we have to topple Assad to destroy those bases – why do you think we would?
I don’t follow what your plan is here? You would say that if Russia did something in Estonia we would then bomb Syria to destroy Russian bases there? Your plan is to take one potential war in Europe and spread it to the Middle East? I thought you were the wise non-interventionist.
If that is the plan why even bother with the Syrian bases why not just have a real standing threat of bombing Russia directly? Maybe go for their much larger naval base on Crimea.
I thought the idea is we would use a non-violent means of screwing them.
I tend to agree, with a caveat. Even among the women, a small but dangerous fraction are terrorists. Even among the children, a small but dangerous fraction are terrorist weapons. These need to be carefully vetted before we admit them, and that’s not a fast process, especially where there are no background data.
Eric Hines
This is ridiculous. These bases’ hostage value derive only from two things: a belief on the part of the deterree that action will be taken against the bases and the value of the bases to Putin compared to the value of successfully taking a country on his doorstep.
Do you really think the current administration would move against these bases were any of the Baltics invaded? Would denying these bases have any value to us were a different administration willing to act against Russia in the event of a Putin invasion?
On what basis do you think these bases have any value to Putin beyond supporting his growing hegemony in Syria? The bases certainly are useless to him as accesses to the Med absent a land route into Syria or with a hostile Turkey blocking his passage out of the Black Sea.
Eric Hines
There’s nothing remotely humanitarian about a UN that routinely accuses Israel of terrorist atrocities for defending itself against terror attacks while ignoring Palestinian terror attacks against Israel.
There’s nothing remotely humanitarian about a UN that has one of its agencies admit a terrorist organization as a member of the agency like it did UNESCO with the Palestinian Authority.
Eric Hines
I am deeply involved with refugee communities in the U.S. Mostly Iraqi Yezidis and Christians who came here shortly before ISIS. They, and the Yezidis especially, are strongly opposed to bringing Muslim refugees here.
Their reason usually boils down to, “We came here to get away from them.” Interestingly enough, most of the Iraqis in the U.S. I know are die-hard Trump enthusiasts.
I wasn’t exactly expecting Assad’s approval. But that does complicate things a bit. I should have checked a map. Let’s say southwest Syria, rather than just south Syria. It still can work. It is Syria and the refugees are Syrian—supposedly. The entire country has got be more familiar, more home like, than…Germany or Sweden, for gosh sakes.
Except for the parts of the country which have been the territory of some other tribe and/or sect since time immemorial. Sykes -Picot. The gift that keeps on giving.
Anything other than bringing them here…it’s all I am sayin’.
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I don’t impute moral authority to the UN. The UN can be a convenient cloak for Security Council members. It would give us an “international” license to do what needs doing, provided that we’re there in force to make sure that the blue helmets don’t assault the local women.
Can anyone tell me, would it be possible to base an effort in Latakia and the surrounding region?
BTW, I flagged this egregious piece of condescension. If it gets redacted, take it up with me.
It’s appalling that you thought that remark fit for publication.
You don’t see the logic of a reciprocal (unstated) threat to vacate Russia’s only means of power projection into the Mediterranean? Seems kind of obvious to me.
Non-violent means are always preferable if they work. Presumably invading Estonia would only be contemplated if these were considered of secondary harm by Russia.
The threat of losing those bases is convincing as deterrent because it would be so easy for us to accomplish – the cost/benefit ratio very much in our favor – and nicely symmetric to the way in which Russia could invade Estonia easily at relatively little cost.
yep, though some women of an age don’t mind terribly being called “young lady” on occasion. Fact is, she is supposed to be worldly-wise given her background, but every time the prospect of confronting the Russians comes up as a topic here on Ricochet she starts getting hysterical and conjuring up their use of tactical nuclear weapons. Enough already. Paying customers expect better.
News from 2 years ago.
The West has been giving Turkey billions to keep the refugees there for a few years now. Nothing new here. Assad has been killing prisoners for years now. Nothing new here. Millions of Syrians have been flooding out of Syria for years. Nothing new.
Why should “the world” have to apologize for anything here? It’s their mess. They deal with it.
I’m fine with us giving aid to Turkey to keep them there. I’m certainly against their migration into Europe That’s insanity.
But there’s nothing for us to apologize. They made it pretty clear they don’t want Western involvement in their s**thole countries. So why should we help them now?
But I’ve been saying this for 2 years now: the best thing about Obama’s foreign policy is precisely that he’s doing…nothing…or at best indirect and low-level “aid” to whichever faction appears better at the moment. And helping the Kurds, which are the only group worth helping (and succeeding thanks to US help)
Imagine if we’d gone in to this mess when every “conservative” hawk in the GOP was crying about us bombing “Syria” (first bomb Assad, then bomb his enemies, then bomb their enemies, then…)
This is the best outcome: tens of thousands of dead Hezbollah/IRGC, Assad’s army gone, tens of thousands of dead Jihadists. Everybody loses, we win.
I make no brief for the current administration, only pointing out the correlation of forces. I can’t speak for Putin, and he may agree with you…but I doubt it. Russia already has access to the Baltic via their bases at Kaliningrad and St. Petersburg. Tartar is the only naval base they have in the whole Mediterranean.
They can use the latter so long as they are not at war with Turkey, which I suggest would be something they would seek to avoid.
Don’t get too caught up on the “bases” in Syria. It’s not as if Russia has a navy to put there in the first place, and its not as if they had anything there prior to the war. Their “base” at Tartus consisted of 10 guys in a room prior to the war.
Putin isn’t doing this for access to anything. He’s doing it simply as a show of force. You’re dealing with a cartoonish Mussolini character here: everything is about image, grandeur and appearing strong. (the Donald Trump of Russia, if you’ll excuse the comparison). This is just Putin retaliating for the sanctions and for the fact that his economy has tumbled by 50% in nominal terms in the past couple of years. It’s predicable dictator behavior.
We don’t need international license, or UN imprimateur, to do what’s right. We just need to do what’s right.
Eric Hines
You, always with the facts.
Where’s the vision, huh? Where’s the vision?
I don’t think you can.
Syria shares borders with a (fracturing) NATO member and with Israel, it lies on one of several pipeline routes between a huuuuge amount of oil and natural gas and one of the world’s richest markets for that, it hosts (?) at least one Russian base, a big chunk of it is currently being used as home base by a religious/terrorist movement that is resolved to conquer the Middle East (and maybe the world) or die trying.
Right now the choice in Syria seems to be between Assad and ISIS – and Assad is the lesser evil. Otoh, Assad’s continued rule is both utterly dependent on external support (right now from Russia) and in the long run deeply destabilising – because if they weren’t enraged with him before Syria’s Sunnis certainly are now.
On the bright side, if Assad rules with Russian help, the US doesn’t get the opprobrium of propping up this particular strong man, no matter how “least bad option” he is. Which is good, right?
What source of information about refugee/displaced person numbers would you believe?
Honest question.
And we do get better. Lots of it. From Ms Berlinski.
Self-important snark, though–we get lots of that, too.
Eric Hines
There’s very little oil flowing through Syria. It’s inconsequential. And whatever oil flowing through there has no problem flowing through there no matter who or how many people control it. Oil is flowing there right now. Everyone is buying and selling oil from each other, even if they are enemies over there. Business is business, even in Syria. Israel has no problems here either. You don’t hear them complaining. Why are we complaining for them?
As for the rest, who cares if they kill each other ad infinitium? Nothing we do is going to change that, nor do we have any reason to try and stop them. They said they don’t want us there. Fine. We don’t want to be there either.
There’s no real good sources of info. Many of the people who are registered in one country then move on to another country, and the numbers get double or triple counted. No doubt its a lot, over 4 million in total outside of Syria. But there’s no way of knowing.
The numbers in Europe are probably exaggerated as most are double or triple counted, first when they enter Greece, then Serbia or Hungary where they wait, then again in Germany or Sweden where they end up. Total numbers in Europe are probably about 500,000 I would guess (and probably half aren’t even Syrian at all). Fortunately it seems the flow is starting to end as politicians in Europe start to realize the massive blow-back they will get if they continue with this absurdity.
Interesting. But I believe they are expanding the base now to accommodate their bigger ships and submarines. But would love to hear more if you have anything else.
She can be very good, no argument there. Russia kind of throws her for a loop I have noticed. Tactical nukes in particular.
I doubt they are doing anything. There was no Russian “base” in Syria. Tartus is already a big civilian port deep enough to accommodate anything the Russians have. It’s also Syria’s main naval base (for the few rickety ships they have). There was a Russian Navy office in the port, with about 10 people there.
Russia maintained the option to dock its ships there. That’s all this “base” was. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_naval_facility_in_Tartus
Journalists have turned this into some mythical creature.
For those still hopeful for the overthrow of the Assad regime, you do realize that such a thing would lead to recriminations and veritable holocaust of the Alawi minority…right?
I don’t want to steer the discussion into a “which minority is more apt to be massacred” slog, but let us not forget why the Alawite minority has held so tightly onto power. It is a matter of survival for them.
People throw away the line liberally that Assad must go, but don’t seem to ever mention who the other losers would be in that scenario.