Tuesday, February 10, 2015

Once ISIS is solved the Kurds will be the next major Middle East issue.

via Ottawa Citizen.
Germany has already sent some Milan anti-tank systems to the Kurds fighting in Iraq. It will now send 30 more launchers and 500 more missiles. Also included in the shipment will be 4,000 assault rifles and 10 Dingo armoured vehicles.
Peshmerga Minister Mustafa Sayid Qadir recently told reporters about the value of the first shipment of gear that came last year. “The German weapons, especially the anti-tank Milan missiles have been effective in deciding the battle.”
Has anyone been noticing the request for munitions coming from the Kurds?  I'm a supporter of their efforts against ISIS and quite honestly I'm beginning to wonder.

Are they gearing up to take ISIS down or are they taking this opportunity to get setup for the fight for an independent state?  Below is a map of "proposed borders" for an independent Kurdish state.

If you Google, "Big Kurdistan" or "Pan-Kurdish National Conference" or "Kurdish Independence" then you'll be taken to some websites where these ideas are considered a done deal.

So chew on that one.

Once ISIS is put back in its cage then we will immediately roll into the "Kurdish" problem and since they will have fought for and hold the ground of much of Syria AND Iraq....with the Syrian govt either still divided or newly formed, the Iraqi govt attempting to deal with its own Sunni/Shia issues and the Kurds having slices of both countries it will be a fait accompli.

Except Turkey will be pissed and spoiling for a fight.  They will not stand idly by while the Kurds establish a state.  Something that will cause a rift between Turkey and the rest of NATO?  We will have for all intents and purposes rearmed them....and if it continues at this pace then they will have a force that can cause Turkey serious problems.

Best case scenario?  The Ukrainian issue is solved by years end.  ISIS is defeated late next year or early 2017.  Which leaves us with the Kurdish issue roiling the world into the next decade.

I am really not a fan of these interesting times we live in.  A bit of boredom would be nice.


  1. Kurds would be an idiot's if not gain something from that situation, they already push those fuckers out of big chunk of lands and still are on the move. But Peshmerga did... slow down in last month, they still hit the goatfuckers but they start to more... how to say... consolidate it gains. Probably they sooner or later will expect the Iraqi "counterattack" so they want to prepare.

    To be more precise Sol' they will receive by now from Germany alone in next supply batch:

    30 MILAN launchers (I don't know what model)
    500 missiles for them (again unknown warhead)
    200 Panzerfaust 3 with unknown number of ammo
    4000 G3 rifles

    Full ammo pack for light/medium weapons, additional Wolf, Dingo and Unimog's (unknown number) with spare parts. Uniforms and medicament's.

    As you can see most of them are not high tech but things from Army reserve stockpiles. It's still a large number of potent weapons with highly praised by Kurds MILAN system. Some new armored vehicles... P.3 can have also modern warheads, but as I mention this is an unknown.

    Now we WILL see in the near future probably US equipped Iraq forces clash with mainly German equipped Peshmerga. And I put my bets on Kurds... they are, more "western", they are the way better partner in the region the Iraq. For sure they have a bigger balls and will to fight.

    But... one problem at the time. First the ISIS then, shit will hit the fan again.

    1. you get it Shas. thats probably how it will go down too. the Pershermega vs. the Iraqi Army. i'm betting on the Kurds too. but like you said...one thing at a time.

    2. And I almost forget... guess who will be the favorite future weapons supplier of Kurds if they will rise own country?

    3. And then finally we might see a settlement to the debate of M1 Abrams vs. Leopard 2......if things go really bad.

  2. I don't see a moral problem with an independent kurdistan, they are not known for oppression, or other human rights abuses, this maybe because they aren't that way or what they have done is insignificant compared to their neighbours. I think you are right, both Iraq and Syria (whatever that becomes) will be to tied up with their own problems to stop it leaving turkey, and i don't care about them they have already not taken action against ISIS (or whatever they're called this week) while other NATO members a fully engaged, simply because they want ISIS to wear the Kurds down.

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. Aquila i advice you to read about the Armenian genocide, the Kurds are as culpable as turks for it.

  3. "Big Kurdistan" engulf the western part of Iran too. If kurds are willing to give up "Turkish Kurdistan", I bet there will be countries willing to recognize this "new" country...

    1. Israel... they would get an possible ally in the region.

    2. If "Turkish Kurdistan" problem is solved - meaning, kurds givinu up claims to turkish territory - I would say almost every country in Middle East would be glad to accept a Kurdistan in western Iran.

      The great battle in Middle East is between Iran (whose population is not arab, but persian and shia islam) and Saudi Arabia (whose population is arab and sunni islam). It´s ethnic (persians vs. arabs) and religious (shia x sunni) conflicts. Almost everything there, including the civil war in Syria, reflects that conflict.

    3. "The great battle in Middle East is between Iran (whose population is not arab, but persian and shia islam) and Saudi Arabia (whose population is arab and sunni islam). It´s ethnic (persians vs. arabs) and religious (shia x sunni) conflicts. Almost everything there, including the civil war in Syria, reflects that conflict. "

      BINGO! And I am not so sure.. understatement alert.. that Iran is the greater problem then Saudi Arabia.

      In my opinion the Kurds deserve their own nation, I know there are many peoples divided by lines drawn on maps by various powers, who technically do also, but the Kurds are, in all their selfishness, now earning our help. Apart from that Kurds do not at all seem interested in holy wars, and other annoying hobbies, so I see less risk in helping them then some others.

    4. Veldman-
      Iran a greater problem than Saudi Arabia?
      Iran a greater potential/opportunity than Saudi Arabia?

    5. I think Saudi Arabia might very well be a bigger potential problem/danger then Iran.

      Their involvement with ISIS, the hold they have on us via oil, the huge amount of money they have, financing 'hate-mosks' in Europe (and the US?)
      I wouldn't say SA as a society has more freedoms then Iran, they just are better at 'selling' themselves to us.
      I know Iran potentially has a nuclear aspect to it, but somehow I think in the end 'money' is more dangerous then a bomb.

  4. If Turkey was smart, they'd realize the Kurds are a dagger. That dagger can either be pointed at the heart of Eastern Turkey or outwards at Iran, Iraq and northern Syria.

    The ethnic Kurdish lands are very intermixed with ethnic Turkoman lands and surround Turkey's borders to the east and south. The Kurds have gone out of their way to show how important good governance is when defending/liberating Arab and Turkoman villages.

    If the Turks were smart, they'd be creating a Kurdish/Turkoman cordon around it a la the Hapsburg Military Frontier.

    Iraq doesn't really exist. It's three different regions, Kurds, Arab Sunni and Arab Shia. Perhaps it would be best to let it de-volve to where it should be rather than trying to expect it to be Switzerland.

  5. Much will depend on what they are using the Milan for. House to House clean up of diehards from down the street or vehicle ambushes? Are they TI equipped to work at night (less an offensive tool than an OP equivalent). And of course, while I can't prove it, I would be _very_ surprised if these didn't come with time/region limiter lockouts on their CLU, the same as the ones on Shoulderfire SAM grip stocks. Time coded missile thermal batteries would also not surprise me.

    These kinds of weapons are far more dangerous to NATO forces in AfG than the ISIL units, IMO.

    Milan is a medium ATGW, a good 2 steps above dragon and in roughly the same class as the AT-4 Spigots that Hezbollah nuked those Merkava with.

    We have all see the images of U.S. convoys pulled to the side of the road so that our people could suppress their's on the other side of an Afghan valley/ridgeline system. Imagine that happens with a Milan hit front-and-backing the lead and trail vehicles. And then they start sweeping the line with explosive fires rather than liner bullet streams.

    MIlan has a range of 2,100m in the initial versions, 2,500m in the 2T and 3 and 3,000m+ in the ER. It's MILIS TI sight is capable of area observation out to 7km and missile tracking (as target recognition) to at least 2.5km. This is a serious tool to be introducing to the region with nearly heavy ATGW range and thus the potential to be misused as an oversized sniper rifle, firing into builtups or against civilian vehicles as a function of decapitation and intimidation by cultural site or infrastructure hostaging.

    1. There are some "news" that Peshmerga use MILAN as it is excellent in stopping the suicide trucks.

    2. Shas,

      Suicide trucks can (and should) be stopped by maneuver traps, from a distance, using barricades and obstacles (trenches if there is a significant offroute access issue or shortage of concrete).

      Busting a 10,000 dollar ATGM into someone's delivery van when you can set cross lane LMG (tires/suspension) or put .50BMG modded ARs like the Beowulf right through the any frontal armor is an unwise use of ordnance.

      If all's your after is a bigger boom for urban work, why not surplus M79 or M203? They won't fire the magnum rounds which means that Western Troops maintain a range leverage as they switch over to the M302 but they are far more flexible against technicals and troops in defilade without costing such a pretty penny.

      What people don't get when they see ATGW is how flexible they can be in hostaging things beyond AFV. Like helicopters or aircraft (airliners) on runways and aprons. Or government offices in multistory high rises. As well as how little things like obscurant launchers and DIRCM turrets can do to resolve the issue if you _don't know where they are sited_ and can't see their launch.

      Go with a 40mm grenade system and you have a hard range limit of 400m or 700m, depending on the round, past which it either fuses out or becomes military unreliable for accuracy. While that's still a beach of hard stones in an urban fight where everyone is above you, and you're working a 200m shot lane, it's a workable tactical problem.

      Take the explosive filler up to 103mm in a guided round, effective out to a mile and a half, and now there is no possibility of an effective perimeter. No way to secure a convoy route. No barrier that you can cover behind.

      This is just d-u-m-b with a capital HEY STUPID!

    3. The most funny thing... is that you notice how different systems would work but you did not notice that they DON"T HAVE THEM. There is an old truth... if something is stupid but it works, it's not stupid.

    4. Shas,

      ...but you did not notice that they DON"T HAVE THEM.

      That's the point.

      You go to Europe and they will sell you anything.

      Just like they did during PGW1 with Saddam and Mirage F-1E5/6 + Exocet, Chemical Weapons Precursors and Super Gun plumbing.

      It escalates the conflict and ADDS RISK for Allied forces who may have to work sometime in the future in the region and not know where the launchers have been sold and resold on to with fresh (cough, Chinese) sources for batteries and code emulators purchased as 'greymarket addons'.

      Did the Germans want to give the Kurds something like the M79 (which I frankly prefer because it puts the 4-shots-in-air truth behind the term 'grenadier' and is far more accurate) or the M203 (which is at least mountable on a variety of rail compatible rifles) then they could have contained the threat posed by loss-of-technology to within a .5 to 1km radius.

      Now they are talking about 2.5km which is, essentially the same 'dot on horizon' distance you would expect to see an M1 Abrams firing at you from.

      Coupled with the flexibility in target types and the ability to compensate for moving ones, at distance, the Milan poses a real escalatory risk for the region.

      Since there are other ways to stop vehicles, I would honestly like to know the theory behind this.

      Are we using Peshmerga commandos the same way we did the Nung and Montagnards in the 60s, as part of Mike Force elements going where, technically, 'we ought not to be' (taking risks we will not)?

      Or are we in fact getting ready to have a Kurdish Enclave which can nail Iraqi forces in the even of a civil war until we can get over there and 'stabilize'? The entire northwest section of Iraq was essentially offlimits throughout the post-1991 environment because we were running SOF out of a U.S. occupied airbase there.

      Either way, these people may feel they have some payback promised for their services and it's not up to the J-Flick to make those kinds of calls.

      States have interests and all that is fine, but we had damn well better know these people _really well_ (Specfor embeds with every Milan equipped team in the field).

      Or we had better be issuing these systems with really limited batteries and software codes which, if not renewed, self-erases from the launcher electronics, frying their firmware, so that they cannot ever again be used, if taken outside of the immediate AOR.

      Even that may not prevent reverse engineering.

    5. It's simple... MILAN is guided missile, operator can guide it to the target with very high possibility that it will hit it and eliminate it with well.. one hit. From a safe distance.

      P.3 can do this also but it can be guided, it have shorter range and is not that precise. They use what they have on site to do the job, simple as that. You don't have anything better... you use what you have and adapt it to that role.

  6. another miscalculation, the ISIS gained strength because they laid the FSA isis was in the porridge that is the FSA. Arm other Kurds will cause more problems, just can not understand how the rulers of the West can be so blind. sorry for my translator

  7. another miscalculation, the ISIS gained strength because they laid the FSA isis was in the porridge that is the FSA. Arm other Kurds will cause more problems, just can not understand how the rulers of the West can be so blind. sorry for my translator

    1. Yep, if you are actually looking for stability, giving weapons to unruly militias is almost never a good idea. Just look what happened in Libya; "many of the weapons given by the west to the "freedom" fighters have ended in the hands of islamic monsters in Nigeria, where they are used to slaughter entire towns. Or arming the Hazm group in Syria, just to have them gangbanged by Alqaeda and ISIS, who stole their weapons and are now riding in their pimped out trucks with some new bitching TOW missiles.

    2. Yes man, we will see a fight in Iraq, IraqxKurdish

    3. Yes man, we will see a fight in Iraq, IraqxKurdish

  8. "Something that will cause a rift between Turkey and the rest of NATO?" to this date we can already see a rift between the both. My take is that if the US and the rest of the merry gang decide to support a Kurdish State and arm them, Turkey its out the fold, the Kurdish issue is a No-No for them.

    And sadly for the Kurds, I dont think there is any political will in the west for helping them establish any serious state project. The moment ISIS is gone, the moment the Peshmerga its at the mercy of the wolves.

  9. I doubt that Turkey would fully withdraw from NATO if an independent Kurdistan was carved out of hide from Iraq and not Turkey. The Turk military is still good enough to not be very threatened by the Peshmerga and it would further de-legitimize the PKK inside of Turkey because the 2013 ceasefire agreement where the PKK already started withdrawl into the Kurdish region of Iraq.

    I consider the three state split of Iraq to be a very high possibility, and the best case scenario is that it is done amicably.

    1. It seems to me most 'new states' do not come to be because the people living there have such a great army.

      They generally get made because some greater power wills it. And I do not mean God..
      Rather well known examples are Israel and Kosovo. As a Dutchman I also know Indonesia did not defeat our colonial forces, it was pressure from the US and Russia that got us to give up.

      It is not the Kurdish military that frightens / annoys Turkey so much,a s the chance that they find international validation and support.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.