developments concerning Syrian refugees in Turkey

developments concerning Syrian refugees in Turkey

Situation statement- Naif Shaaban

To avoid falling into panic over recent developments concerning Syrian refugees in Turkey and the current situation in the north involving Syrians and Turkish interests.

First, let’s clarify that this article is not intended to escalate tensions or incite hostility against Turks. Since its inception, the revolution has sought a special relationship with the Turkish government. Statements by Turkish officials in support of the Syrian revolution have reinforced this idea, starting with the Turkish leadership’s promise to pray in the Umayyad Mosque and including the golden slogan of Turkish officials: “Brotherhood knows no borders.”

However, the resurgence of the Agha and Pasha mentality, along with treating Syrians in their own land as tenth-class citizens and imposing political, economic, social, and military control, has sidelined the revolution’s interests and led us to the current situation.

The Bab al-Hawa crossing operates based on a UN decision and can only be closed by a UN resolution. While the Turkish government has the ability to close it, doing so would cause them to lose several current and future political and economic privileges

The decision rests with the United States, and the US administration would be pleased to open a crossing via Erbil, which could potentially extend to Kasab.

Turkey is surrounded by adversaries, and currently, its only ally is the Syrian revolution. Russia remains its fiercest foe, as Istanbul (Constantinople) has been a Russian ambition since the era of Peter the Great.

The current rise of Turanism has awakened and nourished Arab nationalism, providing an opportunity for Gulf states and Egypt to support this movement in defiance of Turkey.

De-escalation zones are a decision endorsed by the United States, with implementation by Russia, Iran, and Turkey, and the battle does not favor the regime or Iran.

The United States may offer the revolution an alliance with the SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces), which has been receiving daily shipments of American weapons for the past seven years, as the US prepares them for such scenarios.

--- The Turks need to define the nature of their relationship with Syrians in the liberated areas. Is it:

An ally?

A mandate?

An occupation?

Protective forces?

A military presence solely interested in Turkey’s benefit, disregarding the interests of the Syrians who have made sacrifices?

Any answer to the above will require Turkey to treat the revolution as an equal, not in a master-servant dynamic. Those days are over, and the Agha and Pasha era will not return. We will not be intimidated by the threat of another Thessaloniki, as the Syrian revolution still possesses resilience.

We posed these questions to the Turks a year ago, and the envoy (if he indeed delivered them) was apprehensive about such inquiries, considering them overly bold.

We hope to maintain a special relationship with the Turks, one that respects that Syrians in their land are landowners, not servants, and that Syrians in Turkey are refugees under international laws and agreements signed by Turkey, which have brought significant benefits to Turkey. They should be treated and judged within the rule of law, not left as prey to street thugs.

The key point is that this movement is calculated, not random. The reaction of the Syrians shows that they are free individuals, not sheep to be tamed. Perhaps Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Turkey, Iran, and Russia are racing against time to stabilize the fool in Damascus before Trump returns with uncertainty, but they may have acted too hastily and possibly burned their fingers.

This is my perspective, not binding on anyone, but it serves as a starting point for assessing losses and gains.

Naif Shaaban