December 21, 2024
Nasser Kandil
• The Justice and Development Party made strenuous efforts to join the European Union, only to discover that no place was reserved for it within the EU, regardless of its compliance with the bloc’s arduous demands. This exclusion stemmed from a Western perception of Turkey as a functional player reliant on its NATO membership – devoid of the strategic value warranting the benefits of EU membership. This reality was exacerbated by the rise of far-right movements in Europe and the prevalence of Islamophobia. Consequently, the Justice and Development Party pivoted eastward nearly two decades ago, achieving unprecedented progress in its relations with Syria before the Arab Spring.
• The West, led by the United States, successfully lured Turkey back into a functional role by tempting it to lead the Arab Spring and feigning support for its aspirations of a “Neo-Ottoman” resurgence. This maneuver was predicated on Turkey’s unique position within Arab political Islam, particularly its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. However, this Western overture was short-lived. The West quickly facilitated Gulf states’ retrieval of Egypt and Tunisia from Turkey’s sphere of influence and allowed Israel a free hand in targeting Hamas, the foremost representative of Arab political Islam.
• Recent Western-European, particularly American, movements regarding the lifting of sanctions on Syria under Turkish mediation – with a hefty list of conditions – indicate that the West has not abandoned its functional view of Turkey and continues to deny it a strategic role. Washington’s steadfast support for the Syrian Democratic Forces, including their military autonomy and exclusive access to Syria’s oil wealth, sends a clear signal: Turkey’s ambitions to neutralise the existential threat posed by a potential Kurdish entity along its borders remain obstructed. This American stance aligns seamlessly with Israel’s perspective, which sees the Kurdish role as pivotal in reshaping the regional landscape. Israel’s actions within Syrian territory further embarrass Turkey, already accused of passivity in the face of the ongoing massacre of Palestinians in Gaza.
• Practically speaking, Turkey understands that the partition of Syria and the violation of its sovereignty in favor of the occupying entity directly undermine Turkish national security. It also recognises that the key to averting such deterioration lies in Turkish-Iranian cooperation, which can prevent sectarian strife in the region and forge a new balance of power against Israeli expansionism. This cooperation could involve a functional division of labor among resistance movements, with Iran maintaining strong ties to the resistance in Lebanon, Iraq, and parts of Palestine, while Turkey leverages its influence in Syria and its special relationship with Hamas.
The most significant proof of the value of Turkish-Iranian cooperation is their joint effort in thwarting the creation of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq after the 2017 independence referendum. Their shared interest in preserving the territorial integrity of the region and rejecting the establishment of a Kurdish entity remains a cornerstone of their alliance.
• Today, Turkey finds itself in a precarious position. It has lost trust in its relationship with Iran while realising, once again, that the West is deceiving it, relegating it to a functional role rather than a strategic one. Yet, in international relations, nothing is impossible. Could Turkey reorient itself as it did during the Astana Process, when it shifted course after realising the West had entangled it in an open confrontation with Russia?
• Russia, for its part, does not appear to have abandoned its ties with Turkey, especially as indications of Moscow’s commitment to retaining its bases in Syria grow stronger. Could a Russo-Iranian axis reemerge, even as Turkey remains a NATO member? If so, Ankara could position itself as a formidable negotiator backed by a robust alliance. However, Turkey understands that regaining trust is essential. Facilitating Hamas’s operations in coordination with the new Syrian leadership – through Syrian territory – might be the answer. Such a move would send signals not only to Iran but also to the West.
