Et Tu Brute: the US betrayal of the Kurds and what it means going forwards

On 7 October 2019, President Trump elected to withdraw US troops deployed in the North East of Syria where they were cooperating with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) a multi-ethnic alliance of militias with predominantly Kurdish leadership fighting under a single banner against the Islamic State (IS), al-Qaeda affiliated groups, and Turkish-backed Syrian rebel forces. Cooperation between the SDF and US proved fruitful in combatting IS with a number notable victories such as the capture of Raqqa, the de facto capital of IS, in October 2017 and Baghuz, the alleged last strong hold of IS, in March 2019. 

In October 2015, groups based in North Eastern Syria agreed to formally come together following longstanding cooperation in the region, simultaneously establishing the SDF and its political wing, the Syrian Democratic Council, responsible for governing Syria’s North Eastern region — the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. Notably, the Kurdish militia ‘People’s Protection Units’ (YPG)  contributed the majority of fighters and established itself as the primary leadership force within the alliance. Soon after, the US began contributing material and personnel support to SDF operations against IS.  

The SDF-US partnership, while effective in combatting the presence of IS in Syria, was not without controversy. Turkey, a longtime US ally and NATO member, considers the YPG (and thus the SDF) to be an extension of the designated terrorist organization 'Kurdistan Worker’s Party' (PKK), a Kurdish nationalist organization based in Turkey’s Eastern and South Eastern regions. The ongoing Kurdish-Turkish conflict dates back to the late 1970s when the PKK was founded to conduct a limited insurgency against the Turkish state in response to long-term systematic oppression of Kurds. Since then, joint Turkish-Kurdish attempts at finding a peace agreement have repeatedly devolved into military clashes between the two parties. Turkish opposition to the YPG stems from the YPG-PKK links and concerns over an autonomous Kurdish region on its border provoking further action for Kurdish self-rule in Turkey. 

In August 2016, Turkey initiated Operation Euphrates Shield, crossing the Syrian-Turkish border in an action directed against both IS and Kurdish groups in the region. Clashes in locations where IS was not preset resulted in increased US concern over the Turkish-Kurdish rivalry, prompting Brett McGurk, then Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL [IS], to tweet on behalf of the US Department of Defense: “We want to make clear that we find these clashes — in areas where #ISIL is not located — unacceptable and a source of deep concern." This trend continued well through 2019 as Turkish forces would intermittently target Kurdish groups in spite of US and other Coalition nations objections and discussed peace agreements fell through. US Special Forces occasionally resorted to flying US flags in towns where they were imbedded with Kurdish fighters in an attempt to avoid being targeted in Turkish operations. Nonetheless, the status quo appeared to be occasional skirmishes between Turkish and Kurdish forces resulting in harsh words from states such as the US and Russia. In spite of recurring threats from Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to address the issue of Kurdish forces on the Turkish border with an armed response, it appeared that potential repercussions from the US were sufficient to prevent any followthrough. 

US officials frequently reiterated that the SDF, including the YPG, were invaluable allies in the fight against IS and over Summer 2019 negotiations began for a demilitarized buffer zone between the SDF and Turkey in an attempt to deter continued clashes between the two allies in Northern Syria. On 7 August, a deal was reached eventually resulting in a 115km (71mi) ‘Safe Zone’ free of any YPG — and Women’s Protection Units (YPJ), an all female Kurdish force partnered with the YPG in the SDF —  presence which would be jointly patrolled by US-Turkish forces. Notable terms of the deal included the disassembly of SDF defensive border fortifications along the Turkish-Syrian border and an assurance that Turkey would not conduct any operations in the region. Despite occasional complaints from both the SDF and Turkey regarding the behavior of other parties, the plan appeared off to a good start.

However, speaking in front of the United Nations General Assembly in late September, President Erdogan an earlier demand for the buffer zone to be extended. On 1 October, the Turkish deadline remained unmet, casting the survival of the deal in doubt and renewing fears of a long-planned Turkish invasion. On 5 October, as US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper stated the US was “working to make the security mechanism functional”, the SDF reportedly began reconstructing defensive fortifications while units along the border were placed on high alert. In a surprise move, the Trump Administration announced on 7 October that US troops were being removed from the region in an apparent approval of a planned Turkish incursion. The controversial reversal of the demilitarized zone plan was met with condemnation, sparking outcries of betrayal in Northern Syria, provoking bi-partisan political disapproval in the US and generating substantial objections from veterans and officials who had worked alongside the SDF. 

Only two days later, on 9 October, Turkey began its assault into the North-East of Syria with ‘Operation Peace Spring’. The alleged objectives of the operation are to create the Turkish-envisioned buffer zone for Syrian refugees and to expel the SDF from the area. While reliable information on current casualties remain hard to come by as fighting continues on the ground, the BBC estimates some 100,000 people have been displaced as a result of the Turkish offensive.

Now, what implications does this flagrant betrayal of the SDF have in the region and geopolitically?

For starters, the question of what will happen to IS fighters being detained by SDF forces? Former Presidential Envoy McGurk had tweeted following the White House statement that President Trump had given a gift to IS. The SDF was responsible for holding some 10,000 people accused of fighting on behalf of IS as well as a further 70,000 women and children believed to be the family members of IS fighters. The SDF had repeatedly warned that a Turkish offensive would likely result in a diversion of resources, including troops, away from crucial IS detention centers. Senior SDF official Redur Xelil has exclaimed that the SDF would elect to defend its territory and people over continuing to prioritize securing IS prisoners. He further stated that cells in the North-Eastern cities of Qamishli and Hassakeh are now back in operation following car bombings in each city, claimed by IS. As fighting worsens and more SDF elements are redeployed from their guard duties, IS fighters are awarded increasing opportunity to escape and retake arms. A massive resurgence of IS presence in Syria — a ridiculous notion merely months ago — seems ever more likely. 

Second, what kind of signals does this send to US allies? The sudden reversal of US policy with the SDF draws into question this administrations dependability and predictability. Some Israeli media outlets and politicians have expressed concern for the Kurds and over President Trumps’ trustworthiness. Evidently, the message received was that the US abandons its allies. Other, US-backed groups may see the US reversal as a clear sign that Trump indeed wants out of Syria, regardless of the cost. Future cooperation with the US may appear risky given the potential for sudden abandonment, begging the question: where should groups turn for support? Kurdish general Mazloun Kobani has been forced to turn to Russia and the Russian-backed Assad regime in Damascus for support against Turkish advances

Ultimately, it is hard to see the President’s decision as anything other than a disgraceful betrayal. The SDF, once staunch allies in the fight against IS, face annihilation at the hands of the Turks and look poised to turn to US regional rivals for a lifeline. An IS resurgence appears ever more likely, which in and of itself presents a significant security risk to the US given IS history of targeting Westerners and pursuing a campaign of terror attacks in Europe and North America. It appears as though the President’s decision may have undermined eight years of US and allied efforts in Syria, with massive geopolitical ramifications for the US going forwards. 

 Banner image.