ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE: Turkish troops
Russia supports the Turkish-Syrian dialogue and stands for practical cooperation between the countries on the basis of the 1998 Adana Agreement.
Mariya Zakharova
During the October 17 press briefing, a spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, Mariya Zakharova, made the following comment:
Question: Yesterday, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov explained Russia’s position on the Turkish operation. He mentioned the 1998 Adana Agreement. How can this Agreement be applied in this case?
Maria Zakharova: I can once again highlight the statement made by Sergey Lavrov. He said Russia strongly advocates resolving the current situation through a dialogue between the Government in Damascus and the Kurdish forces. As you know, this dialogue has begun and is already yielding certain results. He also emphasised that Russia has always recognised Turkey’s legitimate interests in the security of its borders. At the same time, we stand for practical cooperation between Damascus and Ankara on the basis of the 1998 Adana Agreement. We absolutely clearly see the possibilities for this. The two countries’ military officials should determine the specific aspects of their interaction on the ground. Russia, for its part, is ready to assist them in such a dialogue.
Remarks by the Russian side became another demonstration of the ongoing cooperation of Turkey, the US and the Syrian-Russian bloc over the situation in northeastern Syria. In this situation versions that describe the current situation in northeastern Syria as a pre-agreed scenario that plays into the hand of Damascus, Moscow, Washington and Ankara look even more reliable. The only side that suffers setbacks from this cooperation is Kurdish militias and their separatist leaders.
The statement of the spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry on Russia’s recognition of Turkey’s legitimate interests in the security of its borders is a unprecedented signal. This indicates that the point of view provided in the analysis of Murat Mutlu, “Russian Gambit”, is lose to the reality. Mr. Multu’s main point was that Russia was the main initiator of the current processes in northeastern Syria.
pressTV-iran news President Donald Trump is expected to approve a new plan to keep a few hundred US troops in eastern Syria in order to help his Kurdish allies retain control of oil fields, the New York Times reports. The paper cited a senior administration official as saying Sunday that Trump is leaning towards a new Pentagon plan to keep a contingent of nearly 200 Special Operations forces at a few bases in eastern Syria, some near the Iraqi border. The plan would help Kurdish militants keep control of oil fields in the east and prevent Syrian government forces from reinstating control over territories occupied by foreign troops and their proxies. The so-called Syrian Democratic Forces, a Kurdish-led group of militias backed by the US, has switched sides to join Syrian government forces after Trump announced the American withdrawal. The new plan appears to be an attempt by the US to prise the Kurds away from the central government in Damascus and retain control over Syria’s oil fields. Trump seemed to hint at this outcome in a tweet on Sunday, saying, “We have secured the Oil.” Three other administration and Pentagon officials confirmed to the New York Times over the weekend that top American policymakers and commanders were discussing the option. Trump would need to approve any plan to leave forces anywhere in Syria in addition to the about 150 troops in al-Tanf garrison in the south-central part of the country near the Iraqi border. If endorsed, it would mark the second time in less than a year that Trump has reversed his own order to withdraw nearly all American troops from Syria.
Don’t fret. Tommy Jensen says US won. Being nation of winners. All else is by the by as it were.
Why would the Kurds still want to conspire with the US against Assad after the US threw them against the Turkish wolves? Maybe that local Arab Quislings would help, as the SDF consisted of more then just Turks, but after what has happened I can’t imagine many Kurds still want to help the US in this.
Don’t know the probability of the US succeeding, but this has been reported on many sites … https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security/us-mulls-leaving-some-troops-in-syria-to-guard-oil-pentagon-idUSKBN1X00S6
The Turks will have to gobble up much bigger chunks of Kurd territory before they fully surrender. I wonder how much of Syria will be lost forever due to the stubbornness of the Kurds?
see the Evil Zionist plan unfolding……………………..
Dialogue is of course the only long lasting solution in any conflict. Foreign troops can occupy, but never can control peoples thoughts. Not yet anyway :)
In fairness ,Turkey does have a problem with Kurds, within and without the country of Turkey, even though its a problem largely of the Turkish governments own making.
However, the Syrian government also has a responsibility to prevent Kurds who live in Syria from fuelling armed insurrection of Kurds within Turkey.
I fully realise that Turkey is a major state sponsor of terrorism within Syria , and has been from the outset of this destructive conflict. At some state though the guns have to be replaced by dialogue.
If not the US Coalition of Terror will have won another Divide and Rule conflict that will simmer for decades, and both the Syrian people and Turkish people will suffer greatly from the consequence’s of US military and economic terrorism.
turkey, syria, iraq and iran have a problem with kurds in their border areas and there is no way that anyone of those four countries would grant the kurds, of whom there are 30 million, any kind of sovereignty or their own fiefdom within either of the four countries – the kurds are gullible and easily led astray (by foes like israel) but that does not relieve them of responsibilities towards say syria or iraq and so on.
What is Russia on about; there is no dialogue over Syrian territory that the Turks and other NATO countries have violated. If the Turks want a safe zone then have it in Turkey not Syria.
“Turkey’s legitimate interest of securing its border,” in other words, Russia suppòrts Turkey invasion to Syria. Yes, we knew that since long time ago. Even more, Turkey has threaten Syria with a FULL-SCALE-WAR and, of course, Russia will agree with Turkey, everything the money can buy.
No, you misunderstood this. Lavrov talks about securing borders, not intrusions and terror. That was agreed in 1998, Adana agreement. Be patient and just watch.
wrong and just plain wrong and you can’t be more wrong than that – or as we say kein fingerspitzengefuehl for what goes on – turkey will be back behind its border with syria once the kurdish issue has been settled between the two. and ask yourself for what purpose would turkey take a stretch of ne syria – to settle kurds in there or allow syrian refuges to return to syria in which case why can’t they return to their original place of departure. take something calming and wait for the thing to settle along the lines sketched by russia and agreed by russia/turkey/iran and syria and that does not entail a bit of land-grabbing by turkey.
Russia supports dialogue, but not Erdogan regime troops intrusion into Syrian territory. NSA are sitting ducks, and this can further complocate into Turkish fiasco, just like we saw im Yemen happening even today. Don’t loose your faith, just be patient and watch.
LOL, how many time now have I read news articles concerning Assad’s views on rekindling the old Adana agreement, heaps of them, and what does he always say in those articles, “no chance, piss off, you’ve already had your chance and blew it, no second chances”, so I wonder if the Russians have any chance in hell of changing Assad’s mind, I doubt it very much. According to the old Adana agreement, sanctioning legal Turkish incursions into Syria when pursuing PKK terrorists across the border, was supposed to placate Turkey’s concerns over PKK cross border incursions, and it did up until the war started, but now I’m starting to think all that generous offer from Assad to Turkey really did in the end, was give Erdogan a taste for conquest. Everyone believes there’d be no way in the hell the US would actually attack an important NATO ally like Turkey over the Kurds, but I’m not so sure anymore, Trumps so unpredictable that even the people who like and support him often don’t know what his next move will be, so it’s getting to the point where it’s hard to say anything’s impossible. And articles just like this make me wonder if there’s any possibility of this improbable event occurring,
“In remarks to CNBC late Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the administration of President Donald Trump is “fully prepared” to take military action in the Middle East.
Insisting that Washington prefers to use its “diplomatic powers,” Pompeo said that they prefer “peace to war.”
“But in the event that kinetic action or military action is needed, you should know that President Trump is fully prepared to undertake that action,” he added.
Failing to state explicitly what action would mean “crossing the line,” he added that he does not want to intervene in Trump’s decisions.
“I do not want to get out in front of the president’s decision about whether to take the awesome undertaking of using America’s military might,” he added”.
https://www.dailysabah.com/diplomacy/2019/10/21/pompeo-says-us-fully-prepared-to-take-military-action-in-mideast
—————–
If it nothing else this new US statement is going to do one thing for certain, it’s going to infuriate Erdogan, I can’t wait to hear the rhetoric he spews tomorrow, LOL.