Monday, October 7, 2019

Transactional Loyalty a Bad Look

Generally, I'm a Trump supporter. Still, when he does something I believe to be against U.S. interests, I will say so. One such act is in today's news.

Fox News reports the U.S., which has had troops with the Kurds in northern Iraq, will be pulling them out. We are basically green-lighting a Turkish invasion of the area. Gatestone Institute has an even more downbeat story on the same action.

The Kurds and Turks are age-old enemies. Unlike the Turks, the Kurds don't have a country, living scattered across eastern Turkey, plus northern Syria and Iraq.

Culturally, the Kurds along with the Israelis are just about the only semi-trustworthy people in the region. Turks and Arabs, not so much. And as stateless people, the Kurds need us as a friend.

The Kurds were our main effective ground force against ISIS. Now we leave them to the tender mercies of the much more heavily armed Turkish.

Next time we seek local allies in a third world conflict, we may have a tough time recruiting any. Particularly if people there remember the Kurdish example demonstrating our very transactional idea of loyalty. Basically, we're loyal if we need you, not if you need us.

Later ... there is some talk that the Senate, controlled by Republicans, may slap Trump's hands over abandoning our relationship with the Kurds. The thousand GIs we had there weren't costing us much $$ or losing many men to hostile fire; basically they served as a tripwire to keep the Turks from attacking. Certainly their presence angered Erdogan, a would-be sultan-hegemon.