Turkish Election Results and Implication

[Montmorency]

I'm not optimist about Rojava. Their future is almost totally dependent on America's willingness to finance them and the US soldiers present there. There was also the social aspect, because backwards and primarily agricultural eastern Syria could hardly tolerate Ocalan's somewhat incoherent philosophy. However, according to some people who have traveled to YPG-dominated areas, the Kurds have softened up a lot their ideology, in order to find new allies, maintain public order and enforce their alliance with the US.

On the other hand, there are many ethnic and religious tensions, which undermine the stability of Rojava. There was an insurgency lately, where many videos of assassinated YPG commanders were uploaded in tweeter, but nothing new yet, so I guess it has been suppressed. The commentators were extremely edgy, organising polls about their next victim and etc. The main obstacle, in my opinion, is the rapidity of YPG's advance, although they still haven't seriously threatened Hajin for more than half a year.

The cause was that their foreign backers wanted to grab the most important centers (Raqqa, Deir ez-Zhor, Tabqa dam, oil wells) before the Syrians and these objectives were generally achieved (with the striking exception of Deir ez-Zhor). For that to be possible, though, they allied with numerous shady groups and individuals, former members or allies of daesh. That's not good morally and practically speaking. It hurts SDF's integrity and unity and I'm sure that these opportunists will not hesitate to backstab the Kurds. Accepting everyone as your friend is great in the short term, but it will cause difficulties in the long term.

Do you have sources for these claims? I've been following the situation in Rojava for a while now but I think sometimes Western Leftists are a little naive about the state of the revolution and I'd like to read something from a more neutral perspective.

Also, what do you think is incoherent about Ocalan's philosophy?

So, is the situation more Spanish syndicalists or Makhnovshchina?

I don't know anything about Ocalan.

How about their social policies?

In 2013 an attempt to conquer Ukraine seemed an extreme fantasy, not only to the world, but to Ukraine and Russia as well. Not so in 2014 and later. When the whole country is governed by whims of a single person the incredible may come true. If Putin's counterparts in Belorus or Kazakhstan step down (or die which is more likely) and the new leaders displease Russia, it may repeat its Crimean/Donbas scenario.

No, it's exactly what we would have expected in the situation given the disruption to the Russian order. The surprising thing was that Russia actually had very little ability to achieve its objectives outright and had to settle for a stalemate. Let me repeat that: Putin failed to restore even the status quo in Ukraine. Russia's constraints of action, more than its power, are highlighted in the Ukraine debacle, where Putin could only do the bare minimum of seizing Crimea/fomenting insurgency and had to go abroad to Syria to gain leverage. Even developing non-military means to undermine the entire West turned out easier for Putin than just "solving" the Ukraine problem outright.

And you think this shows Russia has the ability to just invade Kazakhstan or something? Why would they? Russia has CSTO, pipelines, millions of guest workers, and any other number of political and economic levers to pull to manage these countries, which will never be pro-American to the exclusion of Russia; they have no special connection to Europe or America, but they do to Russia. If China came to dominate Central Asia, it would be even more foolhardy to imagine that Russia would think of resolving the problem through military means. If all the Central Asian Muslims suddenly became anti-Russian terrorists, all the more so.