A complex mess
The ongoing situation in Syria with diverging vested interests has led to yet another point of standoff. This time between Turkey and Russia with Turkey shooting down a Russian warplane it said violated its airspace. Turkey insisted it repeatedly warned the aircraft of the violation before shooting at it. ‘The pilot who survived the crash, Capt Konstantin Murakhtin, told Russian Television he had not received a warning before being shot down.’ (BBC NEWS, December 1, 2015) There is also a disagreement over whether or not the aircraft violated the Turkish airspace. Whereas Russia insists it remained within Syrian border, Turkey insists it flew over Turkey’s southern-most side.
What is important is not who is right or wrong but the cascading impact of the action on the fast degenerating situation in Syria. Also important is the question of why was it done, what does it achieve?
Turkey’s relationship with Iran took a huge plunge with both countries backing a different player within Syria. To make things worse, Turkey’s decision to provide facilities for direct oil transport to its shores to the Kurdish Regional Government obviously did not sit well with Baghdad.
Turkey handled its Middle East policy well inspite of the huge gaff of mishandling the raid by Israeli staff on ships laden with goods for assistance to Hamas in 2010.
Turkey and Russia have historically opposed each other. The Black Sea and the Balkans are two of the regions where interests of both have come in conflict resulting in military conflicts. The conflict in Syria of both countries is a continuation of the historical relationship of both nations. Both leaders, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Vladimir Putin, view diametrically opposing solution to bring peace to Syria. Moscow sees Assad’s presence and thereby rule as a stabilising factor in a collapsing Syria. Turkey, on the other hand, feels Assad’s continuing rule as a main contributing cause to Syria’s instability and wants his removal for a peaceful Middle East. The shooting down of the Russian plane draws attention to the dire need to defuse the situation by saner heads to stop an escalation between the two at this junction and in a region already up in flames.
Where does this place Israel? According to Jerusalem Post, “On the one hand, on a bilateral level, Israel has a clear interest in supporting Moscow. The two countries enjoy positive, well-established, stable relations and have thus far managed to successfully navigate the quagmire of the Russian military presence in Syria. In addition, Israel’s relationship with Turkey under Erdogan is unstable and since 2009 has been characterised by ongoing hostility that apparently will be difficult to allay as long as Erdogan remains a dominant force in Turkish decision-making. Taking Russia’s side may also bring economic benefits to Israel as Russia has imposed economic sanctions on Turkey whereas for its part Israel could provide Russia with a partial replacement for Turkey in agriculture, tourism, and other areas.
“On the other hand, actually siding with Turkey, which opposes the radical axis in Syria, would better serve Israel’s strategic logic and fundamental interests. Russian operations in Syria, under cover of the struggle against the Islamic State, provide an international seal of approval to Israel’s most dangerous enemies – Iran, Hezbollah, and the Assad regime. In this context, Turkey and Israel share a common interest which includes Assad’s removal from power, the weakening of Iranian dominance in Syria, and the resulting blow this would mean for Hezbollah. A Turkish signal of willingness to work in cooperation with Israel to address these threats and challenges, and consequently to reduce its hostility toward Israel would bring to the table other issues with the potential for mutual profits.”
However, not to be overlooked is the deal signed between US and Turkey in February 2015 to collaborate in training moderate rebels (reminded me of the good Taliban, bad Taliban mantra) to fight in Syria. Ankara wants an end to the war on terms it has laid down: first stepping down of Assad. Of course, Iran and Russia have not supported this precondition. Second, Ankara wants following of the guideline laid down in June 2012 during Geneva I Conference. In order to force Assad to agree, Ankara wants to use the rebel forces in Syria to place pressure on the government. It also wants to have a no-fly zone in parts of country to put an end to aerial attacks on civil areas by the regime. No altruistic reasons here unfortunately but probably a shrewd deduction that this action will inevitability lead to a favourable situation on ground forcing Assad’s hand in accepting the terms being pushed by Ankara. An interesting point of difference here is that whereas USA wants a coalition to target ISIS, Turkey in addition wants a regime change of Assad. Ankara wants Assad regime replaced by a pro-Sunni dispensation that will have a pro-Turkey flavour.
Inspite of its desire to loom large on Syrian political front, Ankara has refrained from leading from the front; it has instead loomed large on NATO and supporting local rebel groups to bring about the desired change. Turkey and Saudi Arabia’s policies in Syria are in concert. Both want Assad out. Both want Iran cut down to size and containment of Shi’ite rise in the region. Washington’s newfound yet careful courting of Iran is a point of pressure for both. Having stated this, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have not been on a sound footing both wanting to emerge as a leader in the Sunni world. This was very evident in post war Iraq 2003. This partnership at best can be seen as a temporary one.
Yet another angle that has emerged, a rather startling one, as accusations are made about Erdogan’s son being in collaborating with the ISIS in transporting ISIS oil through Turkey. “Kurdish and Turkish smugglers are transporting oil from ISIS controlled territory in Syria and Iraq and selling it to Israel, according to several reports in the Arab and Russian media. An estimated 20,000-40,000 barrels of oil are produced daily in ISIS controlled territory generating $1-1.5 million daily profit for the terrorist organisation. It’s been well-established that Turkey is a major transportation hub for ISIS oil smuggling operations. But where is the oil sent? Someone has to buy it. The answer, apparently, is Israel.” (Global Research, December 3, 2015) An investigative blow by blow report by Al-Araby Al-Jadeed explains exactly how oil is extracted, transported and sold.
Michael Brendon Dougherty comments on US/NATO and Turkish alliance, “Turkey has turned into one of NATO’s and America’s biggest liabilities in the region. Indeed, there seems to be no hope of re-balancing this alliance to make it a positive one for the West.
The presumption of shared values between Turkey and the West is disappearing. Ataturk’s secular state in Turkey is long gone, and Recep Erdogan is slowly putting together a more Islamic state in its place. Press freedoms are being destroyed, clear evidence that Turkey is no longer part of the free world.” (The Week, December 3, 2015)
With so many diverging interests in Syria, will Syria settle down anytime soon?
