Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been stating his wish to meet Syrian President Bashar al Assad frequently in recent months[1], to normalize relations between the two neighboring Muslim countries. As everyone remembers, the two countries found themselves in hostile positions due to the ongoing Syrian Civil War since 2011. During the civil war, while Türkiye supported Sunni rebels and called for a new democratic constitution and more inclusive political system in Syria, the Syrian administration underlined the radical aspects of the opposition and the need for a strong central administration. While the civil war in Syria led to millions of Syrian citizens fleeing their country and Syrian cities turning into wreckages, Türkiye was also negatively affected by the war due to approximately 4 million Syrian immigrants coming to Turkish soil and economic burdens caused by this sudden rise of population. Moreover, both countries are negatively affected by the emergence of a de facto terrorist state in Syria, ruled by PKK offshoot PYD/YPG forces. While this is a direct separatist problem for Damascus, for Ankara as well the establishment of an independent terrorist state could create many negative implications.
An experienced observer of Turkish foreign policy, Professor Hasan Ünal claims that Turkish-Syrian normalization is not a choice but a necessity for Türkiye to point out risks related to the direct and spillover effects of the still ongoing civil war.[2] The turbulence in Syria indeed caused Türkiye not only many security risks, economic problems, and an immigration nightmare but also destroyed Ankara’s successfully implemented “zero problems with neighbors” (komşularla sıfır sorun) strategy adopted by the then-Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu. Interestingly, while he was the one who created this policy, Davutoğlu later became the saboteur of this policy because of his naïve stance towards the United States (U.S.) and other Western powers. While the U.S. and many European powers initially supported the Arab Spring and called for a democratic transition in Syria, despite warnings coming from many experts and politicians in Türkiye, they later had to revise their position due to the emergence of ISIS (DAESH) or the Islamic State, a very radical terrorist organization. During this process, President Erdoğan and the Turkish administration adopted a norms-based Idealist approach to support democracy and human rights in Syria and other Arab Muslim countries. However, this normative policy away from facts on the ground led to a huge immigration problem, Türkiye’s spoiling relations with its neighbors including Syria, Iran, and Iraq as well as Ankara’s crisis-based ties with Russia during 2015 and 2016 after events such as the “jet crisis” and the “Karlov assassination”. In that sense, Western democratic ideals pushed Türkiye on the verge of a war with Russia, the country having the world’s biggest nuclear arsenal. In addition, during the jet crisis in 2015, Türkiye observed that NATO members were not very willing to defend Ankara in case of a war between Russia and Türkiye. The developments in Syria dragged Türkiye to a failed coup d’état in 2016, mostly believed to have been organized by Gülen loyalists within the Turkish Armed Forces who acted in cooperation with the then-American administration.
Realizing the real intention of Washington, aiming to spoil Türkiye’s relations with all neighboring countries (Syria, Iran, Russia etc.) and to make it completely dependent on the U.S. technology, President Erdoğan finally revised the Syria policy adopted by Davutoğlu and in a sense saved Türkiye from becoming a “second Ukraine”. From then on, Türkiye normalized its relations with Russia and Iran as part of the Astana Platform. Erdoğan quickly and cleverly restored trust-based ties with Russia’s Vladimir Putin and adopted a more U.S.-skeptic tone in foreign policy. In the coming months, President Erdoğan even decided to buy Türkiye’s air missile defense system from Moscow, the S-400s, despite American warnings. While this move led to the implementation of CAATSA sanctions, it helped Ankara to straighten out things with Moscow. In the following years, Türkiye normalized its relations with the Sisi regime in Egypt and even tried to normalize its relations with Israel before the Gaza crisis. In that sense, President Erdoğan and his team adopted a more Realism-based approach and understood that security is more important than democracy in times of war and crisis.
The only missing part of the puzzle in the regional map now is the Türkiye-Syria normalization. In fact, the two countries had a similar experience in 1998. After a serious crisis related to Syrian support for PKK groups, two countries signed the Adana Protocol (Adana Mutabakatı) in that year, while Syria was ruled by Bashar’s father Hafez al Assad.[3] This was a turning point in bilateral relations as the two countries enjoyed security cooperation against terrorist groups as well as developing economic relations which helped both sides to prosper and grow rapidly. In that sense, President Erdoğan, after 21 years in power, is now a very experienced and cultivated statesman who understands the realities of the region better than anyone else in the world. That is why, he recently offered a meeting with Syrian President Bashar al Assad in New York. President Assad also facilitated this meeting with his decree allowing the return of Syrian immigrants in Türkiye to their homeland without any legal sanctions.[4] In that sense, a Turkish-Syrian normalization is at the table now in both countries.
Türkiye-Syria normalization will be helpful to both countries. Türkiye, by doing this, first, would allow the safe return of some Syrian immigrants, although most of them I believe will prefer to stay in Türkiye. To be honest, having millions of extra population could even turn into an advantage for the economy in case of successful integration policies. Secondly, thanks to the collaboration with Damascus, Türkiye could fight against PKK more strongly and prevent the emergence of a terrorist state, a “second Israel” for many right-wing Islamists and nationalist people in the country. The restoration of Turkish-Syrian-Iran cooperation could also help the United Nations (UN) and people who are concerned about the grave humanitarian situation in Gaza to prevent further radical moves by Israel and the U.S. administrations. On the other hand, the Syrian administration will be relieved and feel more self-confident if it gets more friendly with Türkiye. President Assad will then focus on unifying his country, forcing foreign militaries to leave his territory, eliminating all sorts of (radical Sunni Islamist groups, Iran-backed militia, and Kurdish nationalist) terrorist groups, and adopting a new regime that will be more inclusive to pious Sunni masses. Syria’s developing economic relations with Türkiye would also help Assad to recover from his heavy wounds due to the civil war. Both statesmen should not forget that they lived the time of their lives or their brightest moments when they enjoyed good relations between 1998 and 2011.
A Türkiye-Syria normalization will be supported mostly by Russia as Moscow will be happy to see two Moscow-friendly regimes going back to their previous harmonious relationship. China will also support the process as this will accelerate economic prosperity and diminish American influence in the region. Although Iran does not make open statements about this process, Tehran could also potentially support the normalization of two neighboring countries that do not adopt anti-Iran rhetoric. Of course, the biggest obstacle to peace between Ankara and Damascus is the presence of the U.S. military forces in Syria as well as Israel. Israel in fact is the only winner of the Syrian civil war as they were able to illegally annex Golan Heights from Syria. In that sense, Israel would use the U.S. card (sanctions and threats against Türkiye) to prevent Türkiye-Syria normalization. Another winner of the civil war is the PKK as the Marxist-Leninist and Kurdish nationalist outlawed group is now able to control and self-govern large territories in Syria. Due to its constant support for PKK in all recent administrations (Obama, Trump, Biden), it seems like the U.S. will also try to prevent a normalization process. The only actor whose position could vary is the European Union (EU). Although the EU is not an independent actor in its foreign policy and always acts as a loyal force to the U.S., it is a fact that problems in Syria causing the risk of further immigration waves to Türkiye and Europe is a real headache for Brussels, especially at contemporary times when the far-right movements (parties) in Germany, France, and many other European countries are on the rise. In that sense, while the U.S. and Israel could try to sabotage the normalization process between Türkiye and Syria, Brussels’ support could be helpful and crucial to stabilize the region. The EU closely follows developments in Türkiye and is now aware of Ankara’s firm decision to look towards the East rather than the West.
Finally, the Arab Spring process and the civil war in Syria in fact was a major learning process for many International Relations experts focusing on this region. We now know that the discrete American ideals and norms do not match with realities in the Middle East and the key to stability in this region is to establish friendly relations with neighboring countries and Russia. Unfortunately, due to its single-issue-driven foreign policy (Israel’s security and interests), the U.S. is no longer able to provide security, stability, and prosperity in the region. That is why, I think the weight and influence of other actors such as Russia, China, Türkiye, and Iran in the regional policies will further rise in the coming years simultaneously with the weakening of the U.S. Although -due to its leading position in terms of liberal democratic world order- the weakening of the U.S. could create some fears at the beginning, Washington in reality has applied these principles only to its allies and is concerned only for Israeli security, not the development of this region. In that sense, a new regional order with the growing presence of Russia and China could be more helpful to all countries within this region only except for Israel, since both countries -especially China- are concerned more with development and do not provoke regime changes or widespread protests in other countries. The situation of Israel on the other hand will continue to be a real issue since Tel Aviv (Jerusalem) has a ridiculous regime that has been able to alienate even pro-Zionist states in the region including Türkiye.
Prof. Ozan ÖRMECİ
REFERENCES
[1] For some examples, see; Euronews (2024), “Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan: Suriye Devlet Başkanı Esad ile ailece görüşebiliriz”, 28.06.2024, Date of Accession: 23.09.2024 from https://tr.euronews.com/2024/06/28/cumhurbaskani-erdogan-suriye-devlet-baskani-esad-ile-ailece-gorusebiliriz; BBC News Türkçe (2024), “Erdoğan’dan Esad ile görüşme mesajı: ‘Davetimiz her an olabilir’”, 07.07.2024, Date of Accession: 23.09.2024 from https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/c8vdg4z299do; Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlığı İletişim Başkanlığı (2024), “Erdoğan New York’ta Beşar Esad ile bir görüşme teklif etti”, 21.09.2024, Date of Accession: 23.09.2024 from https://www.iletisim.gov.tr/turkce/dis_basinda_turkiye/detay/erdogan-new-yorkta-besar-esad-ile-bir-gorusme-teklif-etti.
[2] See; https://youtu.be/dI8KzyTgzTU?t=677.
[3] Ozan Örmeci (2012), “Adana Mutabakatı ve Bugün”, Uluslararası Politika Akademisi, 10.04.2012, Date of Accession: 23.09.2024 from https://politikaakademisi.org/2012/04/10/adana-mutabakati-ve-bugun/.
[4] Haberler.com (2024), “Erdoğan’ın çağrısı karşılık buldu! Esad’dan Türkiye’yi yakından ilgilendiren tarihi karar”, 22.09.2024, Date of Accession: 23.09.2024 from https://www.haberler.com/dunya/erdogan-in-cagrisi-karsilik-buldu-esad-dan-17848258-haberi/.
