Publications /
Opinion

Back
Russia, Turkey, Syria, the kurds, American troops and…no end in sight
Authors
February 7, 2018

Once again, dramatization and theatrical work on the world stage. Once again, a crisis turning into dramatic art, just to impress the audience, with exaggerated threats and statements. This was not a rehearsal of stage craft, but crude politics, a verbal confrontation of two egos - the President of the United States vs the President of Turkey. During a UN meeting in September of last year, Donald Trump stated that Recep Tayyip Erdogan “has become a friend”, and said he was convinced that now both are as close as they’ve ever been. Possibly those were just words, a sort of diplomatic backslap which the self-centered Erdogan certainly treasured. Now, between the two, there are rather confrontation, words of war and even the menace of a conflict. 

One NATO member is actually marching his infantry, artillery and rocket launchers towards the positions of another Nato member, which was protecting the eternal enemy, the Kurds of the YPG (“People’s Protecting Units”). The YPG is a militant group related to the Kurdish PKK, the Revolutionary Workers Party, which for decades has been fighting for an independent state of Kurdistan. Turkey sees the presence of the Kurds on both sides of its 900 kilometers border with Syria as a threat to its territorial sovereignty. 2000 American soldiers, some of them members of the highly trained and motivated Special Forces, are trying to block or slow the advance of Ankara’s troops towards the northeastern  Syrian  town of Manbidj. The US soldiers are loyal, at least for now, to the courageous Kurds with whom they fought the evil Islamic State, liberating Raqqa street by street, house by house. The Pentagon was impressed, and even promised these gallant fighters to keep them under arms, incorporating them in a new force ready to contain Iran’s conspirators, the Hizbollah, or, if possible, the last survivors of  al Qaeda or of the Islamic State. 

Even if Washington changed its mind about the Kurdish force, Erdogan insisted that the GIs should get out of his way. For the moment, Ankara’s planes continue to attack other areas of Syrian territories, wherever they suspect the Kurdish enemy to be, and knowing that Damascus tolerated its illegal intrusions. Russia nodded its agreement, since none of Moscow’s planes went into action, and since the antiaircraft missiles of Moscow were not fired at Turkish jets either.  Assad reacted only verbally to the invasion, since Syrian and Russian jets were, despite the peace gathering in Sochi, dropping bombs and possibly gas on its enemy from within—the enemy being stubborn and determined rebels, which are not ready to raise the white flag of surrender. The Syrian resistance fighters, near the town Marrat al-Numan (province of Idlib), hit a Russian fighter jet, a Suchoi Su 25, with a portable Anti aircraft missile. The plane crashed, and the pilot, a major, committed suicide with a hand grenade, which he exploded before his captors could approach him.

Turkey’s President was, for once, not involved. Erdogan, dressed in a combat jacket, encouraged his troops near the front lines on Syrian soil and threatened to extend his operation “Olive branch” if needed, sweeping  all over the foreign land to crush the Kurdish  secessionists. His tanks advanced to Afrin (25 miles north of Aleppo), much to the chagrin of another Nato member (Germany) which suddenly, through TV images, realized that Turkey moved into battle with tanks that Germany had delivered to the country ( 354 since  2005), the sophisticated “Leopard 2-A”. To avoid cries of indignation at home, the government in Berlin announced to the Turks and to the world that they were upset enough not to modernize these tanks as promised, and would not work on 120 American build M60 either. Trump, in the meantime, had given Ankara his word that the Pentagon would retake   sophisticated arms the US  had given to the Kurds, but apparently he forgot to tell his generals. Russian Foreign secretary Sergey Lavrov declared that the American support of the Kurds is “either a lack of understanding of the situation, or an absolutely conscious provocation”. Moscow therefore rejoiced Ankara, who was angered by Berlin and Washington (its Nato-Allies after all) and was in need of new friends. Not long ago Moscow was so upset with Turkey that it called all its tourists back home, because the Turks shot down a Russian fighter jet which intruded into national airspace. But that is now history, downgraded from criminal act to an unfortunate incident. 

The “New York Times” noted that as often in Syria, ”the US seemed mostly a bystander (…) and since it has receeded, Russia has filled the vacuum, gaining influence and rehabilitating its relationship with Turkey”. Moscow stabilized its presence in the Middle East, and that was for decades one of their goals. This issue has already been documented in June 2016 by Abdelhak Bassou,  in a document published by the OCP Policy Center : ”La Russie et la crise syrienne: le comeback de l’héritier de l’URSS et le changement de la donne en Syrie”. The obvious attempts by the Soviet Union president Vladimir  Putin to make Russia great, feared and respected once more on the global scene through the annexation of the Crimea and the partial occupation of Ukraine were just  the “hors d’oeuvres”. While Erdogan’s soldiers moved towards Manjib, where American Gis, the militants of the YPG and 10 000 members of the “Syrian Democratic Front “are entrenched (many of them are Kurdish fighters as well), Mr Putin tried his luck as a peacemaker in his city of Sochi. The Russian President invited the actors of the seven year long war in Syria, to his stage in Russia, and most delegates reached the conference hall- the largest Syrian opposition group though declined after they discovered regime symbols and the flag of the Assad regime. They were also upset about the continued bombings of rebel held towns and regions, which were, to them, if not directed by the Kremlin directly, certainly were by their satellite guidance systems. The conference ended, as the British “Guardian” judged, as “tethered on farce”. At the end Putin conceded that the United Nations were still responsible for drafting a new constitution and the mediation process. He has other immediate and more   important matters to attend -intensify his electoral campaign for the Presidency. 

Officially, Moscow intervened into the Civil war in the fall of 2015 to stabilize its faltering ally Assad. Yet , the Russians did not send almost 50 000 soldiers into battle, or direct their jets onto rebel targets in more than 28 000 aerial missions,  or complete 90 000  air strikes onto targets on the ground, only to save Mr Assad, their only Arab ally in the Middle East. The cold war complicities of Moscow with nations like Algeria or Libya are now gone. Apparently, Putin is dreaming of returning to glorious Cold war days of the Soviet Union, and to its power. That’s one reason why he could not  afford to lose neither Russia’s  only naval base at the Mediterranean sea (Tartous), nor its  major airbase Khmeimim,   in striking distance of  Nato -ally Turkey. But more important, Moscow remains determined to expand its influence in the region and the world. Russia projects power: it’s the second largest nuclear nation   on earth, member of the UN Security Council and major producer of oil and gas. In his thoughtful “Policy Paper”, published in June 2016, author Abdelhak Bassou noted that  the intervention of Moscow in Syria, supporting a beleaguered and struggling Assad with its own troops, signified a  fundamental change in  Moscow’s foreign policy-since it is ”only to Russia, and not the USSR, to intervene for the first time this far from its borders”. The question raised by author Bassou remains, so far, unanswered and this questions is: ”do they have the means for their politics of grandeur?”. Washington, rather passive in its Middle East involvement (except the recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel) apparently will challenge a belligerent Moscow as Ronald Reagan did during the infamous Cold War years. He armed the US and armed again, driving the enemy in Moscow into despair, forcing the communist enemy  to compete and risking the nation’s economic collapse. Donald Trump, in early days, charmed or impressed by Vadimir Putin, has obtained a dramatic defense budget of 639.1 dollars for 2018, and is projecting 716 billion for the fiscal year 2019.  

The equally planned and massive modernization of the nuclear arsenal of the US will require, between 2017 and 2026, an estimated 400 billion dollars. Will Moscow follow, or limit itself to childish and yet dangerous games of provocation (buzzing American fighter jets, or Navy destroyers in the Black Sea, deploying their spy ship ”Viktor Leonov” off the Eastern coast of the US ,eavesdropping off an American submarine base..). Abdelhak Bassou argued that the involvement in the Syrian war “carries great risks: in case of success the rewards are substantial and important, but in failure as well”. Putin demonstrated his determination to remain reliable to his allies, unlike Washington, which changes its foreign policy positions since Trump is in power, as often as the President’s nightly twitter announcements. Yet, is the devastation of a noble and historic nation, the destruction of its villages and towns, resulting in  ten million tormented Syrian refugees, the reflection of the human spirit, or just the expression of barbaric, crude power, used in an attempt to recapture the spirit of history ,the assumed greatness of the Soviet Union ? Obviously we re-enter a vicious cycle. Democracies had put ad acta, the Cold War. The Pentagon just notified the world in a 75 pages document about its newest and expected plan of deterrence: the development of smaller, tactical, nuclear warheads to be used for limited war. North Korea comes to mind, but Russia, as the document explains, was the real reason for the   modernization. The Pentagon planners believe its enemies, among   them   Iran and China, are not sufficiently afraid of the present aging nuclear arsenal, since Washington would probably shy away from a big bang, which could mean the end of our  world. The blitz will be smaller, enough to annihilate Pyongyang…or St. Petersburg.  

RELATED CONTENT

  • April 10, 2025
      Marcus Vinicius De Freitas Professor, China Foreign Affairs University Senior Fellow, Policy Center for the New South The Chinese government’s white paper, ‘China’s Position on Some Issues Concerning China-US Economic and Trade Relations,[1]’ issued on April 9, 2025, in response to the escalating tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump, is not just a diplomatic response to the escalating tensions with the United States. It is a meticulously crafted strategic document that pr ...
  • Authors
    April 8, 2025
    The Russia–Ukraine war, while primarily perceived as a European security crisis, has triggered deep structural shocks globally, disproportionately affecting the developing world—the “New South.” This essay explores how historical legacies, global economic dependencies, and shifting geoeconomic paradigms have converged through the war to exacerbate existing vulnerabilities in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. It critically examines the war’s impact through four interc ...
  • Authors
    Hermine Sam
    April 8, 2025
    The start of 2025 was marked by the official departures of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Now joined in a new organization, the Alliance of Sahel States (Alliance des États du Sahel, AES), the three countries have left ECOWAS facing a legitimacy crisis and concerns for its future. How these blocs decide to interact with each other will greatly influence the future of regional stability and foreign engagements. A divided W ...
  • April 8, 2025
    رغم التحسن النسبي في بعض المؤشرات الاقتصادية الكبرى في المغرب، إلا أن التشغيل ما يزال الحلقة الأضعف في معادلة التنمية. في هذا السياق، أعلنت الحكومة المغربية عن خارطة طريق وطنية للتشغيل تهدف إلى خفض البطالة إلى تسعة في المئة وخلق مليون منصب شغل، بالإضافة إلى أربعمئة وخمسين ألف منصب شغل ف...
  • Authors
    Nizar Messari
    April 4, 2025
    The rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia since the election of President Trump for a second term, and more significantly, since his inauguration, has intrigued U.S. traditional allies as well as many politicians in the U.S. The argument presented here explains the causes of that rapprochement and places it within a global context that witnesses the establishment of a new world order, multipolar, in which the U.S. is a key player but not the dominant player it used to be in the ...
  • Authors
    Othman Mezouar
    April 4, 2025
    The author of this opinion, Othman Mezouar, is a 2023 alumnus of the Atlantic Dialogues Emerging Leaders Program. April 6 each year marks the International Day of Sport for Development and Peace, a day dedicated to recognizing the potential of sport as a driver of social change and foundation for building a more inclusive world. Having spent several years working at the intersection of sport, youth empowerment, and international development, I have witnessed firsthand how sport can ...
  • April 04, 2025
    In this episode, we discuss with an economist how digital technologies like AI, blockchain, and autonomous ships are reshaping global trade and logistics. These innovations improve effici ...
  • April 4, 2025
    Les récentes élections au sein de l’Union africaine (UA) ont été défavorables pour le Maroc, qui a perdu face à l’Algérie le poste de vice-président de l’Union et n’a pas été réélu au Conseil de Paix et de Sécurité (CPS). Ce résultat a suscité de l’incompréhension et un sentiment d’échec pour la diplomatie marocaine. Cependant, l’article propose de dépasser cette vision émotionnelle pour analyser les mécanismes d’influence au sein de l’UA. La candidature marocaine évolue dans un env ...
  • April 3, 2025
    L'Algérie post-2019 représente une phase complexe de son histoire, marquée par d'importants enjeux politiques, sociaux et économiques. Le mouvement populaire du « Hirak », déclenché en février 2019, a émergé en réponse à la crise politique provoquée par le désir du président Abdelaziz Bouteflika de briguer un cinquième mandat. Ce soulèvement a exigé des réformes profondes dans la gouvernance, dénonçant le modèle militaire hérité de la guerre d'indépendance et ...