By Brandon TurbevilleOn March 2, U.S. troops were spotted moving in a convoy toward the Syrian city of Manbij in Northern Syria.
This new mobilization caught many Syrian researchers by surprise and has caused utter befuddlement on the part of the hapless mainstream average viewer. Why would the U.S., who has already invaded Syria, make another push inside Syria in such a limited way? And why Manbij? This is, of course, the confused response of the minority who actually know that there is even a conflict in Syria.
The mobilization and deployment comes as Turk Euphrates Shield troops exchanged fire with Kurdish forces (Manbij Military Council) in areas west of Manbij.
Spokesman for the Combined Joint Task Force for Operation Inherent Resolve, Col. John Dorrian, said that the deployment was a “deliberate action” taken in order to make sure that the forces of the US-led coalition were able to “deter aggression” and “keep the focus on defeating ISIS” elsewhere in Syria.
Dorrian’s statements were a response to Kurdish news agency Rudlaw’s tweet announcing the sighting of the American troops.
The deployment came shortly after Turkey’s Erdogan reiterated his demands that the Kurdish YPG leave Manbij and retreat to east of the Euphrates. Erdogan warned the YPG that they may be removed by force if they did not leave willingly. As mentioned earlier, Kurdish and Turk forces were trading fire as the deployment took place. It appears that U.S. is also attempting to deconflict the situation between the Kurds and the Turks.
However, it must be pointed out that the American deployment took place on the same day that the MMC reached a deal with Russia to hand over 20 villages between al-Bab and Manbij to the Syrian military. The SAA would effectively serve as the peacekeeping force and a buffer zone between Turkish forces and Kurdish fighters that have previously had a tense relationship to say the least with the Syrian government if the SAA had managed to do so.
Yet the United States has deployed troops to this location in an apparent bid to prevent the Syrian military from gaining more territory in the north of the country thereby endangering the “buffer zone” and ISIS protectorate set up by Turkey. It is also likely that the United States is attempting to act as a stand-in for Turkey so that the Turks are placated over their concerns of a Syrian Kurdish state on their borders.
Indeed, the United States policy toward Syria does not appear to have changed with the reins of the U.S. presidency. The United States and Turkey have long been discussing a plan for a joint military operation to invade Manbij and Raqqa under the guise of fighting the terrorists both states have been supporting and facilitating since day one.
Regardless, whether the U.S. is attempted to prevent the Syrian military from gaining new territory or whether it is merely attempting deconfliction between the Turks and Kurds, the fact is that the war on the Assad government and the Syrian military remains. Neither option is one that benefits the Syrian government in its war against Western-backed terrorists. It is only a question of U.S./Turk military positioning and strategic alignment from which to continue to launch its war of destabilization and destruction against the people of Syria and a resolute Syrian government unwilling to knuckle under to Western hegemony.
The U.S. deployment will temporarily halt the major conflict between the Turks and Kurds, both allies of the U.S., while preventing the Syrian military from regaining ground in the northern part of the country.
The U.S.-led coalition stated that it was aware of the location of the Syrian Military. “They are certainly aware of where we are, and we are aware of where they are. There is no intention between the two of there being any conflict against any party other than ISIS,” said Pentagon Spokesman Captain Jeff Davis.
While Turkey clearly has no problem allowing jihadist extremists on its border, it is quite concerned about Kurdish canton, especially one that shows promise of uniting with Kurds in Turkey. Still, Turkey’s “Buffer Zone” proposal, at first a plan to solidify ISIS supply lines, has extended to Manbij and Raqqa, much further south and east than originally announced.
Yet Turkey has stated publicly that it is not opposed to the Syrian military taking control of Manbij.
“We do not consider the scenario under which the Syrian Army would enter Manbij, as [a] negative one. The Kurdish self-defense units are leaving the city. The Syrian land must belong to the Syrians,” Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim said, quoted by Sputnik.
This is quite an ironic and out-of-character statement by Turkish officials who have done nothing but encourage Syrian land to be given to non-Syrians. The jury is out, however, on whether this public position is as a result of Russia’s increased cooperation with Turkey and thus the possibility that Russia has convinced Turkey of a more reasonable position toward Syria or whether it is simply more of Erdogan’s treachery, i.e. a public position that is different than a private position. After all, Turkish soldiers in Manbij and Raqqa is by no means Syrian land belonging to Syrians.
Regardless, to whom Syrian land belongs is not a determination that should be left up to the Turks or the Americans. Neither of these nations have the right to deploy troops to Syria and neither should have a say in the domestic makeup of the country. Turkey and the United States are foreign invaders, plain and simple and the terrorists they allege to be fighting are nothing but the foot soldiers in their war against a sovereign nation.
As Syrian President Assad stated in an interview with Chinese media,
Any foreign troops coming to Syria without our invitation or consultation or permission, they are invaders, whether they are American, Turkish, or any other one. And we don’t think this is going to help. What are they going to do? To fight ISIS? The Americans lost nearly every war. They lost in Iraq, they had to withdraw at the end. Even in Somalia, let alone Vietnam in the past and Afghanistan, your neighboring country. They didn’t succeed anywhere they sent troops, they only create a mess; they are very good in creating problems and destroying, but they are very bad in finding solutions.Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of eight books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, and The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, The Difference It Makes: 36 Reasons Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President and Resisting The Empire: The Plan To Destroy Syria And How The Future Of The World Depends On The Outcome. Turbeville has published over 1000 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.
