Philip Giraldi knows the answer:
The shooting down of a Russian fighter plane by a Turkish
F-16 is an extremely disturbing turn of events.
Turkey claims that the SU-24 aircraft had violated its
airspace and had not responded to repeated warnings before the armed response
took place.
The Russians for their part claim that they were operating in
Syrian airspace with the concurrence of the Damascus government.
President
Vladimir Putin appeared on Russian television shortly after the plane went down
and was clearly furious, denouncing a “stab in the back by the terrorists’
accomplices” and warning that there would be “severe consequences.”
Russian
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov cancelled a planned Wednesday visit to talk with
his counterpart in Ankara.
The shoot down will have repercussions.
It will
inevitably involve some kind of response from NATO while also rendering the
creation of any grand alliance against ISIS much less likely.
Turkey has produced a map indicating where the violation
of airspace allegedly took place. If the map is accurate, it was over a finger
of land two miles wide that juts into Syria.
The map and Turkish commentary
relating to it suggest that the incursion occurred when the Russian plane
crossed the border, but there is perhaps inevitably a problem with that
account.
A fighter traveling at even subsonic speed would have passed over the
Turkish territory in roughly twelve seconds, which rather suggests that there
would not have been time for any “repeated warnings.”
Then there is the problem with where the plane actually
came down.
Admittedly the aircraft would not necessarily plummet straight down
to mark the spot where it was hit, but the remains appear to have wound up
comfortably inside Syria.
A video of the plane’s downing also seems to show it
being hit and then going directly down.
There is also the question of who gave the order to
fire—and why.
The Turks have been complaining about Russian aircraft coming too
close to the border and there has been inflammatory media coverage about
alleged bombings of the ethnic Turkish Turkmen tribesmen who live in the area
on the Syrian side.
But given the political sensitivity of what is occurring
along the Turkey-Syria border, one would have to suspect that any decision to
take decisive action came from the top levels of the government in Ankara.
American, British, French and Russian airplanes are all operating over northern
Syria. None of those planes can be construed as being hostile to Turkey while
the terrorist and rebel groups have no air forces.
Why a relatively minor
incursion, if it indeed took place, would warrant a shoot down has to be
questioned unless it was actually a Turkish plan to engage a Russian plane as
soon as it could be plausibly claimed that there had been a violation of
airspace.
Why would the Turks do that?
Because Russia is supporting
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, apparently with considerable success, and
Turkey has been extremely persistent in their demands that he be removed.
Al-Assad is seen by Turkey, rightly or wrongly, as a supporter of Kurdish
militancy along the long and porous border with Turkey.
This explains why
Ankara has been lukewarm in its support of the campaign against ISIS, tacitly
cooperating with the terrorist group, while at the same time focusing its own
military effort against the Kurds, which it sees as an existential threat
directed against the unity of the Turkish Republic.
Would Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan do something
so reckless?
Only he knows for sure, but if his objective was to derail the
creation of a unified front against terrorist and rebel groups in Syria and
thereby weaken the regime in Damascus, he might just believe that the risk was
worth the potential gain.
I couldn't agree more with the following:
ReplyDelete""Because Russia is supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, apparently with considerable success, and Turkey has been extremely persistent in their demands that he be removed.
Al-Assad is seen by Turkey, rightly or wrongly, as a supporter of Kurdish militancy along the long and porous border with Turkey.
This explains why Ankara has been lukewarm in its support of the campaign against ISIS, tacitly cooperating with the terrorist group, while at the same time focusing its own military effort against the Kurds, which it sees as an existential threat directed against the unity of the Turkish Republic.""
Indeed.
As I've always said, the West has to face the fact that, if it wants to really defeat ISIS, then it has to take the side of the Kurds against Turkey.
Turkey is the head of the snake and the Kurds are the resistance.
I wouldn't try that one on the TAC crowd.
Deleteits the truth, though.
ReplyDelete