Did Russian betray the Kurds in Afrin (the Kurdish city in Northern Syria that borders Turkey)?
The Russian political analyst Valeriy Pyakin explains why that’s not true and why Russia never betrays their partners.
There are allegations against Russia that Moscow has betrayed the Kurds in Afrin. It’s because Moscow withdrew its military from there thus allowing Turkey to begin the military operation called “Olive Branch”.
Watch the segment of “Question – Answer” where Pyakin explains in details why Russia did not betray the Kurds:
Read the full English translation of the video below:
A question from Margarita who wants you to comment on the statement of the Kurds about the “Moscow’s betrayal in Afrin in favor of Erdogan”.
She quotes: “Russia had military representatives in Afrin for 2 years. There were certain agreements. But Russia betrayed us, ignoring all previous agreements. Russia turned out to be a state without principles.”
End of quote.
Russia never betrays anybody.
Russia always fulfills its committed obligations no matter how difficult it is.
If Russia was such as described in this statement, it would have never enter the war in Syria.
When everybody was counting the days till Assad falls and gets the same fate as Gaddafi.
In these conditions, against all odds, for Russia to enter the war? For any political leader this would’ve been suicide.
Yet, Russia has a leader who is a Statesman.
So we moved in on the side of Syria, defending our own interests, within the Russia’s global policy frame.
We fulfilled our obligations.
So the Kurds who want to have their own state should not distort here.
Btw, I’ve talked about it many times that this issue sooner or later has to be resolved and the Kurds should have their own state. The question is what kind of state and how it will be formed…
In principle, the most perspective has a state based on the Turkish Kurds with access to the Mediterranean sea after Turkey collapses. With Kurdish autonomy in Iraq and Syria.
So what happened? And what are the agreements in the statement about?
When Russia entered the war against ISIS, I repeat, the situation in Syria was very very difficult.
So all the powers that were fighting ISIS in any way were considered to a certain extent allies.
The Kurds in Northern Syria were such allies.
But these Kurds have decided that their political cover from the US is way more strong, beneficial and promising.
In 2015 nobody argued with them.
Ok, you’ve made your choice, let’s coordinate our actions against ISIS.
And that was the agreement.
Russia was just not capable of promising anything to the Kurds while they were under the political cover of the United States.
Russia could only speak for the government in Damascus.
Only for Assad.
And Assad was talking about the territorial reunification of whole Syria.
What did they talk about in Moscow? About restoring territorial integrity of Syria.
So terrorism must be destroyed and Syria must be one united country.
This was the base of all political agreements, including those with the Kurds in Northern Syria.
We defeated ISIS for a large in Syria and the subject of restoring the Syrian state came up.
And suddenly, influenced by Washington, the Kurds are saying:
“We have our own territory.”
“We want this territory where Kurds are living to be an independent state.”
And we must say that the Kurds also added territories that are not populated by Kurds.
Like that, under the noise, why not take them when you seemingly fight ISIS and you have to send your military formations there anyway.
And then under the noise they forgot that they have to return the territory to Syria. Including the territory where they live.
And then have a political dialogue and negotiate the status of the Kurdish state in Syria.
So this is how it must begin. A united Syria. And the right of the people for own statehood.
But they did another thing.
“The United States give us weapons.”
“They tell us that we will have our own republic.”
“And this way we can also oppose Turkey.”
See, the provocation was coming from the United States all the time.
And the provocation was to inflict a war between Russia and Syria against Turkey.
But Russia and Syria, despite the processes that were taking place, said: “Why would we sacrifice Russian and Syrian soldiers for the interests of the US or Turkey?”
“No guys, you created this, that’s why for us it’s easier to leave right now. You figure out your obligations. And no matter what we will restore the territorial integrity of Syria.”
“So, do it.”
“Just don’t racketeer us.”
Kurds: “Oh, you Syrians, you have to restore the territorial integrity.”
Russia: “Sort the things out with your political cover.”
“Are you still with the US against Turkey and Syria? Or you are going to pursue your own interests and you own state?”
That’s how to pose the question.
And Russia worked within these parameters.
We didn’t promise anyone that we would die for their political interests.
We went there with our own concepts of waging war, with our own interests. We follow them. And we do not break our words.
Because a broken word is expensive.