The likewise ever-hawkish editors of the Wall Street Journal hold views similar to those of the WaPo editors:
Mr. Erdogan says the U.S.-armed Kurdish fighters in Syria, known as the YPG, have ties to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a domestic Kurdish insurgency within Turkey. On that exaggerated claim he justifies an exercise that could amount to ethnic cleansing. Mr. Erdogan last month proposed a “safe zone” extending some 20 miles into Syria from the Turkish border, where he would resettle millions of Syrian refugees. This could require the forcible resettlement, or worse, of Kurds already living in the area.
Mr. Erdogan seems to have believed that the U.S. would help in this exercise. But after a phone call with the Turkish strongman, Mr. Trump made clear that Turkey is on its own. That also means so are the Kurds, and the U.S. withdrew its troops from two border posts. A Kurdish spokesman tweeted, “We are not expecting the US to protect NE #Syria. But people here are owed an explanation.”
This looks like a betrayal of the YPG, which lost 11,000 soldiers fighting against ISIS. America armed the Kurds in that fight, and they trusted the U.S. when they were asked to dismantle defensive positions near the Turkish border as part of the buffer-zone negotiations with Ankara. The Kurds are less likely to aid an insurgency in Turkey if they’re allowed to govern themselves in a safe area in Syria policed by the U.S. and Turkey.
Okay, let’s start with the Kurds. The Kurds did not fight DAESH on our behalf but to defend themselves and their homeland. They would have opposed DAESH under any circumstances.
I’m not as convinced that the Kurds are modern liberal democrats as the editors of the WSJ and WaPo and other U. S. worthies seem to be. It’s hard for me to believe that about any group whose heads of “political parties” are coincidentally traditional tribal chieftains. What I think has happened is that the Kurds have done a great PR job in Washington. Any hypothetical Kurdish state will necessarily be carved out of Turkey, Iraq, and Iran and I find it totally unsurprising that the non-Kurdish peoples of those countries are not down with the deal. If the Kurds want their own country they should do it the way other people do—they should seize it. And it is not in our interest to help them do so.
What in the world do the editors see as the endgame? Should the U. S. colonize all of North Africa, the Middle East, and West Asia? Presumably, they assume that everyone else in the world, e.g. the Russians and Chinese, would sit idly by as we did that.
Or do they believe that multi-ethnic states are unsustainable? What about the United States? Either way doesn’t that make them white supremacists?