Syrians Forgotten to Geopolitics

Syria is today considered a ‘frozen conflict’, despite the regular airstrike or bombing the contours of over ten years of fighting seem to have hardened to the point of predictability. The Astana Process brought together Russia, Turkey and Iran and in the absence of US concerns beyond ISIS, these regional powers managed to sketch out a semi stable status quo. Critically within this equation the agency of Syrians themselves has been far diminished.

In Damascus President Assad has essentially mortgaged his country and is beholden to foreign allies before even his traditional authoritarian methods. The country’s eagerness to recognise the separatist republics in Ukraine at the behest of its Russian ally is a typical example of this supercharged loyalty. Meanwhile in the northwest anti-Assad opposition has a history of reliance on Turkey for strategic depth, logistics and in more recent years military and diplomatic protection. In the northeast the Syrian Democratic Forces has endured the uncertainty as to whether President Trump would withdraw but not face a new and potentially existential dilemma.

Talk of rapprochement between Ankara and Damascus is in the air. Turkey has no preconditions for dialogue with Syria but any talks should focus on security on their border, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said earlier this month. President Assad’s staying power has allowed him to stay in power despite the country burning for long enough for the geopolitics of the world to shift to allow him back into the fold it would seem, with a raft of consequences for those who would continue to oppose him.

This week saw the Syrian opposition forced to deny a report by Iran's semi-official Tasnim News Agency that claimed the Syrian opposition was asked to leave Turkey during a meeting with Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. A CNN article described the fate of millions of Syrian refugees in Turkey as hanging in the balance amid fears that they may become pawns in the country’s changing politics. President Erdogan revealed this month that Putin had asked him during their talks in Sochi on August 5 to cooperate more closely with Assad on security matters, something the Turkish leader stated he was already doing on the level of intelligence contacts.

The optimistic view of events is that Turkey’s good offices and diplomatic clout with the actors in the conflict can help navigate a path towards effective peace talks between the Syrian opposition and Damascus. In previous years UN efforts have failed to bring a genuine engagement from Damascus on this front and processes of constitutional reform in particular seem to have been a charade. Could Turkey’s vision of ‘safe zones’ in the north elicit commitments of devolved government by opposition actors within a new federated Syria? Perhaps but in the absence of trust and considering the character of Assad himself it would seem unlikely.

Instead, the more cynical realists would predict that if Syria’s opposition loses its key regional backer, then their future looks bleak. Turkey’s priorities were alluded to by Cavusoglu who explained that “the country needs to be cleared of terrorists... People need to be able to return." Turkey’s recent economic crisis has shone a sharper light on the future of the large number of Syrians who have been forced into the country.

Erdogan and Assad have a history longer than most world leaders. In 2009 Erdogan, then prime minister of Turkey, hosted Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad for a family holiday in the Aegean resort of Bodrum as relations between Turkey and Syria soared to new heights. Trade and diplomatic relations flourished at that time, something that Erdogan will be conscious of, and the border between the two countries was characterised by free trade crossings allowing the speedy movement of people and vehicles as opposed to the expensive security barriers we see there today.

Yet this relationship soured when Syria’s civil war began, and the Turkish President described Assad as a “terrorist involved in state terrorism”. Famously American Diplomat Henry Kissinger reminded people that “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”. The geopolitics of this moment, with the eyes of the world far away from Syria’s frozen conflict have meant that what happens to the Syrian opposition and the millions of Syrians inside Turkey relies on what Ankara’s strategic vision for them is. Whether the anti-government armed groups inside Syria will go along with this is a different question and the certainties of the last year of so may soon be a thing of the past if Ankara and Damascus relations continue to warm.