Inspired by the vileness of Votel and far too many evil psychopaths: Syria safe zones ‘a viable concept’ top US military commander says
Washington Post Feb 23/17
Yu-Ming Liou (@YuMingLiou) is a PhD Candidate in international relations at Georgetown University.Trump’s plan for Syria safe zones could put civilians at even more risk
Megan A. Stewart (@Megan_A_Stewart) is an Assistant Professor of International Security at American University’s School of International Service and a Post-Doctoral Research Associate at the University of Virginia.
Sean Spicer said Tuesday that “safe havens” in Syria are “at the top of the president’s foreign policy agenda.” Indeed, President Trump has advocated the establishment of “safe zones” within Syria since his campaign. There are many obvious problems with such a policy. It would probably require buy-in from Russia, Turkey and possibly the Syrian government, all of whom have raised objections. Beyond these diplomatic challenges, their establishment may violate the United Nations charter.
Establishing and protecting safe zones is likely to be enormously expensive, particularly if it involves ground forces. Despite Trump’s claims that the Saudis and other oil-rich Gulf states will foot the bill, they have made no commitments to do so. Given the fragmentation of territorial control in Syria, it is unclear where the Trump administration intends to establish these safe zones. Regardless of where they are established, the fragmented and fluid lines of control will likely make it difficult to prevent infiltration by armed groups, including the Islamic State. (PKK/YPG and others)I didn't believe Trump's claim that the Saudis and others would pay... this was hyperbole designed to appeal to the audience. Saudi finances are in a mess. I took Trumps claim to mean the US would funnel money through the GCC to obfuscate their involvement
I've added PKK/YPG because they are one and the same terrorist group. No matter the rebrand.
Additionally PKK looms large in this study, as you will find out.
Our recently published research raises another disturbing possibility: the establishment of safe zones for refugees in one part of Syria could make civilian victimization by rebel groups, such as the Islamic State,(PKK/YPG) even worse in other areas of the country.
When rebel groups have access to some form of territorial sanctuary from rival forces (whether in the form of safe zones or foreign bases), they kill many more civilians on average than rebels without external sanctuaries. Both safe zones and foreign bases have similar effects on rebel groups: They provide a place free from government or rival forces where rebels can recuperate, recruit and train fighters, use as a staging ground for military operations, propagandize and expand their resource base. In short, safe zones increase the rebel groups’ lethality.In short safe zones increase rebel groups lethality- The authors of this piece cite many previous instances of exactly this occuring- therefore it is not an unknown for the Trump administration.
At the same time, safe zones or foreign bases often effectively sever the connection between the rebel groups and the civilians they claim to be fighting for. Rebels no longer have to compete with the government to win civilian “hearts and minds” to survive and fight. Rather than protecting civilians, they prey on them (even when those civilians make up their theoretical base of support).
Rebels with external sanctuary become, as economist Mancur Olson coined them, “roving bandits”: able to simply take what they need by force from civilians and return to their protected safe zone or sanctuary.So called 'safe zones' are created for this specific reason, to up the misery level for civilians. There is nothing humanitarian or "safe" about them- They will not stem the refugee flow- A simply absurd claim.
The authors cite incident after incident- Known outcomes- same every time. Which suggests quite clearly this is the desired outcome- no matter what nonsensical assertions made.
This is how the drug/organ/human trafficking is expanded exponentially- This feeds the black markets. The black budgets and covert ops- Only a moron, habitual liar or complete psychopath would extol the virtue of 'safe zones' as anything but inducements to increase human misery. I'll cite the previous incidents all together as the ending for this post.
"The results of our statistical analysis show that rebel groups with only external territorial control (e.g., safe zones, foreign bases, or refugee camps) — an increasingly realistic scenario in Syria as both the Islamic State and non-Islamic State rebels continue to lose territory in contested zones to government forces backed by Russian air power — kill, on average, twice as many civilians as those that control territory within the theater of conflict and lack access to sanctuary."Rebels groups in safe zones kill on average twice as many civilians as those that control territory within the conflict theatre with no access to sanctuary- think about that!!!
"Should a similar safe zone (as in Iraq) be established in Syria, particularly near Islamic State (PKK/YPG) territory, it would be all too easy for a rebel group such as the Islamic State to take advantage of this new sanctuary. The Islamic State (PKK/YPG) will not be flying planes over the territory to be shot down, nor does it rely on conventional ground forces. Even if ground troops were the solution, the Pentagon estimated in 2016 that securing safe zones would take between 15,000 to 30,000 troops, perhaps inviting a ground war between the United States and the Islamic State — precisely what the Islamic State wants."Precisely what the US and company want also- The authors exclude that point. I don't.
Notice the authors of this study it it would be all too easy for A rebel group- any rebel group, not just ISIS- ANY rebel group? Al Sham, PKK/YPG /ISIS all of them
Recall my saying I would list the previous safe zone/sanctuary atrocities?
The authors of the study mention two groups neither of who were in a designated safe zone as is being bandied about by Trump and before that Obama- but they operated outside of the theatre of conflict.
" The Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) were primarily based outside the theater of conflict (in Ethiopia and India, respectively) there were periods characterized by high civilian victimization and predation"Now here is where we get to the "safe zones" designated by UN/ NATO/US/France etc.,
What party established the 'humanitarian safe zones' at Srebrenica? The UN
"Attempts at establishing humanitarian safe zones have failed, sometimes with terrible consequences, as in the 1995 massacre at Srebrenica. More civilians could be put at risk by safe zones purportedly established to protect them"The UN established that zone, allegedly, to protect civilians- While aspects of what went on their have been massaged for political reasoning- People were not protected- Civilians died. Because it was more or less a battle ground- I'll give this over to Saker
France administered a 'safe zone" in Rwanda - How very humanitarian that was!
"The French government’s administration of a Rwandan “safe zone” in 1994 should serve as a clear and terrifying reminder: members of the interahamwe, the perpetrators behind the Rwandan genocide, used these zones to continue the genocide"
And finally we get to that 'safe zone' established in Iraq:
Safe for who? Safe for the PKK to grow in strength and attack Turkey, so that Turkey could be kept on a short NATO leash- As the PKK grew in the protected strength of the US NFZ they were trained by Israel and the US for the role they are now playing in reshaping the region under many labels- PKK/YPG/TAK- an alphabet soup terror group created by alphabet agencies
My theory, years old, has not waivered from that of the PKK and co being a functioning 'stay behind' irregular militia-
March 07/17 update: I finally found the post where it was very first posited that the PKK is a stay behind army- coddled by NATO- the safe zone which served to strengthen the PKK further bolsters my contention November 2014: Kurd/ISIS Symbiosis & the Impending Destruction of Turkey
My hypothesis from 2.5 years ago, which includes a small checklist :
" In reality the PKK appears to have always functioned as a stay behind army.
A NATO stay behind army. Always at the ready to keep Turkey in check."
Back to the Safe Zones article
The Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK) is another rebel group that benefited directly from a safe zone created in a foreign territory. The northern Iraq no-fly zone was established in March 1991 to protect Iraqi Kurds from Saddam Hussein and was unrelated to the Turkey-PKK conflict. The safe zone created a de facto independent Iraqi Kurdistan, providing sanctuary to the PKK.
With no government forces on the ground, the PKK quickly established bases in Iraqi Kurdistan that it used to launch a widespread campaign of attacks on civilian and government targets in Turkey. Our research leveraged this quasi-natural experiment to test the effect of the implementation of the no-fly zone on the PKK’s victimization of civilians.
We found that PKK civilian casualties — as well as the number of attacks on civilians — spiked dramatically after the 1991 establishment of the northern Iraq NFZ.
Using data from the Global Terrorism Database, we found that in 1990 the PKK committed fewer than 50 attacks on unarmed targets. In 1992, the PKK committed more than 150 attacks on unarmed targets. This dramatic increase subsided only after a major Turkish counterinsurgency offensive culminating in an invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan in 1995.
Are safe zones really a solution for Syria-
Or are they the guarantors of dissolution? And I'm talkin' both meanings
- the closing down or dismissal of an assembly, partnership, or official body.
- debauched living; dissipation.