The deepening Middle Eastern crisis and new conflicts may lead to a transformation of the political map of the region. Will Palestine become a new state? And if so, what about Kurdistan?
Nothing lasts forever
Since ancient times history has shown that there are no eternal borders or states. Everything changes over time, as the 5th-century BC Greek philosopher Heraclitus claimed. States change, the composition of their population changes and with it the culture and tradition change. Such are the laws of social history. The reason for everything is conflict of interests, crises and wars, the struggle for resources and the survival of the fittest.
Due to its geography, history, resources, ethnic and religious contradictions, the Middle East remains the centre of clashing interests and conflict. The region is again becoming an arena of change, where powers are grouping together, conflicts are taking place and borders are on the verge of being redrawn. The latter reflects not only the internal contradictions of local peoples, but also the regional interests of major powers.
The West, controlled by the United States, is acutely clashing with China and Russia in terms of geopolitical and geo-economic interests, and expects to prevent systemic changes in the Middle East, which could damage their monopoly, stimulate the independent course of important and resource-rich countries in the region, deprive them of control of transit communications and water basins. The United States cannot afford to lose the rich Arab East and is trying to regain influence over Iran.
Within this framework, Washington’s regional strategy allows for the use of any and all methods (including initiating new conflicts, chaos and forming new states dependent on them). The US bet on Israel is leading to a colossal diversion of forces and many new challenges. Iraq, Syria and Israel have once again become hotbeds of recurring conflict.
Today, the international community demands that the Israeli authorities cease military operations in the Gaza Strip and condemns the policy of racism and genocide. The world is inclined to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict through the recognition of Palestinian independence and the creation of international security mechanisms.
However, four million Palestinians are being offered the formation of another Arab state, but then what about the fate of the almost 40 million Kurds in Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria? This issue was initially touched upon by international diplomacy in the results of the Berlin Congress and was part of the Versailles treaty system (namely the Sevres and Lausanne Treaties) following WWI. Nonetheless, the Kurdish issue has not yet received a final political and international legal solution.
By exploiting the Kurdish issue in Syria, the US is yet again trying to detonate the Middle East
Usually the leaders of the Anglo-Saxon world (USA and UK) exploit ethnopolitical problems in their geopolitical games; it boils down to introducing stereotypical slogans of “protection of national minorities” and the ideas of “justice and democracy” to a particular region to gain influence. By pitting ethnic communities against local political regimes, the US exerts pressure on the latter.
For example, the US operation ‘Free Iraq’ in 2003 on the occupation of Iraq is clear evidence of this. As a result of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime, modern Iraq found itself in a state of chaos and devastation. In fact, a single state is divided into three contradictory parts: Sunni, Shi’a and Kurdish. In Iraqi Kurdistan, the US has relied on the Barzani movement centred in Erbil, because there is oil there. The US has a number of advanced operational military bases there (Al-Harir air base, Loki, Zeitun, Harir camps, etc.), as well as operating a consulate general.
Iraq ranks 5th in the world in terms of oil reserves. The US intends to invest $100 billion in the Iraqi oil sector. In this regard, the Iraqi Kurdistan project presents special value for Washington, which served as the motivation to hold a referendum in September, 2017, and give the region an autonomous status. Iraqi Kurdistan has become a US stronghold in the region. The close allied relations are based on the fact that the US military intervention in Iraq in 2003 led to the creation of broader Kurdish autonomy within the Iraqi state.
The US is trying to mirror this policy in the Kurdish-populated areas of Syria, i.e. in Syrian Kurdistan (Rojava). From the very beginning of the Syrian civil conflict, the US has been paying attention to local Kurdish political and militant organisations (particularly the Democratic Union Party (PYD), Syrian Kurdish National Council (KNC), People’s Self-Defence Units (YPG)), which focus on Iraqi Kurdistan. Washington is seeking to separate the Syrian territories on the eastern bank of the Euphrates River and create another Kurdish autonomy here, adjacent to the borders of Iraqi Kurdistan.
At various times, senior US officials (for example, Vice President Mike Pence, Special Representative of the US President for Syria James Jeffrey, Consul General in Erbil Steven Fagin, etc.) negotiated with the leadership of Iraqi Kurdistan (Nechervan and Masrour Barzani) to facilitate the unification of Kurdish groups in Syria.
Of course, such a US policy on the Kurdish issue has caused a storm of indignation on the part of their NATO ally Turkey, because the formation of two Kurdish entities adjacent to each other may provoke the involvement of Turkish Kurdistan in this process. In 2016, this was the factor to have determined the invasion of Turkish forces into the northern regions of Syria. The aim was to form a 30km ‘security zone’ to handle threats of Kurdish separatism, and the Syrian PYD and KNC were accused of links to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a terrorist organisation banned in Turkey.
During that time the US President, D. Trump, actually abandoned and betrayed the Syrian Kurds in Manbij and Afrin, because he responded to R. Erdogan’s ultimatum by withdrawing his forces and refusing to arm the Kurds. As a result, the Syrian Kurds were forced to abandon a number of their occupied positions and retreat. Thus, the bet of the leaders of Syrian Kurdistan on the US turned out to be fatal for national self-determination in the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR).
The administration of President Joseph Biden continued trying to ensure the unity of Kurdish forces in Iraq and Syria. Accordingly, US emissaries is promising the Kurds both political, military and financial support. In the context of turbulent processes in the Middle East, the US obviously wants to ignite a new flame of conflict in Rojava to distract regional forces (for example, Turkey and Iran) from the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
The idea of holding a referendum similar to Iraqi Kurdistan on the creation of an independent or autonomous Syrian Kurdistan is already being floated, which has evoked a negative reaction from Damascus, Ankara, Tehran and Baghdad.
Were a referendum to take place in Rojava, Ankara could normalise relations with Damascus
It is clear that international support for the independence of 4 million Palestinians in Israel emboldens the 5 million Kurds in Syria. However, Western interference in the internal processes of Middle Eastern countries, ignoring their interests, can erase the efforts of US diplomacy.
Turkey understands that the strengthening of the United States on the Kurdish issue will turn into a new threat of Kurdish separatism for them. Why then would the Turkish Kurds (which there are incomparably more of in Turkey than in neighbouring countries) abandon the policy of independence or autonomy? That is why Turkey, most likely, with the assistance of Russia and Iran, will agree to negotiations with Syria to restore diplomatic relations and to cooperate on the Kurdish issue.
Earlier, Bashar al-Assad named only one condition in the direct negotiations with his Turkish counterpart, Recep Erdogan: the withdrawal of Turkish troops from the northern regions of the SAR. “We are open to all initiatives related to the restoration of relations with Turkey and based on the sovereignty of the Syrian state over the entire territory”, he said.
However, considering the offensive strategy of the US, Ankara and Damascus have apparently made some sort of compromise with the support of Moscow, which allowed the leaders of the two countries to officially declare their readiness for direct negotiations and the restoration of diplomatic relations. Thus, Turkish President R. Erdogan recalled that earlier he and Bashar al-Assad were friends, their families were friends, and now he sees no obstacles to the restoration of diplomatic relations between the countries.
Meanwhile, on June 26, the Russian President’s Special Envoy to Syria, A. Lavrentiev, visited Damascus and was received by the President of the Syrian Arab Republic, B. al-Assad. Following the meeting, Lavrentiev said that Damascus was “open to all initiatives aimed at improving relations with Turkey if this process is based on respect for sovereignty and the desire of the Syrian state to restore it over the entire territory of the country”.
As a result, it was decided to start the Turkish-Syrian negotiation process in Baghdad in the presence of representatives from Russia and Iraq on restoring relations between Turkey and Syria. This trend of rapprochement between Ankara and Damascus has received support from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Russia, China and Iran.
Radical forces in Turkey (in particular, the Devlet Bahceli Nationalist Movement Party) can, of course, make harsh anti-US statements, like suggesting that the US create another (51st) state for Kurdish immigrants. However, Ankara understands that words in politics mean little without force. Accordingly, without the participation of other major powers (including Russia), the Kurdish issue cannot be resolved, and it is time for Turkey to make the right choice.
Alexander SVARANTS, PhD in Political Science, Professor, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
