How much sovereignty will be able to "swallow" the Syrian Kurds?
analytics/
The inter-syrian negotiations on the future of Syria resumed in geneva. The main themes of the negotiation process associated with the constitutional changes reportedly coming in the syrian arab republic in the near future. The high heat of the debate, which was inherent in any attempt to agree on the syrian issue, this time could be called extraordinary. What added fuel to the already high flames of verbal duels? as it turned out, the new intensity occurred once in geneva, switzerland who arrived in the kurdish delegation made their own versions of further developments in Syria to resolve the situation in the future.
According to kurdish representatives, of a country like Syria in its present borders should not remain on the world map. The proposal of the kurds based on the fact that damascus "Should let syrian kurdistan". We are talking about the recognition of the independence of kurdish regions of Syria, the official authorities prior to making the relevant constitutional amendments. As soon as such statements become "Walk" on the sidelines of the geneva meeting, there was a huge information of a stir in countries such as Turkey, Iraq and Iran.
In Turkey, the kurdish proposal for the possible independence of the syrian part of kurdistan has caused a real storm of emotions. The media published articles in which various experts said it was impossible to support such proposals. The reason is clear: even if we assume that damascus suddenly "Let go" of the syrian kurdistan, that automatically raises the question of possible recognition of independence of "Their" kurdistan Ankara, baghdad and tehran. Short ethnodemographic reference: in Turkey there are about 17 million kurds (un data) – 21% of the total population in Iraq at least 6 million (16%), Iran – up to 7 million (9%). The number of syrian kurds before the war in Syria was estimated at 2 million people, today, various sources give values from 1. 1 to 1. 5 million (up 9% of the total population).
And has neither in Ankara nor baghdad nor tehran not to listen to kurdish "Clarification", stating that the alleged secession of the kurdish regions of Syria does not mean the separation of the kurdish regions of Turkey, Iraq and Iran. Supposedly there are some guarantees (not clear by whom the data) that only the syrian kurdistan could become independent, and the rest will remain the territorial components of the above three states of the region. That's just not all participants of the geneva talks by the idea and declared that there are some safeguards into it. In such a case, the kurdish delegation had a "Plan b". Say, if the recognition of the independence of syrian kurdistan, there will be problems, we propose a confederal arrangement with the central role of damascus and autonomous local councils.
In fact, this proposal is a variation of what the media has reported, citing Russian officials. The materials of the media it has been stated that the Russian parliamentary group discussed with syrian president Bashar Assad possible the process of reformatting the syrian arab republic to syrian republic (not only "Arab"), having a federal structure. A separate topic was held and the question of kurdish territories autonomy. According to the representative of the kurdish delegation at the talks in geneva, for the kurds it is very important that damascus supported the idea of broad autonomy, with its own language, local authorities, mass media.
About the economic aspect of the issue not openly say. But this aspect is, in fact, essential. The fact is that kurds today in Syria, no one (except for ig (* banned in russia)) is not forbidden to speak in their native language and form the bodies of local self-government counterparts up to the city councils. But the kurds have no legal grounds to dispose of the bulk of the money received by the state through the production and sale of hydrocarbons.
On the one hand at damascus, there is no reason to grant the kurds broad autonomy with its own system of economic management in the region. But there is a downside: almost every tenth in today's Syria is a kurd, and ignore the kurdish proposal in light of the fact that kurdish self-defense forces (after the army sar, of course) are the most numerous and combat-ready in the direction of fighting the same ISIS (*), damascus is unlikely to succeed. Moreover, the issue of federalization of Syria and the granting of broad autonomy to the kurds support both Moscow and Washington. Usa, despite serious concerns by Turkey, continue to provide significant support to the kurds in the North of the sar.
And one only suhpaykom this support is not limited. One evidence of this fact is to prepare the so-called democratic union offensive in raqqa. In Western and middle Eastern press, there is evidence that a large-scale offensive on the syrian "Capital" of the terrorists of the so-called "Islamic State" (*) will be initiated combined forces in april – with the support of the american coalition. Currently near raqqa observed increase in the concentration of the kurdish militia and other forces supported by Washington.
The liberation of raqqa from ISIS will be for Washington not so much direct support to the kurds as an opportunity to subsequently announce their own "Big victory" over terrorism in syria. Why Russia is ready to support the autonomy of the syrian kurdistan? first, it can really affect further developments in terms of conflict resolution – not to oppose the kurds of damascus, and to make them similar in value (damascus) figures on the syrian chessboard. Secondly, the autonomy of the syrian kurdistan will keep, however mildly, "Toned" Ankara, which is too far-reaching plans in this region.
Navalny and his friends
A Boyko, the correspondent of Russian service bi-Bi-si, reports from Moscow: on 26 March was unauthorized anti-corruption campaign, came out to 8 000 people, more than 500 arrested by the police. And arrested the organizer of an a...
The seals or SEAL Team 6
After the publication of American "green berets" I fell down numerous requests to share similar structures of the American army. Especially often asked about the Delta force. However, it seemed to me more appropriate to talk about...
Modern special forces. How is it different from the special forces of the 20th century?
That's why I love our readers, so that in one or two sentences they can set the task so that no apertures. Just today printed an article about Chinese MTR. And once the job... here is a quote from a comment one of the readers "IN"...