Thread by @aaronstein1

Change in US language noteworthy. The original framing for the Syrian Democratic Forces was “opposition forces who fought with the US against ISIS”

Dunford’s counterpart is Yasar Guler, the POC for the Manbij Roadmap.

Not sure increased US specificity is good for TR

https://twitter.com/vmsalama/status/1084881067612487682

And I am not sure a buffer zone — in the US framing of the issue — would have Turks in it.

The Dunford visit is also in addition to the next High Level Working Group meeting scheduled in February.

Turkish readout emphasizes Manbij Roadmap

tccb.gov.tr/basin-aciklama…

And suggests that the two sides talked about a safe zone (undefined and w/out specificity)

All talk of Turkey and the ISIS fight has melted away. This is consistent with the non-paper Bolton handed Kalin. One would expect the US is waiting for a Turkish response to these points, including how to protect SDF — likely to be a point of continued tension.

This is because US military has concluded it can finish off the “territorial remnants” of IS within the 120 withdrawal timeframe — so no need for Turks to take over. Emphasis then is about force protection in leaving and maintaining gains

Which brings us back to the US-TR back and forth: US and TR did promise to coordinate. And its been a rough ride. But, as I read it, final agreement with TR on anything is NOT REQUIRED to withdraw. (Unless of course POTUS changes his mind).

But — w/ force protection in mind — there are two issues: 1) The buffer zone floated would presumably have Turkish friendlies in it. Those friendlies are hostile to the SDF and the US military; 2) And therefore, w/in that dynamic, it is how to structure a safe US withdrawal

Where green-on-blue risks are mitigated (with the non-SDF elements + pissed off SDF). This is where I would expected tensions with DoD (tasked with implementing) and SRS, who is negotiating something else entirely

The weirdest thing about the roadmap emphasis is that the US had submitted names to Turkey to start the vetting process, per the Roadmap, in early December. Turkey had won this argument. Then the RTE speech warning of imminent East of river ops lead to US withdrawal

There were hard negotiations to follow, of course, but the point of vetting was to establish criteria to make determination about YPG affiliations on the US side. Looks a lot like TR is trying to go back to where they already were in this process …. This is a strategic TR fail

All signs were pointing to a US-TR agreement on vetting criteria that would then be repeated east of the river, resulting in the ribbon Ankara is now asking for. Instead, what has transpired is a hardening of the US position on SDF protection …. Own goal here

Final point: Making hard asks of TR is fine. But when you’ve announce you’re leaving in 120 days, hard to enforce any agreement. Buffer zone is fine, but to meet force protection goals, you need guarantees from Turks + SDF to not shoot at each other. That is hard.