Why Are The Kurds Saying That Chechens Are “Genuinely Native” To Syria”?


In what is probably one of the most peculiar revelations thus far exposed in the War on Syria, it has come out that the Kurds’ official federalization plan, the so-called “Project For A Democratic Syria”, not only recycles Secular Wahhabi rhetoric about “fascism” and “semi-fascism”, but ludicrously alleges that the Chechens are “genuinely native in this land” and “participated in creating the region’s history and culture.” This is a shameless and naked distortion of history that’s predicated solely on self-interested geopolitical reasons, namely the Kurds’ interest in extending an ‘olive branch’ of ‘win-win’ federalization to the over 2,000 Chechens that are fighting for Daesh in northern Syria.

Furthermore, by attempting to rewrite history in order to ‘legitimize’ the new jihadist Chechen settlers, the Kurds are also providing irrefutable proof about the existence of Kelly M. Greenhill’s “Weapons of Mass Migration”. The logical conclusion that one can draw from this fifth generational maneuver of weaponizing history is that the Kurds and their unipolar American-Israeli-Saudi patrons are intent on existentially destroying the Syrian Arab Republic by even going as far as to change its name – an objective that’s also declared in their previously mentioned manifesto – to something more ‘identity inclusive’ such as the presumable “Levantine Federation” or whatever other artificial ‘compromise’ label they manage to think of.

Settlers – They’re Not Just Israeli

In the common geopolitical parlance, whenever someone speaks about settlers, they’re usually referring to the Palestine-occupying Israelis, but the Kurds have just proved that the term can be more widely expanded to include the myriad of Muslim colonists that have streamed in over the past five years to take over Syria. It’s worthwhile to note at this juncture that the non-native Chechens are also grouped by the Kurds alongside the equally non-native “Turkmen” in order to pander to Turkey as a means of gaining tacit acceptance for their geopolitical project. Looked at from a structural perspective and considering that the “Project For A Democratic Syria” was declared over one year ago in February 2015, it’s plain to see that the Kurds had evidently and quite strategically planned out the best possible way in which they can unilaterally revise history in order to clinch a deal with two of the greatest enemies to their vision – the jihadist Chechens and the Neo-Ottoman Turks.

Syria political activist and journalist Afraa Dagher also reported in September of that year that Daesh was luring Uighur terrorists from China with promises of free land and housing for them and their families, further proving that an undeniable plot to literally colonize Syria was and still is aggressively underway. Had the Kurds and their patrons known the extent to which the Uighur and their families would eventually migrate to Syria in order to fight alongside Daesh, it’s possible that they would have included this Central Asian Turkic group as yet another of the myriad “genuine natives” to Syria in order to lay the groundwork for their envisioned “Federation of Northern Syria”. Like the author explained in his most recent piece on the topic, the Kurds are essentially creating a ‘federation within a proposed federation’, or in other words, a much larger scale and many times more dysfunctional entity than Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the latest “origin story” lie about the Chechens and Turkmens being “genuinely native” to Syria is part and parcel of this charade.

As anybody who’s even remotely familiar with the topic knows, let alone Syrians themselves, the Chechens and Turkmen are not endemic to Syria, nor do they “contribute to its social balance”, which is another of the falsehoods that the Kurds officially allege in their “Project For A Democratic Syria” manifesto. The reason that this outright lie is being propagated is so that a “complex federalism” (or the Bosnian-like ‘federation within a federation’) type of system that can imposed on Syria which would render the central government all but useless and de-facto internally partition the country among its disparate identity groups. Key to catalyzing this process is the use of “Weapons of Mass Migration” such as offering administrative-political incentives to ethnically separate but religiously aligned colonizers (the Chechens and Turks) so that they stream into Syria and demographically re-engineer the strategic northern region that the Kurds have anticipated in claiming as their own.

Kaleidoscope Federalism

The author has previously used the adjectival metaphor of a kaleidoscope in describing the nature of Identity Federalism, such as in his work for Russia’s National Institute For Research Of Global Security, because it most accurately reflects this system in practice. Unlike in ‘standard federations’ such as those in the US and Germany or the partially identity-based but geographically restrained system in Russia, in Identity Federations like Bosnia & Herzegovina, South Sudan, and pretty soon Nepal, each “constituent” identity receives its own statelet with constitutionally enshrined broad autonomy.

The Kurds and their unipolar allies’ scheme in Syria actually goes beyond all established precedents in taking this to its maximum extreme in even proposing that “all civil society organizations, as a means of protection and development, will organize defense institutions, including the military and security forces, in accordance with the established format for the democratic homeland, which we aim to build from self-willed institutions.”

Reflecting on the meaning of this declaratory clause of intent from the “Project For A Democratic Syria”, it can be taken to mean that all of the groups which the Kurds and their controllers’ identify as being “genuinely native” to Syria will be entitled to their own military forces, likely translating into the constitutional legitimization of the local armed “opposition” as the official security forces in charge of each possible federal statelet.

Considering that the Kurds’ full official listing of the relevant groups amounts to the “Arabs, Kurds, Armenians, Syriacs, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Turkmen, Chechens, and Circassians”, it’s very probable that they want to see the entire unified Syrian state dissolve along these aforementioned identity-based lines, with each demographic category acquiring its own federal or autonomous administrative-political entity (whether as a federal unit or an autonomous principality located therein) and a corresponding militia to go with it.

To remind the reader of the author’s metaphor in describing this sort of federalism, it’s obvious that the end result of this plan’s imposition would be the total shattering of Syrian society into a literal kaleidoscope of multisided antagonistic ethno-regionalist forces that would likely eventually engage in a Hobbesian war-of-all-against-all with the proper foreign manipulation and time.

Change The Patriotism, Change The Name

It’s a well-known fact that a country’s name and associated patriotism often go hand in hand, which is one of the reasons behind the naming between the Republic of Macedonia and the Hellenic Republic. If a state’s patriotism is changed to something incomparable or irrelevant to its existing name, it’s very likely that the name itself will also change and vice-versa. Herein lies the ultimate trick that the Kurds and their unipolar patrons are plotting, and it’s that they have officially declared in their “Project For A Democratic Syria” manifesto that the country’s constitutional and official name as the Syrian Arab Republic is “an explicit declaration of the state’s nationalism and of the denial and the exclusion of all other constituent people.” Never mind that there is a larger proportion of Arab Syrians in Syria than there are Russians in Russia, but the Cultural Marxists that are directing the Syrian Kurds’ geopolitical project somehow take supreme offense to this and therefore are on the literal war path to ensure that the country’s name and consequent identity are irreversibly changed to their divide-and-rule liking.

Understanding that the application of fifth generational warfare is getting to such a length that the Syrian Arab Republic’s own name is being weaponized and turned into a tool to be used against it, it’s relevant to wonder exactly what sort of a name would be ‘acceptable’ to the ‘politically correct’ provocateurs. The author believes that they will go to such radical extremes (as is their nature) in trying to snuff out and extinguish Syria’s unitary identity that they won’t even resort to calling it by that name anymore once they’re finally done with their plans, seeking instead to ardently erase all reference to Syria and possibly rename it as the broadly ‘inclusive’ “Levantine Federation”. Furthermore, by changing the country’s name, they’ll also have to change its flag as well, and herein lies the connection to the one that’s been flown by the “Free (Fake) Syrian Army” (FSA) ever since the beginning of the conflict.

The FSA flag is actually the same one that was used during the French occupation when Syria was internally partitioned into the State of Aleppo, the State of Damascus, the Alawite State, Greater Lebanon (which to remind the reader, has historically been an integral part of Syrian civilization), and the Jabal al-Druze State. Correspondingly and with the obvious exception of now-independent Lebanon, it’s possible that the Kurdish declaration of a “Federation Of Northern Syria” is meant to directly replicate this artificially enforced colonial division. To draw an obvious parallel, the “Federation” presently occupies most of the State of Aleppo and could likely incorporate Raqqa just like its historical predecessor did if the Kurdish-led “Democratic Forces of Syria” (DFS) are successful in liberating it from Daesh before the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) is (i.e. the “Race For Raqqa” that the author wrote about together with his colleague in October 2015).

Concluding Thoughts

To come full circle to the beginning of the article, the Kurds’ absurd proclamation that the Chechens are a “genuinely native” people to Syria can be seen as a brilliant strategic outreach designed to give post-war ‘immunity’ and possible administrative-political autonomy or even outright separate federalism to Daesh’s most brutal minions in exchange for them laying down their weapons and surrendering to the DFS before the SAA. The Chechen jihadists that have joined Daesh know that it is absolutely impossible for them to ever return to the Russian Federation again, so being forever stranded outside of their homeland due to their blind loyalty to Wahhabism and/or greedy pursuit of money and sex slaves, it’s reasonable that some of them might consider surrendering if they were guaranteed “native-people” status in Syria and accordingly afforded all of the privileges that the Kurds and their unipolar patrons are promising them (including the right to form their own constitutionally recognized ethno-regional “military and security services”).

The same sort of logical can be applied to the pro-Ankara Turkmen, since ‘buying them off’ in a Kurdish-led federative Syria (even if only over the former colonial-era lands of the State of Aleppo) might be what they’d have to concede in order to receive tactic Turkish acceptance and forestall a possible military invasion, which in any case would be beaten back by joint Russian-American air power as per the two Great Powers’ latest geopolitical deal. That obviously wasn’t even conceptualized at the time that the February 2015 declaration was made, so in hindsight, it’s perversely ‘understandable’ why the Kurds would include such a ridiculous statement into their manifesto. All in all, it’s patently clear that with the Kurds outlandishly inventing historical fantasies such as the Chechens and Turkmen being “genuinely native” to Syria, “participating in creating the region’s history and culture”, and “contributing to its social balance”, there’s no way that they can ever be trusted at Geneva, and without a doubt, it should be recognized by now that their “Project For A Democratic Syria” is really just a fancy euphemism for the internal partitioning of Syria.