Will Russia Sponsor Kurdistan?

Greg R. Lawson writing for The Hill raises an intriguing possibility for the future of the Middle East :

It is not difficult to envision the Syrian Kurds striking a deal with Russia to gain more autonomy, up to and including a de facto state. This is something the West can't do given ties to Turkey and fears of a spillover effect into Turkey itself... Over time, this could represent the beginning of a literal carving up of chunks of southern Turkey.

This would not happen immediately, but Putin can afford to be patient.

The United States has not supported an independent Kurdistan, likely because of a desire to see Iraq succeed, but how exactly does the country that went to war to create Kosovo tell the Kurdish people they don't deserve a state because Turkey is our (dubious) ally?

Our Interest in Syria

Andrew C. McCarthy writes in the National Review:

Our vital interest in Syria (and Iraq and elsewhere, for that matter) is to prevent its being used as a platform for the launching of attacks against the United States, our allies, and our interests. Moreover, this, it is crucial to remember, is an American problem. It is not one we could responsibly delegate to another country’s “moderate rebels” even if they were numerous enough to need something bigger than a phone booth for their meetings.

That means it is going to take a large commitment of American forces on the ground as well as in the air to achieve our vital interests. But there is no political support for that in our country at the moment.

This seems correct. The United States cannot identify a realistic and desirable winner and will not commit to deposing a brutal Baathist dictator itself under an administration that campaigned against deposing the brutal Baathist dictator next door.

No Solution for Syria?

A reasonable analysis of the Syrian conflict: there might not be a side to the conflict that we would want to win.

No solution seems more viable and durable than the status quo or a variant thereof. A national unity government, encompassing figures from both the present regime and moderate factions of the insurgency, would be too disparate, weak, and exposed to terrorist groups to last or to effectively rule.

Like it or not, the Syrian standoff is there to stay. The rivalries are too deeply entrenched, and the combat means at the disposal of belligerent factions are too exorbitant, for peace and stability to be an attainable objective in the months or years ahead.

Read the whole thing at RealClearWorld.

The one thing that seems most likely? Russia keeps its naval bases.