Negative consequences of Turkish role regionally, internationally
 
 
After nearly a decade of conflict, Syria’s suffering
continues to increase as chances for a consensual solution out of the shallow,
dark tunnel the country is in vanish. In their wake lies a true tragedy that
will be fully seen when disasters of the 21st century are discussed.
One major factor in the exacerbation of the Syrian
crisis is interference by foreign hands in favour of their own interests and
agendas. It was those hands that took Syrian forces calling for change and
turned them into tools for this purpose – like when Turkey recruited some
Syrians.
Turkey has carried out three major military
incursions into northern Syria since 2016, resulting in Turkish control in much
of the territory formerly held by Kurdish forces. Turkey’s occupation of Syria
diverts attention away from a national solution and sets up division and
disunity.
Ankara supports flimsy claims on territory to expand
its influence, and is working to eliminate the emerging seeds of a secular
democratic experiment that is the autonomous administration in the
Kurdish-controlled regions that the Kurds call Rojava.
Turkish forces have pushed a big demographic change,
where they pushed Kurds out of their homelands to replace them with
Turkmen/Arab tribes, supported fundamentalist groups and mercenaries, and used
them against the Syrian people.
This will not continue as Turkey wishes. Such
interventions will have consequences and repercussions, and although Ankara
views the current results to be in its favour, this won’t last. The result of
Turkey’s actions in Syria will not provide it with any backing to support
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s vision and
destructive policies for the region.
The Turkish president intervenes with his neighbours
in all directions, and fuelling conflicts wherever he can in tandem with his
quest for hegemony and influence in the region. Erdoğan
is standing on the edge of the abyss, and slowly slipping towards a pit of
fire.
Turkey’s domestic situation is likely to get further
aggravated due to its foreign interventions, and Erdoğan’s actions will catch up
with him. Despite his slogans for intervention in Syria, his desire to bring
down the Assad regime will see his regime affected before Assad’s.
Erdoğan’s perceived historical
gains today are in fact the results of fragile deals with multiple parties, not
based on a clear political vision or precise strategy. The lack of strategy
will certainly cause a great negative impact when Turkey’s and its tactical
partners’ interests collide. There are early signs that this will be happening
soon, with the isolation of Turkey and its regime, and Arab and European
attitudes turning away from what they were at the turn of the century when the
Justice and Development Party (AKP) seized power in Turkey.
Erdoğan has made a
launching pad out of Syria to access the rest of the region. He has played the
Syrian refugees card against Europe, and turned the so-called Syrian opposition
away from their cause and towards being his spearhead to be used in his
regime’s regional wars. The Turkish president’s unwelcome efforts will be a
gateway to the collapse of his regime, as his role and influence diminish.
Nothing will be remembered of the Erdoğan
era, except for wars and Turkey’s
entanglement in conflicts that diminished the country’s role in the region.
What Erdoğan
envisioned as Turkey’s
role would have been acceptable if it had took a turn towards serving the
people and rejecting violence, genocide and destruction. Instead, he has used
slogans like “preserving
Turkish national security interests,” which are now at a greater risk than
under Turkey’s non-interventionist policy in the past.
Erdoğan’s policies have only
sparked negative reactions in the region and in the rest of the world, and his
attempts to divert Turkish public opinion away from these reflections on his
policies are evidence that he is aware of the distressing situation, and his
loss of balance.
There is no logical or reasonable justification for
Erdoğan’s actions in Syria,
Iraq, Yemen, the Gulf, Libya, Africa, and recently, Azerbaijan-Armenia, the
Mediterranean Basin, and Europe over Greece and France, except for a desire to
mitigate the repercussions of his policies inside Turkey. In this, he will not
succeed for long.
 
          
     
                                
 
 


