listen, i've made this argument before.

the question at hand is hardly about whether this is a "blow to us imperialism", as though i'm invested in dismantling american power in the region, or aligned with isis or something. i supported the bombing of isis, and i would like to see the russians take the lead role in the long run. that's not what this is about.

in fact, syria is historically a russian client state that is outside the scope of american imperialism. that's part of the point here - syria's not ours.

the argument i've made is that if your anarcho-socialist experiment - and my understanding is that rojava is really just another authoritarian leftist cult, and hardly an endpoint for anybody to aspire to - requires the backing of the global hegemon's imperial military might to exist, it's not much of an anarcho-socialist experiment, is it? they'd have to be able to stand on their own two feet to really be an anarchist experiment. really, rojava is itself better described as an outpost of american imperialism!

the history in the article is not accurate. these areas were neither historically arab nor historically kurdish, but historically assyrian. this is, in fact, the heart of ancient assyria. the assyrians were relatively light-skinned and majority christian well into the modern era, when the kurds massacred them in a series of brutal genocidal attacks. since then, there's been a struggle between kurds and arabs for control of the vacant lands.

so, if you want to do this right, you drive the kurds out and bring the assyrians back in.

that's not really plausible for a number of reasons, but the one thing you can't do in the twenty-first century is let the kurds conquer the area and drive the arabs out. any reasonable alliance with the kurds needed to be rooted in the assumption that they would behave as a responsible western ally and withdraw when the operation was complete; nato allies don't occupy the areas they liberate, they help in restructuring them with the ultimate aim of giving them back their sovereignty.

i don't like what the turks are doing here. it's far from ideal, of course. but, when the europeans are refusing to carry through with their international obligations in funding a peacekeeping force, and the kurds simply won't leave the areas they've conquered and occupied, there's not a better option on the table.

the most important thing here is maintaining the territorial integrity of syria. so long as this is a step in that end goal, it should be supported. if the turks deviate from that goal, they've fucked up and will feel it. 

and, i would hope that the refugees in canada are given the opportunity to return home, as well, as that is what they actually want to do. i would call on the canadian government to offer to fly them back, if they make the request.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/10/rojava-syria-erdogan-turkey-united-states-military

the liberals are supposed to do better than this