Press "Enter" to skip to content

Together with the US absconding, the EU is facing a day of reckoning over Turkey’s Syria Effort

Following a Sunday call between US President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Trump government declared on 6 October 2019 the United States will pull out its remaining troops out of north-east Syria, a region also called Rojava that is under the control of this Kurdish-led Syrian Army (SDF).

As anticipated, Turkey perceived the pull-out of all US troops as a green light because of its long-desired army incursion to the Rojava area. Turkey has, since then, started an aggressive military effort that has resulted in a mounting death toll and the displacement of a hundred million civilians based on the United Nations. Turkish proxies, largely Jihadist groups utilized in this military effort, have supposedly committed acts of warfare and there are fears of demographic changes in addition to the ethnic cleansing of the Kurds.

You will find tens of thousands of IS fighters in prisons safeguarded from the SDF. The continuing fighting between the Kurdish-led SDF and the Turkish military has loosened the clasp of this SDF over those prisons and has caused former IS fighters to split out.
Aside from the immediate catastrophic consequences for the Kurds that have freed their regions out of Islamic State (IS) with enormous sacrifice, the US troops’ pull-out will possess enormous safety consequences for Europe too. You will find tens of thousands of IS fighters in prisons safeguarded from the SDF. The continuing fighting between the Kurdish-led SDF and the Turkish military has loosened the clasp of this SDF over those prisons and has caused former IS fighters to split out. This will, it’s thought to create a conducive atmosphere for its revival of IS in Syria and Iraq, which will subsequently have a stimulation effect on IS sleeper cells throughout Europe. The Turkish invasion hasn’t just destabilized that the EU’s boundaries, but has also generated a potentially catastrophic scenario for Europe’s internal safety in the long run.

The main issue is not whether Europe needs to respond, but instead with which awareness of urgency and gravity? Thus far, neither the EU nor its member countries have coped with all the Turkish invasion of north-east Syria having a complete amount of seriousness. Aside from condemnations, the Council of the European Union has failed to agree to some other collective EU sanctions on Turkey, and it’s very much the matter of the hour if the EU leaders will succeed in doing this. It’s apparent that together with the danger of opening the gates’ for its 3.6 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, the EU was once more powerful armed forces by Erdogan’s Turkey.

That having been said, it doesn’t signify that the EU is completely out of this film. France and Germany can lead collective European attempts of a variety of ready member nations’ to discover military and diplomatic options for northern Syria. There’s a precedent for it.

The French foreign ministry, Laurent Fabius, known as his EU counterparts back from their vacation. To illustrate the feeling of urgency with which France responded at the moment, in 1 moment, a colleague overseas minister had suggested they are on vacation and rest. Fabius had responded by stating”no time for napping now; we remainder when we perish.” In that assembly, the foreign ministers decided that EU member nations were permitted to offer military help to the Kurdish Peshmerga fighters into their struggle against IS. That choice, taken from the EU context, paved the way for a variety of EU member countries, such as Germany, to assist the Kurdish Peshmerga and in so doing, changing the balance of power in favor of the Kurds.

For Europe, the price of inaction may consequently be higher than just taking immediate and firm action, even though that would place (trade) relations with Turkey in danger.
Along with the EU, being a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council enables France to pursue additional military and diplomatic choices. France could pose an urgent resolution from the UN Security Council calling for the institution of a”no-fly zone” over northern Syria. Meanwhile given the danger connected to the revival of IS, France, Germany, and other enthusiastic European nations could work in the context of the International Coalition against IS on building a ground drive in northern Syria.

The Trump government was clear that it has no interest in bearing the expense of equilibrium in northern Syria. The danger of the Islamic State’s resurrection or the security of Kurdish allies are no longer valid arguments for the US to maintain its troops in northeast Syria. In the middle of Turkey’s military effort will cause more escalation and humanitarian catastrophe, although it might also be the beginning of serious long-term dangers to Europe’s safety.

For Europe, the price of inaction may consequently be higher than just taking immediate and firm action, even though that would place (trade) relations with Turkey in danger. It’s a moment of truth for its European Union and its member countries to show the world which they’re decided to act aggressively in safeguarding human rights in addition to maintaining Europe’s safety.