The US-Turkey deal to create an ISIL-free buffer zone along the Turkish-Syrian border could be a turning point in the Syrian conflict. Yet it seems that Arab countries have failed to take advantage of this development, remarked Jordanian writer Saleh Al Qallab in the Kuwaiti daily Al Jarida.
The development might signal a new US strategy for the Obama administration after signing the nuclear agreement to address the problems in the Middle East, the writer noted.
The Arab world must not stand idly by as other players call for Iran to be part of any solution to the conflicts in Syria, Yemen and Iraq. Al Qallab added that such players might even agree on a new Sykes-Picot agreement to further slice the Arab nation.
He said that there was no objection to Turkey being a major player in the Syrian crisis. Turkey shares more than 800-kilometre border with Syria and is home to 3 million refugees. It also faces the threat from the PKK, which was designated recently as a terrorist organisation by the US, as well as from ISIL and Bashar Al Assad who is trying to stoke sectarianism in Turkey.
He blamed Arabs for failing to act following the recent development on the northern Syrian borders. America’s change of plan regarding the buffer zone and no-fly zone requires an urgent Arab response, a review of the southern Syrian borders and a unified stance on what Mr Al Assad said in his recent televised speech that whoever was fighting on his side was a Syrian, regardless of their nationality.
This, he said, suggests that there is a plan for nationalisation of Iranians and all those foreign militants fighting alongside the Syrian regime, as well as for stripping many Syrians of their nationality.
In a comment article in the Jordanian newspaper Addustour, Oraib Al Rantawi wrote that the US-Turkish deal, allowing the US to launch air strikes on ISIL from Incirlik military base in Turkey, has achieved two goals for Washington from the AKP-ruled government.
One, it enabled the US air force to use the Turkish military bases close to its area of operations in Syria and Iraq. Two, it got Turkey involved in the anti-ISIL coalition by cutting off key ISIL supply routes through Turkish soil.
In return, Ankara got some of its demands for entering the war on ISIL met: it can enforce a limited no-fly zone in northern Syria and the US should disregard the Turkish army’s ongoing war against the PKK. Washington has reportedly given the green light to a limited no-fly zone while it continues to list the PKK as a terrorist group, tolerating operations against Kurdish terrorism in parallel with a war against ISIL.
The US, the writer remarked, knows that Turkey’s relations with Syrian Kurds will inevitably be further strained by its battles against Turkish Kurds. True, Syrian Kurds have not been part of the deal, but the PKK’s influence among Syrian Kurds makes it hard to separate Ankara’s war on its Kurds from that of Syria's Kurds. Washington sees the Kurds in Syria as a reliable ally in the campaign against ISIL and it does not want to ruin this relationship to satisfy the desire of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan to strike multiple birds with one stone.
The US-Turkish agreement will result in disagreements and push and pull rounds, with Turkey seeking to expand the buffer zone and deploy loyal Syrian forces to run this area, while the US will strive to leave it as limited as possible.
Ankara will try to expand the scope of targets with its US-made firepower, whereas Washington wants these fighter jets to focus on ISIL’s targets, Al Rantawi noted.
Turkey wants to thwart Syrian Kurds’ ambition of establishing their entity in a federal Syria, and the US seems to be backing Kurdish plans in Syria, according to the writer.
The Turkish government no longer repeats “the overthrow of the Assad regime” rhetoric, but at the same time there is no sign of a revision in the Turkish stance on the horizon, one that sees the Syrian government as a partner in the war against ISIL.
The Syrian government continues to have close ties with the Kurdish movement. But concerns about the rise of a separatist Kurdish entity in the future might serve as a common ground for a Turkish-Syrian rapprochement. In fact, the war on ISIL puts Damascus and Ankara on the same trench despite exchange of accusations and unfriendly relations.
Turkey’s tactical shift has sparked new dynamics that will lead to strategic shifts in the balance of power and the maps of coalition, the writer concluded.
Translated by Abdelhafid Ezzouitni
aezzouitni@thenational.ae
