13.02.2020 Author: Salman Rafi Sheikh
Where does Turkey stand in
the Syrian Endgame?
Column: Politics
Region: Middle East
Country: Turkey
Whereas the mainstream
western and Arab media have been claiming a ‘serious rift’ between Russia and
Turkey over the death of Turkish soldiers in a Syrian offensive in Idlib, this
is far from the case. While there is no gainsaying that Russian and Syrian
interests do not always converge fully and that there are some contentious
areas, this then is also quite equally true of Turkey’s relations with the
US/NATO as well. Therefore, expecting Turkey to take a full wheel U-turn to the
US/NATO as a result of the so-called ‘serious rift’ with Moscow/Damascus is not
only an extremely unlikely event to happen but also geo-politically an
unrealistic assumption; for, the major disagreement, as it stands, does not
exit between Russia and Turkey per se, it exists, if at all, between an
increasingly assertive Syrian army, ambitiously advancing to regain control of
their country, and a Turkish a resolve to prevent the emergence of a
‘Kurdistan’ along its border with Syria.
Whereas both Syria and
Turkey, as also Russia, aim to prevent the establishment of ‘Kurdistan’ along
Syria-Turkey border, the disagreement remains over who will prevent this i.e.,
whether Turkey will do this through a direct military presence or the Syrian
army through directly taking control of the territories.
It was this political
disagreement that was at the heart of Putin’s visits to Damascus and Istanbul
in the end of January 2020. As the reports suggest, the Russians had ‘strongly
advised’ the Syrian army to halt their offensive and allow Turkey to relocate
its troops. Assad, while he agreed to halt the offensive, did not want to break
the momentum of battle ground victories. At the same, Moscow does not think
that allowing al-Qaeda affiliate groups to continue to operate from Idlib and
attack Syrian and Russian interests is going to work for them; hence, the
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov’s calculated response to the tensions arising
out of the clashes between Turkey and Syria.
In particular, he stated:
“We don’t agree with this
view [of Erdogan about attacking Idlib]. Russia is in full compliance with the
Sochi agreements on the Idlib zone. At the same time, we regret to say that the
situation is far from perfect”, adding further that “a large number of terrorists remain in
the area and continue aggressive attacks on the Syrian army and Russia’s
Hmeymim air base. It causes us huge concern.”
Of course, when Peskov was
referring to the continuous presence of terrorists in Idlib, he was alluding to
the Turkish failure of honouring its part of the Idlib-deal of separating the
‘moderate fighters’ that it supports from the al-Qaeda jihadis.
Yet, the candid disagreement
and/or failure to honour the deal has not led to a total breakdown of the Sochi
process itself, a process that continues to provide the main framework for
joint operations inside Syria. Therefore, while the mainstream media were
projecting the Turkey-Syria clash, it probably purposefully failed to notice
that Russia and Turkey still conducted yet another joint patrol in the
countryside of Al-Darbasiyah and Ras Al-Ain in the northeast extreme of the
Turkish-Syrian border.
Let’s not forget that these
joint operations come as a part of a deal between Turkey and Russia to force
the YPG fighters out of the region bordering Syria and Turkey.
As such, notwithstanding the
disagreement regarding who would control and manage Idlib and the rest of the
northeast border region of Syria, it also remains a fact that Turkey’s most
fundamental interest i.e., prevention of a ‘Kurdistan’ along its border with
Syria can only be realised through an alliance with Russia and Turkey than
through an alliance with the US/NATO.
A Turkish full-wheel U-turn
to the US/NATO and the EU, despite the latter’s various attempts, therefore
does not seem possible for obvious strategic reasons. An alliance with the
US/NATO would be counter-productive in that these countries/alliances favour
the establishment of ‘Kurdistan’ and continue to arm and aid Kurdish militias
dedicatedly fighting for a nation-state of their own.
Therefore, if Turkey were to
agree to a US plan whereby Russian and Syrian forces are forced out of
(northern) Syria and the US forces were to get involved once again, it will
only work to Turkish disadvantage in that it will once again trigger forces
like YPG to push for a greater share of the control of some of the territories
of Syria, if not work for an altogether establishment of Kurdistan.
The Kurdish factor boils
down to deep enough a convergence between Russia/Syria and Turkey that can
easily withstand disagreements arising out Syrian operations, the killing of
Turkish forces and a wave of refugees that Turkey feels it will have to
accommodate due to a Syrian offensive in the northeast of Syria. A damage
control mechanism has
already been set in motion to not only to control the damage and repair, but
also to prevent the US from fishing in troubled waters.
Salman Rafi
Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s
foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.